Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br /> <br />O""<f: 1''' ,-.~ <br />u~u J:,: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />May 14, 1993 <br />Issue No. 991 <br /> <br />WESTERN <br />STATES WATER <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />TIIE WEEKLY NEWSLETfER OF TIIE WESTERN STATES WATER COUNCIL <br /> <br />Creekview Plaza, Suite A-201/942 East 7145 So. / Midvale, Utah 84047 / (801) 561-5300 I FAX (801) 255-%42 <br /> <br />editor - Tony Willardson <br /> <br />typist - Carrie Curvin <br /> <br />WATER RESOURCES <br /> <br />Water project Transfers/Platoro Dam/Solano Project <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The omnibus Reclamation Projects Act of 1992, <br />Tille XXIII, authorized the transfer of '...operation, <br />maintenance and replacement responsibility for the <br />Platoro Dam and Reservoir to the Conejos Water <br />Conservancy District.' The district sponsored the <br />project and also represents other local water <br />rightholders. Located in Colorado's San Luis Valley, <br />the dam was built in 1951 , but for all practical <br />purposes was unusable as an agricultural water <br />supply project due to constraints imposed by the Rio <br />Grande Compact. Therefore, the district was relieved <br />of its original repayment obligation. In 1985, Elephant <br />Butte Reservoir in New Mexico spilled, cancelling <br />Colorado's compact debt, and in 1986-88, the district <br />was allowed to purchase water through temporary <br />water sales contracts that covered federal operation <br />and maintenance costs. In late 1987, the district <br />approached the Bureau of Reclamation offering to buy <br />out its remaining repayment contract obligations, <br />which were contingent on the availability of marketable <br />water. (H.R. 429; S. Rpt. 102-267; P.L.102-575) <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />H. R. 429 authorized the Secretary to accept a one- <br />time payment of $450,000 and enter into a transfer <br />agreement that relieves the U.S. of' further risk or <br />obligations related to operation and maintenance of <br />the project. However, title and any other liability <br />related to the project will remain with the United <br />States. Recreational use will be supervised by the <br />U.S. Forest Service. Moreover, the district must <br />maintain certain minimum streamflows and reservoir <br />levels to protect fish and wildlife. Further, the <br />Secretary of the Army retains exclusive authority for <br />flood control purposes. The lump sum payment <br />agreed to was negotiated based on the present worth <br /> <br />chairinan - Dave Kennedy <br />executive director - Craig Bell <br /> <br />of required repayments, thevllluEloi' the land, the <br />district'sassumpiiori'of operation and maintenance <br />costs for floodcontFol,llnd the minimum pool and <br />required instre8m flow: releases for fish and wildlife <br />accepted by the district. (S. Rpt.102-267) . <br /> <br />. During a recent hearing, Simaior Malcolm Wallop <br />(R-WY) asked designated Assistant Secretary of <br />Interior for Water and Science Elizabeth Rieke: 'What <br />is your view with respect to the transfer of reclamation <br />projects either to states or to the project beneficiaries <br />assuming the federa.l government is. repaid the <br />. allocable reimbursable cost of such a project?' She <br />replied: 'I generally support transferring ownership of <br />federal reclamation facilities to states or to project <br />beneficiaries after full. repayment of reimbursable <br />costs, assuming specific terms. and conditions can be <br />agreed upon which fully reflect the public interest in <br />the project. I understand project transfers will require <br />compliance with Federal statutes such as the National <br />Environmental Policy Act and specific authority <br />granted to the Secretary by the Congress.' <br /> <br />. Wallop continuEldilSking: 'The Goshen Irrigation <br />District located on the North Platte, River in <br />southeastern Wyoming has' paid for' its' canals' and <br />diversion facilities'and would like them transferred to <br />private ownership. Would you' be supportive of such <br />a transfer?' She. replied: 'I am not familiar with the <br />Goshen Irrigation Districi; ~however, single purpose <br />intrastate diversion and distribution facilities present <br />the simplest facility transfer opportunities. I would be <br />pleased to explore with the Congress and the Goshen <br />Irrigation District possible terms, and conditions for <br />transfer of titlefor these projeCt facilities.' <br /> <br />'The House's version of H.R. 429, Tille XXVII, would <br />have also authorized the transfer of title to the Solano <br />project in California, but it was dropped from the final <br />