Laserfiche WebLink
<br />., <br /> <br />NOliDHAUS 1iAJ..TOM TAYLOR <br />TARADAsH 8c BLADH, LLP <br /> <br />B. RCID H"I.TO'" <br />LESTER K. TATI.OR <br />~LAN n. T~RADASH <br />w...y....e H BI.AOM <br />LeE. BeRGeN <br />TeReSA LEGER r:IE: FI[.l'tN....",OI:: <br />..111.1.. C. (;R""",. <br />C.'~rHI" A. KIE;RSNOW$KI <br /> <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAw <br /> <br />SANTA F'I!: O,.....ICE <br />SUITE 9 <br />zoo w. 0.. "'ARC"'S STREET <br />~"'NT'" "C. New MEXICO 87501 <br /> <br />ALBUQUEROUE O"''''ICE <br />SUITe 1050 <br />SOC M...RQUI:TT'I: ....VEHVI:. N.',V <br />AL.BuQuERQue, NEW MI::XICO 87102 <br /> <br />TCLCPMONE ISO!!1 98Z-311522 <br />TCLE;"'...,,1l 15051 Uoe2-,S27 <br /> <br />WASHINCTON. D.C. OFTICE <br />SUITE 300 <br /> <br />U"'''ICI. I.~..J. RCy.BI:....n <br />SUS....N G. JORgA" <br />';TEI..LA SAUNDERS <br />ro~ ..I. P'=CKH...... <br />S1".P,,",C" H. c.RE.E.T).l"'~ <br />1,;'ON#III.O H. GROVE <br /> <br />""LCIllIoIONE I~O!U 2...3....275 <br />TELC""'''' IS051 2....:I__e... <br /> <br />~:~ -::':!!'!!'!~':'!"!-='-'"'!' .&lj'!':...II.... N w <br /> <br />W"'SHINGTON, D.C. 20008 <br /> <br />TE:LE'PHONE 12021 530-1270 <br />TCLI;,.....x (2021 53Qoo18Z0 <br /> <br />The Jicarilla Apache Nation'.; Comments on the Bureau of Reclamation's Nove ,LeI" 2001 <br />Summer LolV FlolV Test ReJlort, San Juan Rivel' <br /> <br />The Nordh"us Law Firm submitJ these eOlTIll1':nts on the Low flow Test Report on behalf <br />of Gur client, the Jic:lrilla Apache Nation. These comments address two general concerns: <br /> <br />First, the do-:um..:nt does not carefully connell its' conclusions to the data, o.lld o.ppears to <br />incorrectly use ten]].; of w.rt in describing impacts. Analog'Jus concerns with regard to the <br />Pn:liminary Draft En'.'ironmental Impact Statement w':re raised by other cooperating o.gencies at the <br />mceting on Nuvemlw' 28 md 29, 2001. Reclamati.Jn should co.refully review and revise both <br />documents to ensure that they o.ccurately describe the reoull'; of the Low Flow lest "nd that <br />conclusiuns about III": nature md degrce of an)' effeClS are s'lppurted by the record. <br /> <br />Second, the r :creation "do.: ,L" appeo.rs to be laq.:dy hc"rs~y. The credibility of the data needs <br />to I-e weighed in dr:lwing any conclusiuns [r-.m it. <br /> <br />Specific comments: <br /> <br />Se<:ion II, page 3, 2d paragraph: Who.t does extrapolated "to some degree" mean? It is our <br />understanding that Reclw.mation determincd the test period was sufficiently long, and this needs to <br />be expressed more clearly. . <br /> <br />Sectiun IV, pagc 9, 2d paraC;raph: This paragraph concludes without explanation or support that "In <br />general, Reclamation believes that during long-term flows of250 cfs during the inigation season <br />some exceedence of State standards for the San Juan River between Navajo Darn and the Animas <br />river confluence would occur." The data needs to be put in the context of existing water quality, and <br />more careful analysis is needed before attributing water quality measured during the test to the low <br />flows. <br /> <br />Section IV, poge 11, first paragraph: This paragraph states that "as provided by SLate of New <br />Mexico Engineers Offic<.:, all water right:; below Navajo Dam to Farmington would :,,, met with a <br />250 cfs release." It would be helpful to include a specific reference. <br /> <br />- - ".., - ... <br />