Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Colorado River Ooerations <br /> <br />( <br /> <br />Annual Operating Plan <br /> <br />On December 1,2000, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) held its final consultation <br />meeting with representatives of the Colorado River Basin states and members of the Colorado River <br />Management Work Group on its recommended plan for operation of the Colorado River reservoirs <br />in 200 (, A draft of the recommended "200'l Annual Operating Plan for the Colorado River System <br />Reservoirs" (2001 AOP) was made available two weeks prior to the meeting, <br /> <br />The Secretarial determinations included in Reclamation's recommended 200 I AOP include: <br />I) the active storage in the Upper Basin reservoirs is above that quantity required pursuant to Section <br />602(a) of the Colorado River Basin Project Act; thus, the operation of Lake Powell will be governed <br />by the spill avoidance and equalization provisions contained in the Long-Range Operating Criteria; <br />2) taking into consideration all relevant factors contained in the Long-Range Operating Criteria, <br />sufficient water is available for release from Lake Mead to provide a limited surplus, 630,000 <br />acre-feet, for use by Colorado River mainstream users in the Lower Basin; 3) any Lower Division <br />state will be allowed to utilize water apportioned to, but unused by, another Lower Division state in <br />accordance with Article 11(B)(6) of the 1964 Decree in Arizona v. California; and 4) water in excess <br />of that quantity required to supply uses in the United States will not be available; thus, 1,5 maf of <br />water will be made available to Mexico during calender year 200 I in accordance with Article IS of <br />the 1944 Mexican Water Treaty and Minute No, 242 of the International Boundary and Water <br />Commission, <br /> <br />During the December I, 2000 meeting, representatives from the environmental community <br />objected to the recommended Secretarial determinations related to Hoover Dam's operation, They <br />indicated that the determination for operation of Hoover Dam should be under a normal condition, <br />rather than surplus, at the beginning of the calendar year 200 I with the opportunity to revise the <br />operations, mid-year, if conditions warrant. All others in attendance, although not fully supporting <br />the rationale used by Reclamation to arrive at the determinations, did not object to the recommended <br />determinations, On behalf of the Colorado River Board and California. J supported the <br />reconmlended determinations, <br /> <br />Included in the Board folder is a November 15,2000, letter from five environmental groups <br />commenting on the draft 2001 AOP, In their comments, the environmental groups indicated that a <br />surplus determination should not be based on demand for water and that the Secretary should use <br />the same flood release strategy that he has used in the past few years. They stated that "[T]he flood <br />release strategy, rather than the '70R' strategy or the '75R' strategy, most accurately fits the conditions <br />existing at the time of the Secretary's decision over the past five years.... With current projections <br />fora December 31,2000 Lake Mead elevation of1196.47, we presume that this approach would lead <br />the Secretary to declare normal conditions to govern Lake Mead operations in 2001." The <br />environmental groups further indicated that" [Wle remain concerned that the '2000 Determinations' <br />section of the AOP includes mention of the Seven Colorado River Basin States plan," It is their <br />position that it is wholly inappropriate to accept the Basin States' plan and use it for the 200 I AOP <br />while the NEPA process on the Interim Surplus Criteria has not been completed, Finally, the <br />environmental groups' letter stated that" ...,we strenuously object to any proposal that allows water <br /> <br />2 <br />