Laserfiche WebLink
<br />....... <br /> <br />.-- <br /> <br />At TERNA TlVE 4 - Shonages were determined for "dry" years during lhe Project operation study and <br />were r:,clored in to arrive at the Iigure to be released (20 cfs) aner a "dry" year is declared. 111ere would be no <br />change in lhe maximum potelltial relurn flows to the San Juan River upon full development of lhe Project under <br />this altcrnative. <br /> <br />I. HYDROELECTRIC GENERATION <br /> <br />1. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT - In 1988, a hydroelectric power plant was designed for installalion <br />at McPhee Dam using the 20, 50, 78 cfs flow criteria found in the DPRfFES. 1l1e penstock taps the outlet of the. <br />SLOW and leads to two turbines rated at a combined generating capacity of 1,350 kw and 7,170,000 kwh, One <br />of the turbines. is designed for an optimum flow of 25 cfs, and has a maximum capacity of approximately 33 cfs. <br />111e other was designed for an optimum flow of 50 cfs, with a maximum capacity of approximately 45 cfs. <br />1l1us, the combined maximum discharge capacity of both generators is about 78 cfs. Construction of the power <br />plant was completed in 1992, and the generation of electricity began. <br /> <br />2. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES <br /> <br />ALTERNATIVES 1,2 and 3 -1l1e decision as to how much water of which temperamre to release <br />from which outlet is beyond the scope of this environmental assessment. 1l1e choice of the alternative as <br />presented in the Finding of No Significant Impact for' the McPhee power plant environmental assessmen~ <br />includes as a central precept the fact that operation of the power plant will not interfere with water releases for <br />Iish and wildlife. 1l1e current proposal would not change that situation. Water release decisions would be made <br />based on the recommendations of an interagency team of biologists. However, the fact that the all of the <br />alternatives presented this environmental assessment, except for the No Action Alternative, provide for <br />acquisition of more water for the fish and wildife pool, or allow for the releases to fluctuate, or both, may enable <br />the increased generation of electric power. <br /> <br />The power produced uader all managed pool alternatives may increase when compared to the No Action <br />Alternative. Higher base flows during most of the year should allow increased power generation during "normal" <br />and "wet" years. During ponions of these years (for example, the spring of a non-spill year or the fall) water of <br />suitable temperature to sustain the trout fishery could be released through the SLOW and powerplanl. During <br />the critical summer period, flows at a minimum of 70-80 cfs would be needed. During this period, some of the <br />coldest water may need to be released from the bottom of the reservoir, 1l1e total volume of water may not be <br />accessed from the SLOW, and so would not be routed through the powerplant. 1l1is may resuit in the <br />powerplant being operated at less than maximum capacity. <br /> <br />ALTERNATIVE 4 (No Action) - This alternative would result in hydroelectric generation according to <br />the DPRfFES water release criteria. Maximum power would not be produced during dry or normal years <br />because the water releases would be less than 78 cfs. <br /> <br />J. RECREA nON <br /> <br />I. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT. Several types of recreational activity occur along lhe Dolores <br />River downstream from McPhee Dam. The most popular activities are fishing and rafting, Other activities <br />which occur are camping, hiking, photography and nature watching. <br /> <br />FlSHINC <br /> <br />fishing is lhe primary recreational activity occurring on the reach of thc Dolores River from McPhee <br /> <br />37 <br />