Advanced Search
|
Site Map
Resources
Home
Archives
Press Releases
Media
Litigation
Open Records
Opinion
Government
Don't Buy A Lie!
Dam promoters cleave to false and corrupt pretense of justice.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement Comment: Desert Rock Energy Facility
Posted by
Steve Cone
on 6:59 AM October 8, 2007.
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENT BY STEVE CONE: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT--DESERT ROCK ENERGY FACILITY
Harrilene Yazzie, NEPA Coordinator
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Navajo Regional Office
P.O. Box 1060, Gallup, New Mexico 87305
505-863-8287
Jennifer Pyne AICP
Project manager/Environmental Planner
URS Corporation
7720 N. 16th Street, Suite 100
Phoenix, AZ 85020
602-648-2335
602-371-1615
jennifer_pyne@urscorp.com
Ladies:
I'm obliged to take advantage of your extension of the comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement ["DEIS"] for Desert Rock Energy Facility ["DREF"]. In response to a recent Freedom of Information Act ["FOIA"] request, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ["USF&WS"] provided the following two emails referencing the DREF Biological Assessment and the eventual issuance by USF&WS of a jeopardy analysis as part of a Biological Opinion for Desert Rock. These emails provide unique (albeit disquieting) perspective on the collusive nature of the relationships between high-level federal administrators and the corporate executives they so faithfully service. The raw arrogance and threatening posture of Sithe Global, LLC in these exchanges constitute a classic case of promoters of private profit projects reviling front-line, public employees charged with safeguarding the environment and upholding the public trust. The fact that such machinations have become commonplace cannot mitigate for the severe impacts of this intended assault by DREF promoters on the natural environment and the practice of good government.
RECORDS OBTAINED UNDER THE FOIA:
From: David Campbell/R2/FWS/DOI
07/23/07 08:24 AM
To: Brian A Milsap/RO/R2/FWS/DOI, Wally Murphy/RO/R@/FWS/DOI
cc: Lyle Lewis/R@/FWS/DOI, Eric Hein/R2/FWS/DOI@FWS, Marilyn Myers/R@/FWS/DOI@FWS
Subject: Desert Rock Energy Project BO - Cons. #22420-2004-F-0356
All:
I received a call from one of the consultants working on the Biological Assessment for the Desert Rock Energy Project. They have received the letter we wrote on July 2 requesting additional information for the consultation. During the conversation the consultant informed me that Sithe Global LLC did not want to request the additional information we requested regarding the effect of climate change, specifically: a) addressing in their analysis the results of modeling of future water availability; and b) the effects of any changes in hydrology and water resources of the San Juan River basin on Colorado pikeminnow, razorback sucker, bald eagle, and Southwest willow flycatcher.
The consultant informed me that Thomas A. Johns, Senior Vice President Development, Sithe Global LLC stated that Sithe Global had taken the issue back to "Washington, D.C." and that we would soon be instructed by "Washington" not to address or pursue the climate change questions.
I thought you should be aware of this conversation.
David L. Campbell
Aquatic Ecosystems Branch Chief
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
New Mexico Ecological Field Services Field Offices
2105 Osuna Road NE
Albuquerque, NM 87113
505-761-4745 (phone)
505-346-2535 (fax)
From: "Johns, Thomas"
07/12/2007 08:27 AM
To:
,
,
,
cc: "Straussfeld, Dirk"
, "Holmstead, Jeff"
, "Mike Fitzgerald"
,
, "Doug MscCout"
, "Steven Begay"
Subject: Desert Rock BO
Dave
Sithe and DPA are very concerned with [SIC] appears to be a lack of progress on the Desert Rock Biological Opinion. As you are aware the BA was mailed to you by BIA on April 30. In my meeting with you on May 24, I understand [SIC] that you had not yet completed your review of the BA, but based on your initial review you were going to request some changes to the BA related to the mercury deposition risk assessment of the rated [SIC] to greenhouse gas emissions. You indicated in that meeting that you would complete your review shortly. In a call with you the week of June 18 you informed me that a key employee in your office had been out of the office for a family emergency which has caused a delay but that the letter was going under internal review. I left a voice mail to get an update on July 10 and have yet to receive a response.
As we have discussed the BO is very important to the air permit process for the project and we would like to get this process completed as soon as possible. Would you please provide me with an update as to the status of your review? Is there anything we can [SIC] to help? Thanks
Tom
Thomas A. Johns
Senior Vice President Development
Sithe Global LLC
Three Riverway Suite 110
Houston, TX 77056
509.995.2906 (Cell) Primary
509.926.3485 (Office)
713.499.1167 (Fax)
johns@sitheglobal.com
# # #
Closely tied to this refusal of Sithe Global, LLC and Dine Power Authority ["DPA"] to consider the potential impact of climate change and global warming on future water availability in the San Juan River, is the Secretary of the Interior's 2007 Hydrologic Determination, a finding which clears the way for the State of New Mexico to settle claims of the Navajo Nation to the San Juan River in New Mexico, and for the Bureau of Reclamation ["BOR"] to construct the billion dollar Navajo-Gallup Water Pipeline -- a federally-funded project designed to directly supply water for operation of the DREF. Records obtained recently through the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act indicate the Dine Power Authority ["DPA"] has sought to earmark "approximately 20,000 acre-feet" of Navajo settlement water from the San Juan River for the DREF, referring to such development as necessary "to apply Navajo water to the highest beneficial uses". Apparently, the Navajo Department of Justice and the United States Government as Trustee are in agreement with DPA that supplying water for a third massive coal-fired power plant within a 15-mile radius in the San Juan Basin is a more noble endeavor than providing a safe and reliable source of drinking water for tribal members in the Navajo Eastern Agency, many of whom will be completely by-passed by the Navajo-Gallup Water Pipeline.
RECORDS OBTAINED THROUGH NEW MEXICO INSPECTION OF PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST:
[excerpted from comment by Dine' Power Authority]
DINE POWER AUTHORITY
P.O. BOX 3239
WINDOW ROCK, ARIZONA 86515
(928) 871-2133
FAX (928) 871-4046
EXHIBIT "A"
Dr. John Leeper
Navajo Nation Department of Justice
P.O. Drawer 678
Fort Defiance, Arizona 86504
RE: Position Statement on San Juan River Basin in New Mexico
Navajo Water Rights Settlement
The Dine' Power Authority ("DPA") submits the following comments regarding the proposed Navajo Nation water rights settlement in the San Juan River Basin in New Mexico. These comments are directed towards the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project ("NIIP") because the waters reserved for that project comprise a significant portion of the Navajo Nation's San Juan River Basin water claims.
The United States Congress by Act of June 13, 1962, 43 U.S.C. 615ii, et seq., approved the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project for the purpose of furnishing water for the irrigation of irrigable and arable lands and for municipal, domestic, and industrial uses, providing recreation and fish and wildlife benefits, and controlling silt, and for other beneficial purposes. DPA submits its comments consistent with the original vision, intent and spirit of creating an economic engine for the Navajo people by developing the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project and it appears that the Navajo people have been precluded from fully realizing the benefits envisioned by developing the Navajo Indian Irrigation project.
In pursuit of achieving its purposes and furthering the economic well-being of the Navajo people, the DPA with various partners is undertaking to develop, construct and operate the Navajo Transmission Project, a 500 KV high voltage transmission line originating in the Four Corners area of New Mexico and terminating near Las Vegas, Nevada. Additionally, DPA has entered a development agreement with Steag Power, LLC., to develop, construct and operate a 1200-1500 mw power generating facility in the San Juan River Basin. To facilitate such development and apply Navajo water to the highest beneficial uses, DPA respectfully submits the following comments.
FEDERAL LEGISLATION COMMENTS
1. DPA requests the inclusion of additional language in the Bill to enable DPA and partners to acquire and use approximately 20,000 acre-feet, or sufficient water to meet the needs of a 1200-1500 mw power generation facility proposed for the Four Corners area of New Mexico.
* Section 203(a)(3) seems to imply certain limited uses for waters reserved for the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project. DPA requests inclusion in the following language at Section 203(a)(3) which is consistent with the economic engine concept envisioned for the NIIP.
"(B) domestic, industrial or commercial purposes; and
(C) the generation of both thermal, and hydroelectric power as an incident to the diversion of water by the Project for the foregoing purposes."
2. DPA needs to request the Navajo Nation to utilize features and capacity of the NIIP works to convey approximately 20,000 acre-feet of water to a proposed power generating facility near the existing BHP coal lease area.
* DPA strongly supports the provision in Section 203(a)(4) which provides: "The Secretary is authorized to use capacity of the NIIP works to convey water supplies for the purposes of the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project authorized by Title I of this Act, and may use said capacity for conveyance of water for other non-agricultural purposes if sufficient capacity is available and the associated diversion and use of water is not inconsistent with applicable federal and state law and does not impair other water users in New Mexico. Use of NIIP works to convey water for non-agricultural purposes consistent with this subsection shall not be cause for the Secretary to reallocate construction costs for the project."
3. DPA asserts that the Navajo Nation is entitled to savings in depletions of water due to the conversion of the NIIP from gravity irrigation to sprinkler irrigation project. In a memorandum dated December 6, 1974, the Deputy Secretary in the Office of the Solicitor of the United States Department of the Interior issued an opinion addressing this issue, the Deputy Secretary concluded that the Navajo Nation is entitled to a net savings of 24,000 acre-feet of depletions which resulted from converting of the project from a gravity to a sprinkler irrigation system. This savings in depletions is not currently recognized in the proposed settlement agreement, legislation or decree.
[end excerpt] --------------------------
# # #
The sad truth is that water from the San Juan River Basin in New Mexico Navajo Water Rights Settlement through the Navajo-Gallup Water Pipeline would never reach many needy Navajo who have been promised their rightful share. Rather, the Navajo-Gallup Water Pipeline has been conceived as a conduit to convert water held in trust for the Navajo People to profits reaped by Sithe Global, LLC and the promoters of the DREF. Thus, the politics of unbridled greed feed on the promise of environmental justice, and the People inherit a dismal legacy of pollution, degradation and death.
Sept. 09, 2007
To the Editor of the Santa Fe New Mexican:
What about the Burnham Water Haulers?
Kudos to the New Mexican for reporting on State Engineer John D’Antonio’s outrageous part in funding what was nothing but a KNME television propaganda piece, “The Water Haulers,” advocating for the massive Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project.
It is insulting to us, the Navajo People, that KNME arrogantly depicted Navajos as one great monoculture walking in lockstep, even when it comes to a massive Federal water project that we fear will dry up the San Juan River, harm our land and further disrupt our lives and traditional values. Clearly, the real purpose of this project—despite KNME’s willingness to ignore key issues, is to provide water for massive energy projects, urban and other development on and off the reservation, part of an area known as the National Energy Sacrifice Area, exactly what happened with the last project pitched to Congress to “help the Navajos,” the Navajo Dam.
The Navajo-Gallup Water Project is very much ingrained in the Desert Rock efforts. In the “Preferred Alternative” section of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Navajo-Gallup Water Project, it clearly indicates that a project outlet for industrial purposes is needed and that a water pumping station would be placed in Kirtland, New Mexico, just north of the proposed Desert Rock project. In the Desert Rock DEIS, there is indication that there is not enough water in Burnham to support the plant, therefore, “alternative sources of water” would have to be conveyed to the site. Is it coincidence that these two projects are occurring simultaneously? No because they are a connected action, occurring in the collusive efforts of Sithe Global LLC and Diné Power Authority.
In Burnham, we oppose any efforts which mislead the public into believing that this water project is meant to benefit the Navajos. The reality is that we, who live in Burnham, haul water for ourselves and our livestock, and the proposed Desert Rock plans to use 4,500 acre-feet of water per year when we do not have modern conveniences such as the common toilet, sinks, or showers. We are water haulers too!
It is not okay for this energy monster to consume our aquifer, leave it dry, and then transport water across the reservation while we get nothing. I acknowledge and empathize with the hardships of the individuals shown in “Water Haulers” and while I do not mean to undermine their outcries, it is important to recognize that our situations in Burnham are the same. We travel afar, purchase thousand-dollar water tanks, spend gas money, heat up the water on our stoves and then repeat daily.
There is no balance between these pros and cons of the water project in “Water Haulers.” Where is the mention of industrial uses of this water? What about the grandma and grandpa water haulers who live along the proposed route of the water project who will not benefit? I question the journalistic integrity of KNME and its use of this film as propaganda. I would hope that the National Academy of Television Arts and Science honor KNME with an Emmy Award for deliberately misleading the public and misrepresenting the true intent of this water project, which is to supply water to the energy projects which will pollute us to death.
Dailan J. Long
Burnham, New Mexico
# # #
The Bureau of Reclamation's 2007 Hydrologic Determination on the San Juan River magically found that the flow of the Colorado River is greater than anyone ever thought due to reduced evaporation rates from drought-shrunken reservoirs -- a feat of hydrological alchemy surpassed only by the BOR's penchant for justifying its continued existence by converting public funds and resources into private, corporate profits. This proclamation by the Secretary of the Department of the Interior identifies "new water" from the San Juan River -- water in just the right quantities necessary to fill the Navajo-Gallup Pipeline and operate the DREF. On 1 October 2007 a "Motion for Limited Discovery Concerning the 2007 BOR Hydrologic Determination" was filed in San Juan County's Eleventh Judicial Court to obtain from the United States and the State of New Mexico responses to certain interrogatories and the production of various documents pertinent to the formulation of the 2007 Hydrologic Determination.
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
COUNTY OF SAN JUAN
STATE OF NEW MEXICO, ex rel.
THE STATE ENGINEER,
Plaintiff,
vs. No. CV 75-184
Honorable Rozier E. Sanchez
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., District Judge Pro Tempore
Defendants, SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN
ADJUDICATION
vs.
La Plata River Section
THE JICARILLA APACHE TRIBE and the
NAVAJO NATION,
Defendant-Intervenors.
MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY CONCERNING
2007 BOR HYDROLOGIC DETERMINATION
The San Juan Agricultural Water Users Association and the Hammond Conservancy District respectfully move the Court to allow limited discovery concerning the 2007 Hydrologic Determination by the Bureau of Reclamation. A copy of the discovery is attached as Exhibit A.
The grounds for this motion are as follows:
1. A hydrologic determination is a legal prerequisite for storage permits in the Navajo Reservoir, and hence for the Gallup Navajo pipeline.
No long-term contract . . . shall be entered into for the delivery of water stored in Navajo Reservoir or of any other waters of the San Juan River and its tributaries, as aforesaid, until the Secretary has determined by hydrologic investigations that sufficient water to fulfill said contract is reasonably likely to be available for use in the State of New Mexico . . . and has submitted such determination to the Congress of the United States and the Congress has approved such contract . . . .
Navajo Indian Irrigation Project Act, Pub. L. No. 87-483, 76 Stat. 96, 100 (1962). By including this provision in a statute, Congress has explicitly recognized the dire scarcity of water in the Colorado River, relative to the needs of the river. It is the intent of Congress to be absolutely sure that there is enough “wet water” to satisfy the needs of existing users and any new project.
2. When the conditional pipeline settlement was proposed by the State Engineer, it was recognized by knowledgeable parties along the Colorado River that the proposed conditional settlement was problematic due to lack of water. “However, New Mexico has a problem, it has already allocated its full share of the water available under the 1988 hydrologic determination to other uses. Therefore, to comply with the proposed Navajo settlement, New Mexico needs the Secretary to redo the hydrologic determination and, magically, find more water in the Upper Basin.” Eric Kuhn, Memorandum to Colorado River Water Conservation District Board of Directors (Apr. 6, 2006), attached hereto as Exhibit B. (Because New Mexico is only entitled to an 11.5% pro rata share of Upper Basin water, the BOR determination must find that the water supply for the Upper Basin has somehow increased by 173,913 acre-feet, in order to increase New Mexico’s supply by 20,000 acre-feet.)
3. On June 8, 2007, Secretary of the Interior Kempthorne signed a new hydrologic determination concerning the additional 20,000 acre feet of depletion proposed for the pipeline settlement.
4. On its face, the 2007 determination is difficult to explain. It seems to find that the supply of water in the Colorado River has increased since the last hydrologic determination in 1988. This is contrary to virtually all of the scientific studies since 1988. Those studies find that the amount of water in the Colorado River system is shrinking, or was overestimated to begin with. There is no scientific study or scientific peer review supporting the BOR’s new determination.
5. Without additional information, it is impossible for anyone to evaluate the BOR 2007 determination, because the BOR has not revealed or explained the changes which it has made from the last determination in 1988. The BOR has not fully revealed or explained the changes in its formula or computation or model, or in the data that was fed into the formula. The BOR has also not revealed or explained the scientific evidence, if any, that supports these changes.
6. It appears, although one cannot be certain, that the BOR has found additional water, on paper, by recalculating evaporation loss. See Exhibits C and D, attached hereto (Ed Quillen, Making More Water, Denver Post (Sept. 17, 2007) and Steve Cone, A Miracle in the Four Corners, Op-ed, Farmington Daily Times (Jul. 15, 2007)). It seems that the BOR’s reasoning is somewhat along the following lines: Because there is less water in the reservoirs, there is less evaporation, therefore there is more water in the Colorado River system. (The illogic of this reasoning should be readily apparent. It is internally inconsistent.) There may well be other changes in the BOR’s computation, either in its formula or the data input into the formula, but it is impossible to tell.
7. If the BOR 2007 determination is wrong, then the consequences are catastrophic. First, Public Law 87-483 has not been complied with. Second, an incorrect determination creates an environmental and economic disaster for all of New Mexico and the persons who depend on the San Juan River, and for the Colorado River Basin states as a whole. Third, if the 2007 determination is erroneous, then, it will mislead Congress, the New Mexico Legislature, this Court, the parties to this litigation, and the parties who have not yet been joined. Therefore, it is imperative that the validity of this determination be examined now, not years from now, when it will be too late. If the 2007 determination is erroneous, as it appears to be, then the errors need to be identified and corrected before the pipeline settlement is enacted or implemented. It makes no sense to build a pipeline without wet water to put in it.
8. The case management plan expressly contemplates that changes will be made as necessary or advisable during the course of this adjudication. Therefore, the case management plan should be modified to allow limited discovery on this crucial issue. Now that the 2007 determination has arrived, the time is ripe for discovery.
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
COUNTY OF SAN JUAN
STATE OF NEW MEXICO, ex rel.
THE STATE ENGINEER,
Plaintiff,
vs. No. CV 75-184
Honorable Rozier E. Sanchez
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., District Judge Pro Tempore
Defendants, SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN
ADJUDICATION
vs.
La Plata River Section
THE JICARILLA APACHE TRIBE and the
NAVAJO NATION,
Defendant-Intervenors.
INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION
CONCERNING 2007 BOR HYDROLOGIC DETERMINATION
Pursuant to Rules 1-033 and 1-034 of the New Mexico Rules of Civil Procedure, the San Juan Agricultural Water Users Association and the Hammond Conservancy District propound the following interrogatories and request for production to: (1) the United States Bureau of Reclamation (“BOR”); (2) the Office of the [New Mexico] State Engineer; (3) the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission; and (4) the United States Department of the Interior.
In this discovery, “hydrologic determination” refers to the 1988 Hydrologic Determination, or 2007 Hydrologic Determination prepared by the BOR pursuant to Pub. L. No. 87-483, 76 Stat. 96, 100 (1962).
INTERROGATORIES
1. In arriving at the 2007 determination, what changes were made to the 1988 hydrologic determination? Please identify and explain each change in the model, formula or method used, and in the data or assumptions used, and the effect of each such change.
2. What was the scientific basis for each change?
3. Identify each person in your agency who was involved in the 2007 hydrologic determination, and each person outside your agency of whom you are aware, and explain the involvement of each. Please include persons who made comments, questions, communications, or suggestions about the 2007 hydrologic determination, whether formal or informal, whether written or not (including but not limited to, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service).
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
1. Please produce all documents relating to your answers to the foregoing interrogatories.
2. Please produce all documents relating to the 2007 hydrologic determination, including all documents in electronic form as specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a).
Respectfully submitted,
VICTOR R. MARSHALL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
By
Victor R. Marshall
Attorneys for San Juan Agricultural
Water Users Association and the
Hammond Conservancy District
12509 Oakland NE
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87122
505-332-9400 / 505-332-3793 FAX
I hereby certify that the foregoing was faxed
and emailed to Bradley Bridgewater, Esq.;
emailed to the parties on the following list;
and mailed to Stanley Pollack, Esq. and ‘
Jolene McCaleb, Esq. this day
of , 2007.
MEMORANDUM
April 6, 2006
TO:
Board of Directors, CRWCD
FROM:
Eric Kuhn
SUBJECT: Colorado River Basin-Wide Issues
1.
Seven States Agreement
The Bureau of Reclamation has accepted the states proposal and will include it as one of the
alternatives considered as a part of the shortage criteria environmental impact statement (EIS). The
good new is that the April 1st forecast for inflow to Lake Powell is 96% of normal or 7,800 a.f.
Storage in Lake Powell should gain one to one and one half million acre feet between summer 2005
and summer 2006. With an average year, we could see equalization releases in 2007 (the first since
1999).
2.
Upper Colorado River Commission Issues
The Upper Colorado River Commission will be holding a meeting in Wyoming in early June.
One of the issue on the Commission agenda is the hydrologic determination. The hydrologic
determination is one of those important oddities in the Law of the River. Under the federal
legislation which authorized the construction of the San Juan-Chama and Navajo Irrigation Project,
before the Secretary of the Interior can enter into contracts for water out of Navajo Reservoir, the
Secretary needs to “determine by hydrologic investigations that sufficient water to fulfill for use in
the State of New Mexico during the term thereof under the allocation made in articles III and XIV
of the Upper Colorado River Basin compact.”
Under the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact New Mexico gets 11.25% of the yield
available to the four upper division states (Arizona gets a fixed 50,000 a.f. per year). The hydrologic
determination is the formal mechanism under which the Secretarydetermines that New Mexico has
an adequate allocation under the 1948 compact to allow the execution of contracts for Navajo
Reservoir water.
The most recent hydrologic determination was signed by Acting Secretary Broadbent in1988.
Under the1988determinationthat the Secretarydetermined that under the 1922 and 1948 compacts,
the Upper Basin’s safe yield is 6.0 million acre feet. The prior (1983) hydrologic determination was
5.8 million acre feet. In order to develop a yield figure, the Bureau of Reclamation has to make
numerous assumption, many of them controversial. For example, for the 1988 hydrologic
determination, Reclamation assumed a minimum objective release of 8.23 million acre feet a year
from Lake Powell. Obviously, both the Upper Basin States and Lower Basin States objected to this
assumption (for opposite reasons). Other critical assumptions include shortages at upstream
diversion points, maintaining minimum power pools and how bank storage works within Powell.
Recently the State of New Mexico and the Navajo Nation reached a settlement of the Navajo
water claims in New Mexico. The settlement includes the construction of a pipeline from the San
Juan River to Gallup, New Mexico. This pipeline would provide about 20,000 acre feet per year of
much needed municipal water to Gallup and reservation communities within New Mexico. The
water supply would include a contract for water from Navajo Reservoir.
However, New Mexico has a problem, it has already allocated its full share of the water
available under the 1988 hydrologic determination to other uses. Therefore, to comply with the
proposed Navajo settlement, New Mexico needs the Secretaryto redo the hydrologic determination
and, magically, find more water in the Upper Basin.
Technical representatives from the Upper Basin States, the UCRC and Reclamation have
been looking at different hydrologic options. To increase New Mexico’s allocation by 20,000 a.f.
means that the total Upper Basin supply needs to be increase by about 200,000 a.f.
New Mexico has proposed several changes that could be used to justifythe additional water.
New Mexico has suggested keeping the 6.0 million acre feet number, but reducing the amount of
expected mainstem reservoir evaporation during critical periods from 520K to 260K. This would
have the same effect as increasing the supply to about 6.2 million acre feet per year. New Mexico
has also proposed changing the methods used to calculate depletions within New Mexico.
As far as we know, Colorado has not accepted these changes, but New Mexico is definitely
putting the political heat on, so its Congressional delegation can introduce legislation approving the
Navajo settlement.
The implications to Colorado are primarily political. As far as I know, the hydrolgic
determination has NO legal impact on Secretarial decisions (Bureau of Reclamation) within
Colorado.
A major question in Colorado is whether or not the CWCB will use a possible change in the
hydrologic determination to argue that Colorado has more reliable water availably to it under the
1922 and 1948 compacts. If so, what are the implications for the HB-1177/IBCC/Round table process?
If this happens and the water is not actually physically available in the future, what are the
consequences and who is most at risk?
REK/ldp
Making more water
Ed Quillen, Denver Post columnist
Article Last Updated: 09/17/2007 04:57:43 PM MDT
The U.S. Department of the Interior has discovered a way to produce more water from the overworked Colorado River.
(I learned of this not from my own dogged journalistic investigations, but from Phil Doe of Littleton, who chairs a group of troublemakers known as the Citizens Progressive Alliance.)
At issue last summer was a pipeline from the San Juan River to serve Gallup, N.M., and portions of the Navajo nation. Before it can be built, the Interior Department has to issue a "Hydrologic Determination" that there will likely be enough water available to make the project worth building. After all, there's no point in constructing 267 miles of pipeline if there's no water to put into the pipes.
On June 8, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne sent a letter to New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. "The finding in the Determination is that there is likely to be sufficient water to support the proposed contract," Kempthorne wrote, which "removes any Department of Interior concern about potential limitations of water supply."
The San Juan River is a major tributary of the Colorado River, which is governed by the Colorado River Compact. The compact was drawn up in 1922, and it was based on the best data available then, which indicated an average annual flow in the Colorado of about 17 million acre-feet.
The problem is that those statistics were compiled during years that, in the grand sweep of things, were unusually wet. More recent studies put the average closer to 13.5 million acre-feet per year.
So we have a river that was allocated on the basis of 17 million annual acre-feet, but rarely carries that much water. In our state's water jargon, the river is "over-appropriated," meaning there are more legitimate claims on the river than it has water to supply.
And that was before this pipeline was approved by Interior. So how did Interior determine "that there is likely to be sufficient water"?
Take two logical statements, combine them into illogic, and you can make water — at least if you're the Interior Department.
Logical Statement 1: The lower the evaporation from the surface of reservoirs in the Colorado River basin, the more liquid water in the system. No argument there.
Logical Statement 2: The lower the levels of the reservoirs in the Colorado River basin, the less surface area there is to suffer from evaporation.
So, the reservoirs are smaller and thus they lose less water, and therefore, there is more water available. Believe it or not, that's how our Interior Department determined that there was water available for this New Mexico pipeline.
No one seems to have asked, "Why are the reservoirs smaller?" The answer to that question would be something like, "Years of drought," and that would imply that there isn't enough water to go around with current uses, let alone adding another diversion from the river.
Consider Lake Mead behind Hoover Dam near Las Vegas. That's hot, dry country, and so the reservoir drops 6.4 feet a year on account of evaporation, which works out to 791,000 acre-feet a year — enough water for more than 3 million people.
Move up the Colorado River to Powell Reservoir (also in a hot desert), and there's an estimated 884,000 acre-feet a year lost to evaporation and seepage into the surrounding sandstone. Let's figure only half the loss is evaporation, and that's 442,000 acre-feet — enough for at least 1.7 million people.
In other words, the combined evaporative loss from just these two reservoirs is enough water for all 4.7 million of us Coloradans. So if we were to remove the dams, the reservoirs would shrink away and evaporation losses would diminish. Thus there's more water for everybody in our arid West. So if it works this way, as Interior now argues, why did it build dams in the first place?
Ed Quillen of Salida (ed@cozine.com) writes Tuesdays and Sundays.
Printed from ABQjournal.com, a service of the Albuquerque Journal
URL:
http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_columns/577307opinion07-11-07.htm
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Reality Evaporates in Push for Navajo Pipeline Project
By Steve Cone
Citizens Progressive Alliance
FARMINGTON— The wizards of the Western water world are working to create a new reality and a bleak future for the San Juan River.
In a modern-day miracle of grandiose proportions, development interests in New Mexico and Colorado have engaged the scientifically compromised U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to divine that flows of the Colorado River system actually exceed expectations. And they have identified just enough water to foist their latest scheme on the unwitting taxpayers of this country.
In a June 8 letter to Gov. Bill Richardson, Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne approved a new Hydrologic Determination for the San Juan River, paving the way for construction of the billion-dollar Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project.
This letter states, "The finding in the Determination that there is likely to be sufficient water to support the proposed contract removes any Department of Interior concern about potential limitations of water supply."
Kempthorne's concurrence with this revamped Hydrologic Determination is essential for further water development of the San Juan River because New Mexico has bumped up against the ceiling of its share of Colorado River Compact allocations. The Bureau's revised Hydrologic Determination is based on numerous controversial assumptions, but it represents a boon to water development interests in that it invites New Mexico to further deplete and effectively desiccate the San Juan River, jeopardizing the hydrologic future of the entire basin and portending catastrophe for the Colorado River system.
After decades of data collection and interpretation, including tree-ring studies by the University of Arizona and U.S. Geological Survey, it is well understood that when the Colorado River was first divvied-up, overly generous allocations to the seven Colorado River Basin States were based on erroneous predictions. Now, rather than conducting a more objective, honest analysis of water availability, Reclamation's water experts are tempting fate by repeating the same mistake with a logic so twisted as to defy reason.
According to Bureau hydrologists and based on the New Mexico State Engineer's calculations, just the right quantity of water needed to fill the Navajo-Gallup Pipeline is now available. It has been found, miraculously, by factoring-in reduced evaporation rates due to the region's most recent drought. Since less water is evaporating from drought-shrunken reservoirs, the bureau argues, more water is actually available for development.
Eureka! Less is more.
Just stop to think for a minute about the unmitigated gall of the water establishment demanding the public take such an argument seriously.
How could reduced evaporation rates from reservoirs at historically low levels constitute proof that there is additional "new water" in the already over-allocated Colorado River system? This magical math in Reclamation's new Hydrologic Determination is most suspect, as it suggests a preordained outcome designed primarily to satisfy the appetites of developers for rampant, unsustainable growth.
Now, using the Animas-La Plata Project as a model, Richardson and the New Mexico congressional delegation have started to fast-track legislation authorizing a tribal settlement and seeking massive federal subsidies for Navajo-Gallup by evoking sympathy for Native Americans— a tried-and-true method of deflecting the scrutiny this project so richly deserves.
The Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project, which would cost as much as $3 billion dollars if typical bureau cost overruns materialize, is designed to settle the Navajo Nation's claims to the San Juan River in New Mexico. But it is hardly a secret that the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, the biggest straw in the San Juan, provides water for the Navajo Agriculture Products Industry farm that has lost millions of dollars over the years.
Small wonder the Navajo Nation balks at the prospect of litigating its claim to reserved water rights on the San Juan River. Federal law enshrined in the Winters doctrine holds that the only feasible and fair method of quantifying a tribal water right is through a determination of the "practicably irrigable acreage" (PIA) of the reservation land in question. So, the only acceptable means of measuring the Navajo right on the San Juan is to complete an assessment of the PIA of the Navajo Nation lands in the San Juan Basin. This must be done to secure the public trust and as a matter of fairness and accuracy to protect the public's most valuable resource.
All content copyright © ABQJournal.com and Albuquerque Journal and may not be republished without permission. Requests for permission to republish, or to copy and distribute must be obtained at the the Albuquerque Publishing Co. Library, 505-823-3492.
# # #
In August 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency ["EPA"] submitted comments to the Bureau of Indian Affairs ["BIA"], contending the DREF DEIS fails to address in detail several issues, including water supplies for the DREF, the potential for byproducts to leach into the groundwater, mercury and particulate matter emissions, public health and environmental justice. The Associated Press has reported that the EPA is encouraging the BIA to work with the project promoters on options for local access to power to mitigate environmental justice concerns. Such toothless encouragement by the EPA is akin to a cadre of law enforcement officials consulting with a serial killer prior to his next murder spree, and supplicating, "Please leave the light on for your victims! They do not deserve to die in the dark!"
Desert Rock Energy Project: Power plant document concerns EPA
By SUSAN MONTOYA BRYAN | Associated Press
September 16, 2007
excerpted from The Santa Fe New Mexican
ALBUQUERQUE — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has concerns about the thoroughness of a massive document prepared by the Bureau of Indian Affairs on the potential impacts of a proposed coal-fired power plant on the nation’s largest Indian reservation.
And opponents of the $3 billion Desert Rock Energy Project are pointing to the EPA’s comments as validation of concerns they have about the plant’s potential impacts on the environment and the health of residents in the Four Corners region. . . .
In comments submitted to the BIA last month, the EPA contends the draft environmental impact statement for Desert Rock fails to address in detail several issues, including water supplies for the plant, the potential for byproducts to leach into the groundwater, mercury and particulate matter emissions, public health and environmental justice.
Environmentalists and some Navajos complain Desert Rock would use tribal resources to produce power that would be sent elsewhere while many across the sprawling reservation remain without electricity.
In its comments, the EPA is encouraging the BIA to work with the tribe and developers on options for local access to power to mitigate environmental justice concerns.
< Click for a
printer friendly version
of this article. >
Copyright © 1997-2006 A-LP Central. Unauthorized duplication is a violation of applicable laws. All rights expressly reserved.
