DOCSLIB.ORG

Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects Electric Power Marketing Final Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects Electric Power Marketing Final Environmental Impact Statement Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects Electric Power Marketing Final Environmental Impact Statement COVER SHEET Title: Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects Electric Power Marketing Final Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0150 Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Reclamation Lead Agency: Western Area Power Administration, U.S. Department of Energy Written comments on this environmental For general information on the U.S. Department impact statement (EIS) should be addressed to: of Energy EIS process, contact: Mr. David Sabo Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director Western Area Power Administration Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance (EH-42) Colorado River Storage Project U.S. Department of Energy Customer Service Office Room 3E-080 Forrestal Building P.O. Box 11606 1000 Independence Ave., S.W. Salt Lake City, Utah 84147-0606 Washington, D.C. 20585 Telephone: (801) 524-5392 Telephone: (800) 472-2756 file:///I|/Data%20Migration%20Task/EIS-0150-FEIS-1995/01eis0150_cov.html[6/24/2011 2:58:48 PM] Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects Electric Power Marketing Final Environmental Impact Statement ABSTRACT The Colorado River Storage Project Customer Service Office of the Western Area Power Administration (Western) markets electricity produced at hydroelectric facilities operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. The facilities are known collectively as the Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects (SLCA/IP) and include dams equipped for power generation on the Colorado, Green, Gunnison, and Rio Grande rivers and on Plateau Creek in Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico. Of these facilities, only the Glen Canyon Unit, the Flaming Gorge Unit, and the Aspinall Unit (which includes Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, and Crystal dams) are influenced by Western power scheduling and transmission decisions. The environmental impact statement (EIS) alternatives, called commitment-level alternatives, reflect combinations of capacity and energy that would feasibly and reasonably fulfill Western's firm power marketing responsibilities, needs, and statutory obligations. The viability of these alternatives relates directly to the combination of generation capability of the SLCA/IP with energy purchases and interchange. The economic and natural resource assessments in this EIS include an analysis of commitment-level alternatives. Impacts of the no-action alternative are also assessed. Supply options, which include combinations of electrical power purchases and hydropower operational scenarios reflecting different operations of the dams, are also assessed. The EIS evaluates the impacts of these scenarios relative to socioeconomics, air resources, water resources, ecological resources, cultural resources, land use, recreation, and visual resources. Western has identified commitment-level alternative 1, the Post-1989 commitment level, as its preferred alternative. The impact evaluations indicate that this commitment level is also the environmentally preferred alternative. file:///I|/Data%20Migration%20Task/EIS-0150-FEIS-1995/02eis0150_abs.html[6/24/2011 2:58:57 PM] Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects Electric Power Marketing Final Environmental Impact Statement 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 NEED FOR AGENCY ACTION The Western Area Power Administration (Western) needs to determine the level of long-term firm capacity and energy commitment from the Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects (SLCA/IP) that Western will make available to its customers and that will form the basis for its SLCA/IP power marketing program. 1.2 PURPOSE OF AGENCY ACTION The alternative commitment level selected by Western must be consistent with its statutory obligations and legal constraints. This necessity requires a weighing of economic, environmental, and other public considerations. Western's action will have to achieve a balanced mix of purposes as follows: Provide the greatest practicable amount of long-term firm capacity and energy. Provide for the meeting of firming requirements as practicable by purchases of capacity and energy. Provide long-term resource and contractual stability. Provide the greatest practical value of the power resource. Result in the lowest practicable associated adverse environmental impacts. Be responsive and adaptable to likely future operations of SLCA/IP facilities. Be responsive to decisions from the Bureau of Reclamation's (Reclamation's) Glen Canyon Dam Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (Reclamation 1995) and the Energy Planning and Management Program (EPAMP) EIS (Western 1995). 1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION to sell and deliver capacity and energy generated by hydroelectric power plants built as part of certain Federal water projects. The SLCA/IP power plants include facilities in the states of Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico. The facilities are located on the Colorado River and its tributaries and on the Rio Grande and its tributaries (Figure 1.1). Power generated by the SLCA/IP facilities or purchased by Western from other sources is provided to Western's customers under contracts that establish the terms for how capacity (generation capacity) and energy (quantity of electrical energy) are to be sold. The contracts also specify amounts of capacity and energy that Western agrees to offer for long-term sale (greater than 12 months) to its customers. These amounts constitute Western's "commitment levels." The capacity and energy level is called "firm" when its availability is guaranteed to the customer. Currently, Western's sale commitments from the SLCA/IP, including capacity and energy purchased from other sources, total approximately 1,300 megawatts (MW)1 of long-term firm capacity and 5,700 gigawatt-hours (GWh)2 of long-term firm energy. This commitment level was established in 1978 (1978 marketing program) for the period to 1989. As part of the development of its power marketing program for the period 1989 to 2004 (the Post-1989 marketing program), Western proposed to increase these commitment levels to 1,449 MW of capacity and 6,156 GWh of energy. file:///I|/Data%20Migration%20Task/EIS-0150-FEIS-1995/03eis0150_1.html[6/24/2011 2:59:04 PM] Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects Electric Power Marketing Final Environmental Impact Statement This EIS has been prepared in accordance with Section 102(2)C of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as implemented in regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500-1508) and DOE NEPA implementing regulations (10 CFR Part 1021). 1.4 WESTERN RESPONSIBILITIES AND MISSION The Western Area Power Administration was established within the DOE pursuant to the Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977 (42 U.S. Code [USC] §§ 7101 et seq.) (DOE Act). This legislation provided for the transfer of Federal power marketing and power transmission functions from the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Reclamation to the Secretary of Energy, acting through Western's Administrator. Western performs these functions in 15 western states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. Western conducts its functions in conformance with certain laws, primarily the DOE Act, Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (16 USC § 825s), Section 9(c) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 [43 USC § 485h(c)], and, in this case, the Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) Act (43 USC §§ 620-620o). While Western took over the power marketing activities, Reclamation retained irrigation, water supply, and dam-operation functions at Federal water projects constructed by Reclamation. FIGURE 1.1 Western's Colorado River Storage Project Customer Service Office (CRSP-CSO) markets power from the CRSP and the Collbran, Rio Grande, and Provo River Projects. The CRSP power plants are those authorized by the Colorado River Storage Project Act; specifically included are power plants at Glen Canyon Dam (the Glen Canyon Unit) on the Colorado River just below the Utah-Arizona border; at Flaming Gorge Dam (the Flaming Gorge Unit) on the Green River just below the Wyoming-Utah border; at Fontenelle Dam on the Green River; and at the Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, and Crystal dams (Aspinall Unit) on the Gunnison River in Colorado (Figure 1.1). On October 1, 1987, the CRSP hydropower facilities, the Collbran Project (Upper and Lower Molina dams), and the Rio Grande Project (Elephant Butte Dam) were integrated as the SLCA/IP for marketing and rate-making purposes. The Provo River Project has been operationally integrated in the CRSP since 1963. The hydroelectric facilities of the SLCA/IP are operated by Reclamation. Within the limits on dam operations set by Reclamation, Western coordinates water releases with Reclamation for hydropower generation and markets the capacity and energy so produced. Western's power marketing responsibility begins at the switchyard of Federal hydroelectric power facilities and includes the Federal transmission system to interconnected utility systems. In marketing power in excess of project-use needs, Western sells both long-term and short-term firm power. This power is first offered for sale to what are known as "preference customers." This designation originates from the Reclamation Project Act of 1939, which requires Western to give preference in the sale of Federal power to municipalities, nonprofit corporations or agencies, cooperatives,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Blue Mesa Reservoir
    BLUE MESA RESERVOIR General Information Located in Western Colorado near the town of Gunnison, Blue Mesa Reservoir is Colorado's largest body of water. Blue Mesa Dam was built in 1966 and was the first and largest of the three Aspinall Unit dams intended to store and control spring flows on the Gunnison River. Blue Mesa Reservoir is 20 miles long and is the largest Lake Trout and Kokanee salmon fishery in the United States. It lies within the Curecanti National Recreation Area. Curecanti National Recreation Area 102 Elk Creek Gunnison, CO 81230 (970) 641-2337 www.nps.gov/cure Activities Boating, fishing, boat-in, developed, and primitive camping, hiking, horseback riding, hunting, and wildlife viewing. Facilities Visitor center at Elk Creek, campgrounds (8), marinas (2), boat ramps, day use / picnic areas, hiking trails, and Pappy’s Restaurant. Elk Creek Complex (970) 641-0707 The Elk Creek complex is the major facility of Blue Mesa Reservoir. It features a visitor center, the main marina, Pappy's Restaurant, campground and RV dump station. Campground consists of four loops with 160 campsites, water, electric hookups (Loop D), flush and vault restrooms, and showers also available. The marina offers in and out boat launching, a store, fish tackle, gasoline, boat rentals, kayaks, canoes, SUP's and boat slips. The marina and the restaurant are only open in the summer, while the visitor center and campground are open year- round. www.nps.gov/cure/planyourvisit/camp_elk_creek.htm www.thebluemesa.com Lake Fork Marina (970) 641-3048 The marina offers in and out boat launching, a store and tackle shop, gasoline, boat rentals, boat slips and guided fishing.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion Paper Is/Has Been Under Review for the Journal Biogeosciences (BG)
    Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Biogeosciences Discuss., 12, 6081–6114, 2015 www.biogeosciences-discuss.net/12/6081/2015/ doi:10.5194/bgd-12-6081-2015 BGD © Author(s) 2015. CC Attribution 3.0 License. 12, 6081–6114, 2015 This discussion paper is/has been under review for the journal Biogeosciences (BG). Dam tailwaters Please refer to the corresponding final paper in BG if available. compound the effects of reservoirs Dam tailwaters compound the effects of A. J. Ulseth and reservoirs on the longitudinal transport of R. O. Hall Jr. organic carbon in an arid river Title Page 1,2,* 2 A. J. Ulseth and R. O. Hall Jr. Abstract Introduction 1Program in Ecology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, USA Conclusions References 2Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming, USA Tables Figures *now at: École Polytechniqe Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland Received: 3 April 2015 – Accepted: 7 April 2015 – Published: 24 April 2015 J I Correspondence to: A. J. Ulseth ([email protected]) J I Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. Back Close Full Screen / Esc Printer-friendly Version Interactive Discussion 6081 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Abstract BGD Reservoirs on rivers can disrupt organic carbon (OC) transport and transformation, but less is known how downstream river reaches directly below dams contribute to OC pro- 12, 6081–6114, 2015 cessing than reservoirs alone. We compared how reservoirs and their associated tail- 5 waters affected OC quantity and quality by calculating particulate (P) OC and dissolved Dam tailwaters (D) OC fluxes, and measuring composition and bioavailability of DOC.
    [Show full text]
  • Curecanti Unit Colorado River Storage Project
    CURECANTI UNIT COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary Bureau of Reclamation, Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner CURECANTI UNIT Colorado River Storage Project BLUE MESA DAM GUNNISON 0 <:- PLANT If{' -""~BLUE MESA DAM! ~1 ~~~~~~~!1li~"""~ Go POWERPLANT ill d, rF:_=~~~~:°w POINT DAMI "<-::.-:.CRYSTAL'----_..,. _____ DAMI ..., CURECANTI UNIT The Curecanti Storage Unit is an will stand 340 feet above the original important part of a vast program to streambed elevation. A 60,000-kilowatt store, regulate, and put to widespread powerplant will be located at Blue Mesa beneficial use the waters of the Upper Dam. Colorado River and its tributaries-large and small. The purpose of the Curecanti Construction on the Curecanti Unit Unit is to control the flows of the Gunni­ began in 1961 with the relocation of son River, a major tributary of the Upper about 6 1 /2 miles of U.S. Highway 50 Colorado River. Three other such stor­ through the lower part of the Blue Mesa age units are now under construction­ Reservoir area. Portions of the highway the Flaming Gorge Unit on the Green will be flooded during high water per­ River in the northeast corner of Utah iods when the Gunnison River is divert­ the Navajo Unit on the San Juan River ed through tunnels around the Blue Me­ in northwest New Mexico; and the Glen sa damsite. During 1961, surveys and Canyon Unit on the Colorado River in other preconstruction work will be com­ northern Arizona. pleted for Blue Mesa Dam. Early in 1962, the contract for construction of The Curecanti Unit will involve the Blue Mesa Dam is scheduled for award.
    [Show full text]
  • Work Starts on Blue Mesa Dam
    ... Work starts on Blue Mesa Dam On the Gunnison River in western Colorado, the Tecon Corp. has started work on the first dam of the Curecanti Unit of the Bureau of Reclamation's Colorado River Stor­ age Project. The 342-ft. earthfill dam will contain 3,000,- 000 cu. yd. Reservoir storage will be 940,800 ac. ft. and the powerplant will have a 60,000-kw. capacity. CONSTRUCTION of the Bureau of By GRANT BLOODGOOD The darn embankment will consist Reclamation's Blue Mesa Darn and Assistant Commissioner and Chief Engineer of three zones of selected material, Powerplant on the Gunnison River in Bure1u of Recl11m11tion each distinguished by its particular western Colorado began in late Ap­ Denver, Colorado structural and permeable properties ril. The darn and powerplant are the and by the method of placement. De­ major features to be undertaken on Blue Mesa Dam is to be construct­ tails are provided in the caption of the Curecanti Unit of the Colorado ed about 25 mi. downstream from the cross-section drawing. River Storage Project. The $13,706,- Gunnison and about 1 Y.2 mi. down­ 230 contract for construction of the stream from the town of Sapinero. Powerplant 342-ft. earthfill darn and 60,000-kw. Principal dimensions and characteris­ powerplant is held by the Tecon Cor­ tics of the darn and powerplant ap­ The Blue Mesa Powerplant, to be poration, Dallas, Texas. Work under pear in the accompanying table. constructed at the downstream toe of the contract is required to be com­ Geologically, the darnsite is favor­ the darn, is to house two 30,000-kv.
    [Show full text]
  • Green River Basin Water Planning Process
    FINAL REPORT Green River Basin Water Planning Process February, 2001 Prepared for: Wyoming Water Development Commission Basin Planning Program States West Water Resources Corporation Acknowledgements The States West team would like to acknowledge the assistance of the many individuals, groups, and agencies that contributed to the compilation of this document. At the risk of possible omission, these include: The Green River Basin Advisory Group (facilitated by Mr. Joe Lord) The Wyoming Water Development Office River Basin Planning Staff The Wyoming Water Resources Data System The Wyoming State Engineer’s Office The Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality The Wyoming State Geological Survey The University of Wyoming Spatial Data and Visualization Center The Wyoming Game and Fish Department Dr. Larry Pochop, University of Wyoming The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (Bridger-Teton, Wasatch-Cache, Ashley, and Medicine Bow National Forests) The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management The U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey Wyoming Department of State Parks and Cultural Resources Cover: Millich Ditch, East Fork Smiths Fork Prepared in association with: Boyle Engineering Corporation Purcell Consulting, P.C. Water Right Services, L.L.C. Watts and Associates, Inc. CHAPTER CONTENTS (Individual Chapters have page number listings) ACRONYM LIST I. INTRODUCTION A. Introduction B. Description C. Water-Related History of the Basin D. Wyoming Water Law E. Interstate Compacts II. BASIN WATER USE AND WATER QUALITY PROFILE A. Overview B. Agricultural Water Use C.
    [Show full text]
  • Cogjm.Larson Letter Crsp 02-08-1951
    , UNITED STATES DEPAkTYEhT O~'THE INfERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION REGION 4 Post Office Box 360 Salt Lake City 10, Utah February 8, 1951 To the Editor: The enclosed press release, ma..!7&, and physical data on the potential Colorado River Storage Project and Participating Projects may prove valuable as source material in future reporting of the Upper Colorado River Basin development. Although the project report has been approved by the Secretary of the Interior there will not be enough copies for general distri- bution until and if the report is printed as a Senate Document. The accompanying fact sheets should give you sufficient data, however, until reports are available upon request. As you know the report is now being reviewed by federal agencies and the governors of the basin states. Under the Flood Control Act of 1944, they have approximately until May 1, 1951, to submit their comments to the Secretary of the Interior for subsequent submission with the report to the President and the Congress. E. O. Larson Regional Director DEPARTM:!::HTOF THE INTl::RIOR ~r:tEAU OF !t&CLA";:ATIO~T News release for Wednesday, Jan. 31, 1951 - 10 AI', KST UPPER COLORltDO RIVER DEVELOPMENT REPO:lT ft.PPROVEDBY SECRETARY CHft.PMAN A plan for development of the water and power resources of the Upper Colorado River Basin, which drains portions of five Rocky Mountain States, has been approved by Secretary of the Interior Oscar L. Chapman and sent to the Colorado River Basin States (Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and California) for comment. The plan is in the fo~ of a Bureau of Reclamation Planning Report entitled "The Colorado River Storage Project and Participating Projects, Upper Colorado River Basin." The Report, which also goes to other Federal Agencies for review and comment, envisions the eventual construction by the Bureau of Reclamation of 10 dams and reservoirs with storage capacity of 48.5 million acre-feet of water and 1,622,000 kilowatts of hydroelectric cape.city and nume rous partici- pating irrigation projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Changes to the Seedskadee Ecosystem
    CHANGES TO THE SEEDSKADEE ECOSYSTEM This study obtained information on contem- warmer than in earlier times and large prey (horse, porary: 1) physical features, 2) land use and man- camel, mammoth, bison) became extinct or smaller agement, 3) hydrology, 4) vegetation communities, and native people shifted to hunt smaller animals and 5) fish and wildlife populations of Seedskadee (Thompson and Pastor 1995). They also probably NWR. These data chronicle the history of land and made greater use of vegetable foods that apparently ecosystem changes at and near the refuge from the occurred during this period; summers may have Presettlement period and provide perspective on been spent in mountains and winters were spent when, how, and why alterations have occurred to eco- in foothills and valleys. Early Archaic subsistence logical processes in the NWR and surrounding lands. centered around pronghorn, rabbits, and other small Data on chronological changes in physical features animals including fish and birds obtained in the and land use/management of the region are most Green River Valley. available and complete (e.g., from NWR annual nar- By about 2,000 BP, human populations in ratives, USDA data and records, sequential aerial southwest Wyoming increased and apparently many photographs, hydrology data from the Green River, small villages were established; evidence of early agri- etc.) while data documenting changes in fish and culture is found along some waterways. The Shoshone wildlife populations generally are limited. people spread into the Seedskadee region around 700 BP. They were a nomadic tribe that traveled widely and created multiple trails between the Green SETTLEMENT AND EARLY LAND USE River floodplain and nearby mountains (USFWS CHANGES 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge
    Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan September 2002 Prepared by U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge P.O. Box 700 Green River, Wyoming 82935 and Division of Refuge Planning Region 6, Mountain-Prairie Region P.O. Box 25486, DFC Denver, Colorado 80225 Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan Approval U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6 s,.i1'-;",iJ-sf=- u." f\efu-ge Progn S~ &_"./C1. ~ Dats: R;;w;j A Vlli!JTl,J(l. ftl 0 1IegI(J1II1 O'ltel Nato:reI 'M1d"-1 Refuge Sy.;!edI TTTable of Contents SummarySummarySummary ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Photo Display .................................................................................................................................................................. 4 I.I.I. Introduction / Background Refuge Overview: History of Refuge Establishment, Acquisition and Management .......................................... 7 Seedskadee NWR Overview .................................................................................................................................. 7 History of Seedskadee NWR Establishment, Acquisition, and Management ................................................ 7 Purpose of and Need for Comprehensive Conservation Plan .................................................................................. 11 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado River Slideshow Title TK
    The Colorado River: Lifeline of the Southwest { The Headwaters The Colorado River begins in the Rocky Mountains at elevation 10,000 feet, about 60 miles northwest of Denver in Colorado. The Path Snow melts into water, flows into the river and moves downstream. In Utah, the river meets primary tributaries, the Green River and the San Juan River, before flowing into Lake Powell and beyond. Source: Bureau of Reclamation The Path In total, the Colorado River cuts through 1,450 miles of mountains, plains and deserts to Mexico and the Gulf of California. Source: George Eastman House It was almost 1,500 years ago when humans first tapped the river. Since then, the water has been claimed, reclaimed, divided and subdivided many times. The river is the life source for seven states – Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming – as well as the Republic of Mexico. River Water Uses There are many demands for Colorado River water: • Agriculture and Livestock • Municipal and Industrial • Recreation • Fish/Wildlife and Habitat • Hydroelectricity • Tribes • Mexico Source: USGS Agriculture The Colorado River provides irrigation water to about 3.5 million acres of farmland – about 80 percent of its flows. Municipal Phoenix Denver About 15 percent of Colorado River flows provide drinking and household water to more than 30 million people. These cities include: Las Vegas and Phoenix, and cities outside the Basin – Denver, Albuquerque, Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico. Recreation Source: Utah Office of Tourism Source: Emma Williams Recreation includes fishing, boating, waterskiing, camping and whitewater rafting in 22 National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks and National Recreation Areas along river.
    [Show full text]
  • UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION 355 South Fourth East Street Salt Lake City 11, Utah October 30, 1962 MEMORANDUM TO
    UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION 355 South Fourth East Street Salt Lake City 11, Utah October 30, 1962 MEMORANDUM TO: Upper Colorado River Commissioners and Advisers FROM: Ival V. Goslin, Executive Director SUBJECT: Construction and Advance Planning Program of the Bureau of Reclamation for the Colorado River Storage Project and participating projects, et al 1 for fiscal year 1963. Note: this tabulation represents the distribution of all funds available including newly appropriated money 1 carry-overs, savings and slippage, etc. According to an announcement from the office of the Secretary of the Interior the details of the Bureau of Reclamation • s program of construction and advance planning for Fiscal Year 1963 include the items on the following pages of particular interest to the Upper Colorado River Basin. The Bureau of Reclamation• s Advance Planning program in the Upper Basin States includes two major projects--the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project in Colorado estimated to cost $170 million and the San Juan-Chama Project in New Mexico estimated to cost $8 6 million. The three "new start" construction reclamation projects for which Congress appropriated funds for fiscall963 are: 1. Glen Elder Unit, Missouri River Basin Project, Kansas 2. Oake Unit, James Section, Missouri River Basin Project, South Dakota 3. Morrow Point facilities I Curecanti Unit, CRSP, Colorado STORAGE UNITS: Glen Canyon Storage Unit $4514021191 --to continue placement of concrete in Glen Canyon Dam and to continue construction of the powerplant and switch­ yard; to continue progress payments on the turbines 1 generators I governors I and other materials and equipment furnished .by the government.
    [Show full text]
  • 1972 Operation of the Colorado Riyer Basin 1973 Projected 0Llcrations
    1972 Operation of the Colorado Riyer Basin 1973 Projected 0llcrations ANNUAL REPORT 1972 Operation of the Colorado River Basin 19i') Projected Ope tions (prepared pursuant to the Colorado River .Basin Project Act of 1968, Public Law 90-537) U. S. Department'of the Interior Rogers C.>B. Morton, Secretary Bureau of Reclamation Ellis L.Armstrong, Commissioner January 1973 Table of Contents Page Map - Upper Colorado and Lower Colorado River Basins ..... Inside Cover Authority for Report .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ......ii Introduction' ....... ~ ........ ... ........ .. .... .. .. .ii ActualOperations under Criteria -Water Year·1972 .....•.... 1 Upper Basin Reservoirs ..•.... ... ... ... .................2 Lower Basin Reservoirs ........... .. .............. 14 River Regulation ' 20 Beneficial Consumptive Uses 21 Upper Basin Uses >••••.••••••••••••• 21 LowerBasin Uses and Losses 21 Water Quality Control.. .. ...... .. ................ .' . .. 22 Water Quality Operationsduring Water Year 1972 .. 22 Future Water Quality Control.. .......... .. ... .. ..... .. 22 Enhancement of Fish and Wildlife ........ .. .... .. .. .. 23 Upper Basin 23 Lower Basin 23 Preservation of Environni"ent 2S Projected Plan of Operation under Criteria for Current Year 26 Determination of "602(a) Storage" .. .. ...... .. ..... .'. ..26 Lower Basin Requirements .................. .>. ........ 27 Plan of Operation Water Year 1973 ... .. .. .. ... .. .... .. .... 29 Upper Basin Reservoirs .. .. .. .... .. .. .. ..... .. .. .• .. .. 29 Lower Basin Reservoirs .... .. ...................... 33 At the end of September 1971, Blue Mesa Curee Bti Unit Reservoir had 532,300 acre-feet of active storage and a water surface elevation of 7,484 feet. During April-July 1972, inflow to Blue Mesa was 469,000 acre-feet, or about 59 percent of the long-time average. This amount of water caused the reservoir to reach a seasonal high of 7,485 feet and an active storage of 543,300 acre-feet early mJuly. During water year 1972, fishing was enhanced below Gunnison Tunnel by the flow of not less than 300 c.f.s.
    [Show full text]
  • STATEHENT on CURECANTI UUIT, COLO., of COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (1.Iodified Plan)
    BR-4 Feb. '55 STATEHENT ON CURECANTI UUIT, COLO., OF COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT (1.iodified Plan) The Curecanti unit of the Colorado River Storage project is located on Gunnison River, a tributary of the Colorado River, in west­ centra.l,. Colorado. The report of the Colorado River Storage project and participating projects of December 1950 included plans for development of the Cureccnti and Crystal reservoirs and povrerplants. The Curecanti unit recommended in that report was for a reservoir capacity of 2,500,000 acre-feet. The State of Colorado requested that the reservoir nater sur­ face is limited to elevation 7520 or a capacity of 940,000 acre-feet. As a result the conr.u.ttee reports on the Bills before the last session of the Congress conteined the recorrJr.endation of the State of Colorado that the Curecanti unit be limited accordingly. Since the cost of po,•rer produced by the smaller dam ,1as somewhat higher than the cost of po,·1er produced by alternate iteans, ·,;e have endeavored to ,1ork out a plan for improving the economic feasibility of this unit. Reconnaissance studies of a modified plan are non v:ell advanced and indicate that a greater and more economical utilization of the po,·,er resources, on the Gunnison 'liver could be made by adding tno dams and poTier­ plants between the Curecanti and Crystal Reservoir sites. The resulting unit Ttould consist of an integrated system of four dams and po'\'Terplants. It is planned prir.i.arily for hydroelectric development and uould also pro­ vide benefits from flood control, recreation, and ultimately from irriga­ tion and other uses dependent upon river regulation or replacement storage.
    [Show full text]