WSP05470 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. n (".-., !u..;,. Nevada in preparation of a joint leller obje<:ting to the stated basis for determination of b02la) storage. The joint three-state letter dated May 7, 1979, requested the Service to send another leller to the Basin states stating that all of the factors listed in the 1970 Operating Criteria for determination of 602(.1) storage would be used, not just the four factors listed in the Service's letter. The thrE'{'-state lelter stated that the Operating Criteria were adopted after an intensive analysis of all rE'levant factors in accordance with Public law 9O-S37, which states that the Se<:retary of the Interior may modify the criteria to better achieve the purposes specified, but only after appropriate consultation with the Basin states. Since there had been no consultation with the states with regard to using only the four listed factors, the letter strongly obit'Cted 10 use of only these factors for determination of 602(.1) storage. By letter dated July 18, 1979, Assistant Commissioner Clifford Barrett stated that the Service was not inlending to modify or inlerpret the basis for determining 601(.1) storage and that the listing of the four specific faclors did not mean that other relevant factors would be excluded. Reevaluation of the Hom'er Dam Flood Control Regulations The Corps of Engineers and the Water and Power Resources Service have been jointly evaluating possible revisions to the Hoover Dam Flood Control Regulations over the past few years. This study has analyzed alternative combindtions of storage spaces reserved in lake Mead and upstream reservoirs for flood control purposes and \'arious release rates to draw down lake Mead to required storage levels by January 1 of each year. Public meetings were held at various commumties along the lower Color ado River during 1979 to rl'CE'ive comments on the pr~ent regulations and on the alternatives. A draft repon on the study was received by the Board in late 1979. The pr~ent operational plan is to release a "target maximum" flood control release of 40,000 cubic feet per second (ds), which is the release which is not exceeded unless absolutely n/:"Cessary. However, the repon states thdt encroachment of developments on the flood plain has taken place within the last two decades to the point where large flood damages would now result from a target maximum release. In fact, substantial damages could occur in the Parker Strip area for a sustained release of over 28,000 ds. The most extreme condition mentioned in the repon is the largest flood of record, a 300,000 ds inflow to Black Canyon in 1884, and that flood could be regulated sufficiently in lake Mead to a peak outflow of 73,000 ds. The repon states that there is a 96 pPrcent chance that somp flood control releases will have to be made within the next 10 years. When the reservoir system is filled, there is a 24 percent chance in any year for sustained releases averaging 28,000 ds or more for one month from Hoover Dam under the present operational plan. Storage in la!..e Havasu would be sufficient to ensure that only half of these floods would cause sustained releases in excess of 28,000 ds below Par!..er Dam. Flood damages would occur at Needles when releast"S excE'E'd 30,000 ds and at Blythe when releases exceed 38,000 ds. Of nine alternative operational plans selected, the alternative which is \tery similar to the current plan of operation was tentatively selected as the recommended plan. Hoo~'er Dam Power Contracts In November, the \Vestern Area Power Administration sponsored meetings on its proposed marketing 18 plan for Boulder Canyon Project (Hoover Dam) hydroelectric power after the current 50-year contracts expire in May 1987. The plan calls for a two-year process of developing marketing criteria, holding public meetings, negotiations, and allocating power, ending in the autumn of t981. The Chief Engineer met with representatives of the California Hoover Power Alloltees in December to prepare a coordinated response to the proposed marketing plan. The Allottees were concerned that their right to renew their present contracts, as stipulated in the enabling legislation and in the existing contracts, be acknowledged and honored. Fish Jnd Wildlile CoordinJtion Act-Proposed RegulJtions On May 18, 1979, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed establishment of rules for administering the 1958 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. Because the proposed rules would have gone beyond the directives for coordination containl'd in the original act in requiring actions that could have harmed the Colorado River rights and interests of the State and its agencies, the Chief Engineer draftl'd comments which \"oere discussed at the Board's June 20, 1979 meeting. By letter of July 13, 1979, to the Associate Director, Fish and Wildlife Service, the Chief Engineer commented that the proposed rules should adhere closely to the specific language of the 1958 Act and that any significant expansion should only occur through action by Congress. Several '>€'Ctions of the proposed rules were identified where it appears that the rules would go beyond the directives for coordination contained in the Act Other agencies in the western states submitted similar comments. The Fish and Wildlife Service published a notice in the November 6. 1979 Federal Register advising the public that the proposed rules are being redrafted in response to public and oth('f agency comments and also that an Environmental Impact