My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP05194
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
WSP05194
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:17:21 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:54:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8510.100.60
Description
Rio Grande Compact Commission
Basin
Rio Grande
Water Division
3
Date
1/1/2000
Title
Report of the Rio Grande Compact Commission 2000
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />":::t' <br />--') <br />OJ <br /> <br />:; <br /> <br />C:j <br /> <br />~~ <br /> <br />together to develop a detailed program, initiate recovery of the Rio Grande silvery minnow <br />and secure initial funding. The detailed program document has been negotiated and completed <br />and is currently being reviewed by the signatories' decision-makers. . <br /> <br />Pro osed Conversion of Rio Grande Pro 'ect Water to M&/ Uses <br />The Engineer Advisers discussed with Reclamation the additional conversion of <br />approximately 29,000 acre-feet of Rio Grande Project water to M&/ purposes. The 29,000 <br />acre-feet is based a study wh ich has not been reviewed by the Engineer Advisers. Reclamation <br />provided the Engineer Advisers with a draft copy of an Environmental Assessment of this <br />Proposed conversion. <br /> <br />Low Flow Convevance Channel EIS <br />Reclamation released a draft Environmental Impact Statement (DE IS) regarding the <br />physical configuration of the Low Flow Conveyance Channel (LFCC) on September 8, 2000.. <br />The DE IS evaluated alternatives, including no-action and discontinue maintenance <br />alternatives, and two alternatives to relocate the LFCC and the Rio Grande floodway in the' <br />reach'from downstream of the San Marcial railroad bridge to Elephant ButteReservoir. The <br />two relocation alternatives were evaluated due to the sedimentation and aggradation of the <br />floodwayin this reach, which has caused the elevation of the floodway bed to exceed. by <br />several feet the elevation of the adjaceilt floodplain, and the inevitable avulsion of the river in <br />this reach through the spoil bank levee that currently confines the elevated floodway. <br />Reclamation previously deferred decisions regarding the operation of the LFCC by removing <br />those decisions from the SCope of the LFCC EIS and including them in the Scope of the Upper <br />Rio Grande Basin Water Operations Review and Environmental Impact Statement. <br />Reclamation's OElS explicitly reconfirmed the essential water conveyance, sediment ' <br />transport, and drainage functions that the existing facilities were constructed to provide and <br />the importance of maintaining those essential functions with new facilities. All three states <br />provided written comments. Reclamation informed the Engineer Advisers at the February <br />200 I meeting that a record-of-decision is expected to be completed in 200 I. The Engineer <br /> <br /> <br />-,' <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />i!.:;.:;:t;;'j~~1.::;:-~~:~;;~!:o'::;{)-~ <br />,(!.';~:Jp.".~-;-;":.ji':;","~::-;~'!:.~::.;. <br />I,~~o(-{....~;-:r.~:.~r~.;-:,.~.-..",-.. <br /> <br />';iI'I; :_4~' ~~~,~~_~- l;.~.,._'~,t.:" <br /> <br /> <br />;:'<:~ <br />i~~'f, <br />It.~.. <br />~;:?~._~ ~ . -, .,~ <br />:r;~..' ~r.-::..~, ~~'-x <br />~. .,<~;.,f{.>::-~<--" <br />r.':jo.~ " ,- .~, ~!~_ ~'"!N~~,~"..1 <br /> <br />iljil~' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.