WSP06798

• File Number: 8040.260
• Description: Section D General Studies-Oil Shale/Coal
• Date: 7/6/1981
• Title: 13a-Oil Shale Data and Notes-Federal Register-Vol 46 No 128-Part III-Water Resources Council-Synthetic Fuels Development for the Upper Colorado Region Water Assessment
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

35068

--

-

-..

Federal Register I Vol. 46. No. 128 I Monday, July 6, 1981 I Notices

Moreover. the aggregated deplellons for
Colorado in the Yampa River. While
River, Upper Colorado Main Stem, and
San Juan River development areas
approximate Colorado's entitlement
under conservative b)'drok>gi.c
assumptions.

C. Other Institutional Considerations

The institutional [actors Bx:pecled
most 10 constrain water availability for
synfuels development in the Region are
the Endangered Species Aclllnd the
Wild and Scenic Rivera Act. Habitat of
the Colorado River Squawfisb and the
I lumpback Chub. two endangel'1!d
species. occur in the Lower Vampa
River. the While River, the Creen River
from its confluence with the Vamps 10
the Colorado Rivers. and the maln slem
of the Colorado River from its
confluence with Plateau Creek 10 Lake
Powell. Studies under the Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act nave been taken in
beadwater areas ol the Piedra and La,
Pinos Rivers in lhe San Juan River
development area, the Ruby Canyon
reach of the Upper Colorado main stem
near the Colorado-Utah State line, and
on the Yampa River within Dinosaur
National Monument. The specific effects
of any ol these considerations on water
supply availability or development
cannot be appraised at this time.
The "first in time. fiut in right"
principles and procedures will probably
put synfue-Js development in a "junior"
status for wilter supplies. However, lhi,
can be overcome if sufficient reservoir
storage is CQnstructed to regulate nows-

VII. Water Resource Impacts

A. Upper C%rodo Rh'er Basin

1. Woler Quontity. The impacts ol
synfuels development (accelerated case)
on surface water quantity in the Upper
Basin are presented on Table 7. The
impacts were measured as a percent
depletion of average annuaJ outflows
under nalural and projected surface
water conditions. Much higher
percentages may be anticipated during
the seasonal and my-year low flows.
although re.ervolr .torage could be
managed to maintain minimum instream
now.. The greatest impact would be on
the White River development area.

Table 7.-1mp8cts of Synfvs/s Dt1wt/cpnlciIIl
on Surface CNttb_

t... A,C--KIOOI

Sy<IfvelI.....................

P_..~
-
--
--,

UpperG<...""""
-.....
-.....

"
..
....

Table 7.-Impacts 01 Synfue(s DeveIopinent
on SurfaceOu~tinued

1-..:c.l..........c...-ftIlX/J

...--~

"-'- Of .....
-
--
--'

lJpper~IWIt"'-s-.__
~a.-"""",.___.
--
lJpper~_e..._

u
..
u
.U

'_OIOT_,.
'lnc..,.....- ___ _...--......
--
.a-......__1D1_11I1..

2. Water Quality. The potential
magnitude of Increased .ediment
loadings was examined by constructing
annual suspended sediment budgets. In
the examinatlnn. It was assumed that 3.6
acres oC land would be disrurbed per 1
million barrels of oil extracted from
shale each ,year, 25 acres per 1 million
tons of ,urface-mlned coal, and 5 aerea
per 1 million tora of coal from
undergroUfld mine.. Table 8 presents the
results of the suspended sediment
analysis. The largest impacla are
projected for the White River.t Ouray,
with an Increase of more than 10 percent
for the accelerated case.

Table 8.-$u$pendsd 5Qt1iment Loads-2OOO
IT....I*_I

~

-
-
-
-
11111S!

--
-

-
~
::::.

-_.
- .*
- -

,.
,.
..
..

--
......- i1.ooo
-.~- 1..,.- ..= ...=
y---
-- ....- ..- ..- ,..,.
-~-
o...,~_._u~ .- ...= ...=
--....
----
UtM~_ 5._.000 .3.000 ".000 135.000
--
~&IGo-_
~.\l1an....:.._'JI:IO._ .- ....= '",(100
SiIn'-_1II
~-..~ ...= ..... ...=

Projected changes In dissolved solids
concentrations from synfuelll
de\'elopmp.nl were investigated through
a mass.hBlance IIpproach based on 1915
data. Zero rplum flow. from synluel
lacilities were anumed in line wilh lhe
findings on wa.lewater management.
Table 9 presenls the' resull, of this
analysis. Total loadings show decreases,
equalling almo,1 30 percent for the
accelerated case on the White River
neer Ouray, as synfuels water use
increases. The projections reOt'Ct
depletion, witb ftnd without synfuels
developmenl.

Table i.-DisscNed Soficb ConcemMliOnI!IaM lO6ding$-2000

...-.

W!lrIOuII""",- 1__

/
.-...---
-

I~"

,,-
...,
"

'''''''

11.000
...,
..

1'-
...,
"

.....

lJpper~RNwIll"'-~.~
T___~._
---o.nw
CclU_'-_~s_.._________
l_ Gt--. _ ~ a.-. _. uw.
s-...........~__

.'5 WI .,. 613 41,2 "'
2CIO .)'lI______u_ 201 311
450 ~I '0 .~' _ 201
SOl 3.f0I sea 3,615 _ 3,5&2
558 1,&40 551 3.567 ~58 3.6C1
~ I3J ~ ~ 411' _2

"
"
~.

Projected downstream profiles of
carbonaceous biochemical oxygen
demand ICBOO) for the ba!ICUne and
accelerated case. in Ute year 2000 were
compared to CHOn profiles without
snyfuels development lor 1975 aod 2(X)().
The comparisons were bued on 7-day.
low-now values with. l().year
recurrence interval. Since the analysis
did not Include the effects of new
upstream n:5ervoirs. it renecls worst
case condHions.
Potential increases In CBOD loading
lrom municipal wastewater treatment
plants are most apparent in the White
River Basin. The concentration 01 CBOD
in the White River near Meeler.
Colorado. renects an increase of
approximOllely 20 percent for the base.

line case and about 80 percenl for the
accelerated caae by tbe year 2tllO. Even
larger increasea--l00 and 300 percent,
respectively-were estimated for the
White River near Rangely, Colorado,
where large population increase. would
likely occur. Small CBOD changes were
projected for the Colorado River main
stem and the Vampa River development
areas.

B. Lo~r Colorado River Basin Impcct&

1. Water Quontity. The Impacts ol
synfuel development under llle
accelerated case on nows in the
Colorado River in the Lower Ba9in are
shown on Table 10. As e result of
synfuels development. water supplie9
would be reduced on all points of the