Laserfiche WebLink
<br />f:) <br />'_'.r" <br /> <br />.~~ <br /> <br />Agenda Item 10 <br />May 5, 1988 <br /> <br />(4) Make recommendations for how to proceed from here. <br /> <br />With respect to recommendations for future action, it is <br />anticipated that the report will address four items: <br /> <br />(1) Future studies, <br /> <br />(2) Interim reservoir operations during the conduct of <br />additional studies, <br /> <br />(3) Coordination and decision-making during the period of <br />additional studies, and <br /> <br />(4) NBPA compliance. <br /> <br />It is our understanding that the recommendations concerning <br />items (1), (3), and (4) will be agreed upon by the four <br />involved agencies. However, the agencies do not agree on what <br />should be recommended concerning item (2) and their differences <br />will be set forth in the report., <br /> <br />With respect to future studies, it is anticipated that the <br />Executive Review Committee will recommend that additional study <br />and monitoring is needed with respect to the impacts of <br />fluctuating flows on endangered fish on the beach erosionl <br />building processes and with respect to the minimum flow which <br />should be maintained below Glen Canyon Dam. This conclusion is <br />based on the results of the environmental studies and seems to <br />be firmly agreed to by all four agencies. <br /> <br />With respect to coordination and decision-making during the <br />duration of any additional studies, the four agencies are <br />agreed on the obvious need to coordinate the research effort <br />should it go forward. In addition, it will apparently be <br />recommended that the National Park Service and the Fish and <br />Wildlife Service should review and have more participation in <br />the preparation of the annual operating plan for Glen Canyon <br />Dam and that the four agencies should better advise interested <br />pUblics on why Glen Canyon Dam is operated as it is. <br /> <br />With respect to the question of NEPA compliance, I am under <br />the impression that the Executive Review Committee will beg the <br />question by recommending that the decision as to what is <br />required to effect NEPA compl\ance should be a departmental <br />decision. I suspect that the Executive Review Committee's <br />position on this issue is a consequence of the differences <br />among the agencies on how interim reservoir operations should <br />be conducted, as you will see from the following discussion. <br /> <br />-2- <br />