2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

Contract No. 12-WC-40-456 

ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT 

COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT 

REPAYMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND 

THE STATE OF COLORADO 

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD 
1 1. GENERAL DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................. 4 

2 2. PROJECT WORKS ......................................................................................................................................... 8 

3 3. PROJECT COORDINATION COMMITTEES .............................................................................................. 9 

4 4. MEASUREMENT AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR DISTRIBUTION OF STATUTORY WATER 

5 ALLOCATION ............................................................................................................................................. IO 

6 5. ALLOCATION AND USE OF PROJECT WATER ..................................................................................... II 

7 6. WATER RIGHT PROVISIONS .................................................................................................................... 12 

8 7. METHOD OF PAYMENT FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS ..................................................... I3 

9 8. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION ................................................................................................. 17 

10 9. PAYMENT OF OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPLACEMENT COSTS .................................. I9 

11 10. USE AND DISPOSAL OF WATER DURING CONSTRUCTION ............................................................. 20 

12 11. WATER SHORTAGES ................................................................................................................................. 2I 

13 12. STATE'S OBLIGATIONS FOR APPROPRIATIONS ................................................................................. 22 

14 I3. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES .......................................................................................... 22 

15 I4. THIRD-PARTY CONTRACTS .................................................................................................................... 22 

16 I5. TITLE TO PROJECT WORKS AND PROJECT REPAIR ........................................................................... 23 

17 I6. SEVERABILITY ........................................................................................................................................... 23 

18 17. CONTROLLER'S APPROVAL CRS §24-30-202(1 ) .................................................................................... 24 

19 18. FUND AVAILABILITY CRS §24-30-202(5.5) ............................................................................................ 24 

20 19. GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY ..................................... : ........................................................................... 24 

21 20. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW ........................................................................................................................ 24 

22 21. CHOICE OF LAW ......................................................................................................................................... 24 

23 22. BINDING ARBITRATION PROHIBITED .................................................................................................. 25 

24 23. SOFTWARE PIRACY PROHIBITION ........................................................................................................ 25 

25 24. EMPLOYEE FINANCIAL INTEREST/CONFLICT OF INTEREST CRS §§24-18-20I AND 

26 24-50-507 ...................................................................................................................................................... 25 

27 25. CHARGES FOR DELINQUENT PAYMENTS ........................................................................................... 26 

28 26. GENERAL OBLIGATION--BENEFITS CONDITIONED UPON PAYMENT .......................................... 26 

29 27. CONFIRMATION OF CONTRACT ............................................................................................................. 26 

30 28. NOTICES ....................................................................................................................................................... 27 

31 29. CONTINGENT ON APPROPRIATION OR ALLOTMENT OF FUNDS ................................................... 27 

32 30. OFFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT ................................................................................................................... 27 

33 31. CHANGES IN STATE'S ORGANIZATION ............................................................................................... 27 

34 32. ASSIGNMENT LIMITED-SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS OBLIGATED ............................................. 27 

35 33. BOOKS, RECORDS, AND REPORTS ......................................................................................................... 27 

36 34. RULES, REGULATIONS, AND DETERMINATIONS .............................................................................. 28 

37 35. PROTECTION OF WATER AND AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................... 28 

38 36. WATER CONSERVATION ......................................................................................................................... 28 

39 37. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ................................................................................................. 28 

40 38. COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS AND REGULATIONS ..................................................... 29 

41 39. MEDIUM FOR TRANSMITTING PAYMENTS ......................................................................................... 30 

42 40. CONTRACT DRAFTING CON SID ERA TIONS .......................................................................................... 30 

43 41. CONSTRAINTS ON AVAILABILITY OF WATER ................................................................................... 30 

44 

11 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

IO 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

Contract No. 12-WC-40-456 

UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT 

COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT 

REPAYMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES 

AND THE STATE OF COLORADO 

~~ THISREPAYMENTCONTRACT,madethis /8 dayof ~ ,20I2, 

/1 

pursuant to the Act of Congress approved June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 388), and acts amendatory 

thereof or supplementary thereto, all of which acts are commonly known and referred to as the 

Federal Reclamation Laws, between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, hereinafter referred 

to as the United States, represented by the officer executing this contract, and the STATE OF 

COLORADO, acting by and through the Department ofNatural Resources, Colorado Water 

Conservation Board, hereinafter called the State, located' in Denver, Colorado, acting through 

their representatives. 

WITNESSETH, That: 

WHEREAS, the following statements are made in explanation: 

(a) The Act of Congress approved April 11, 1956 (70 Stat. 1 05), authorized the planning 

and investigation of the Animas-La Plata Project as a participating project of the Colorado River 

Storage Project Act; subsequently, the construction, operation, and maintenance of the AnimasLa Plata Project was authorized by Title V of the Colorado River Basin Project Act of September 
30, 1968 (82 Stat. 896), and the United States has investigated, planned, and begun to construct 

2 said Animas-La Plata Project for the storage, diversion, salvage, and distribution of the waters of 

3 the Animas River, which Project has among its authorized purposes the furnishing of water for 

4 municipal, industrial, domestic, and other beneficial purposes. The water rights settlement 

5 purposes of the Project were authorized by the Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights Settlement Act 

6 of 1988 (Public Law 1 00-585) as amended by the Colorado Ute Settlement Act Amendments of 

7 2000, Public Law 106-554 (hereafter referred to as the Settlement Act, as amended). 

8 (b) The Settlement Act, as amended, authorizes the construction of a reservoir, pumpmg 

9 plant, inlet conduit, and appurtenant facilities with sufficient capacity to divert, store, and use 

10 water from the Animas River for an average annual depletion of 57,100 acre feet of water to be 

11 used for a municipal and industrial water supply; 

12 (c) Reclamation has completed the Animas-La Plata Final Supplemental Environmental 

13 Impact Statement (FSEIS) dated July 2000 and subsequent Record of Decision dated September 

14 25, 2000, for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The State acknowledges 

15 that as a result of this regulatory compliance, and the terms of this contract, it is limited in the 

16 Contract to a municipal and industrial Statutory Water Allocation with an estimated average 

17 annual depletion not to exceed 5,230 acre-feet of water for this Project. 

18 (d) As provided by Public Law 100-585, the design and construction functions of the 

19 Bureau of Reclamation with respect to the Animas-La Plata Project shall be subject to the 

20 provisions of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (Public Law 93-638) 

21 to the same extent as if such functions were performed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

2 
(e) Adequate water rights for the Project have been obtained in Colorado and New Mexico, 

2 and the United States is satisfied that any conflicts between private water rights and Project 

3 water rights have been resolved. 

4 (f) The State is interested in contracting for the water supply allocated to the State of 

5 Colorado pursuant to Public Law 106-554. 

6 (g) The State has demonstrated its legal and financial capability to make the contributions 

7 and payments required by this document, by demonstrating that it is a legal entity under state 

8 law, and that it has appropriated funds in amounts sufficient for this obligation. 

9 (h) In May of2001, Reclamation prepared an Interim Cost Allocation, based on October 

10 2001 price levels ofthe estimated Project construction costs, which established the repayment 

11 obligation of the State as $32,808,350 at that time. This Interim Cost Allocation continues to be 

12 updated annually to reflect the impacts of inflation on Project construction costs as described in 

13 Article 7 herein. 

14 (i) The Consolidated Appropriations Act of2005 (December 8, 2004) (P.L. 108-447) 

15 provides in Division C, Title II, Section 207 (commonly referred to as "Section 207'') the 

16 Secretary the authority to forgive the obligation of the non-Indian sponsors relative to the $163 

17 million increase in estimated total project costs that occurred in 2003. On December 30, 2005, 

I 8 the last sentence of Section 207 was amended to also forgive the costs of the effects of inflation 

19 on the $163. million increase (Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2006 - December 30, 

20 2005, P.L. 109-140). 

21 G) It is the intent of both the United States and the State that any rights granted by this 

22 Agreement are not limited to a specific term but would instead continue in full force and effect 

23 pursuant to section 9 ofthe Reclamation Project Act of 1939,43 U.S.C. § 485h, and this 

3 
Agreement will remain in full force and effect during the Useful Project Life, and as provided in 

2 Article 7(1) below. 

3 (k) The parties hereto desire to enter into this contract in order to secure this municipal and 

4 industrial water supply pursuant to the terms and conditions of Public Law I 06-554 for the use of 

5 such water in and for the benefit of Colorado as hereinafter provided. 

6 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and dependent covenants herein 

7 contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 

8 

9 I. GENERAL DEFINITIONS 

I 0 Where used in this contract: 

II (a) "Association" means the Animas-La Plata Operations, Maintenance, and Replacement 

I2 Association, established by the Project sponsors who were signatories to the IGA, dated March 

I3 4, 2009, pursuant to the Colorado Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association Act, 7-30-I 0 I 

I4 et seq., CRS (2006), to carry out the OM&R activities and responsibilities of the Project. 

I5 (b) "Colorado Ute Tribes" means the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, a federally recognized 

I6 Indian tribe, and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, a federally recognized Indian tribe. 

I7 (c) "Consultation" means the United States shall notify and confer with the State regarding 

I8 significant decisions pertaining to this contract. In the event that consensus cannot be reached 

I9 and the United States makes a decision, appeals are available to the extent allowed under 

20 applicable laws. 

2I (d) "Estimated Repayment Obligation" means the reimbursable construction costs allocated 

22 to the State's M&I uses associated with the construction of Project Works plus any appropriate 

23 Interest During Construction (IDC). 

4 
(e) "Final Repayment Obligation" means the final reimbursable construction costs 

2 allocated to the State's M&I uses associated with the construction of Project Works, plus any 

3 appropriate IDC, as determined through the Final Cost Allocation described in Article 7(d) 

4 below. 

5 (f) "IGA" or "Intergovernmental Agreement" means that agreement, effective March 4, 

6 2009, which has been executed by the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development 

7 Authority; the San Juan Water Commission, a political subdivision of the State ofNew Mexico, 

8 the La Plata Water Conservancy District, a political subdivision of the State of New Mexico; the 

9 Southern Ute Indian Tribe, a federally recognized Indian tribe; the Navajo Nation, a federally 

I 0 recognized Indian tribe; and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, a federally recognized Indian tribe, and 

II their authorized assignees, that have been identified by the Settlement Act, as amended, to 

I2 receive a water allocation that created the Association to operate and maintain the Project. 

I3 (g) "Non Contract costs" means the costs of work or services provided by Reclamation 

I4 staff and/or service contractors in support of the project. Non-contract costs refer to the costs of 

I5 work or services provided in support of the project, some of which can be expensed against a 

I6 specific plant account, and other work which is of such a broad non-specific nature that it can 

I7 only be attributed to the project as a whole. These latter costs are also referred to as "distributive 

I8 costs." Non-contract costs refer to the work or services provided in support of the project, some 

I9 of which can be expensed against a specific plant account, and other work which is of such a 

20 broad non-specific nature that it can only be attributed to the project as a whole. These costs 

2I generally originate for work or services provided by agency personnel (or contractor personnel 

22 used to augment agency resources), or land or right-of-way acquisitions to facilitate project 

23 development 

5 
(h) "Operation and Maintenance Facilities" or "Permanent Operations Facility" means 

2 those facilities necessary to support operations, maintenance and replacement work, including 

3 permanent operating facility building headquarters with associated office space, shop for repair 

4 and housing of the maintenance support equipment, storage place for supplies, and equipment 

5 yard. 

6 (i) "Project" means the Animas-La Plata Project, a participating project of the Colorado 

7 River Storage Project Act, authorized by Title V of the Colorado River Basin Project Act, 

8 approved September 30, 1968, as modified by the Settlement Act, as amended. 

9 G) "Project Construction Committee" means the committee made up of representatives of 

I 0 those entities that have been identified by the Settlement Act, as amended, to receive a water 

II allocation and the Bureau of Reclamation. This committee has provided and will provide 

I2 coordination and consultation on the construction activities among all the project beneficiaries, 

I3 seeking common understanding and consensus on decisions associated with such items as final 

I4 plans for Project Works, project construction completion schedule, and Project construction 

I5 costs. 

I6 (k) "Project Operator" means the Association operating the Project Works. 

I7 (I) "Project Water" means all water provided through the Animas-La Plata Project. 

I8 (m) "Project Works" means all works or facilities as described in the Settlement Act, as 

I9 amended, to be constructed under the Project, including a reservoir, a pumping plant, a reservoir 

20 inlet conduit, and appurtenant facilities with sufficient capacity to divert and store water from the 

2I Animas River for an average annual depletion of 57, I 00 acre-feet of water to be used for a 

22 municipal and industrial water supply, together with lands and rights-of-way for such works, as 

23 described in Article 2 herein. 

6 
(n) "Remaining Repayment Obligation" means the difference, if any, between the 

2 Estimated Repayment Obligation and the Final Repayment Obligation as determined through the 

3 Final Cost Allocation described in Articles 7(d) and 7(g) below. 

4 (o) "San Juan River System" means the San Juan River and its tributaries. 

5 (p) "State" or "Contractor" means the STATE OF COLORADO, acting by and through the 

6 Department ofNatural Resources, Colorado Water Conservation Board, located in Denver, 

7 Colorado, or its assignees. 

8 (q) "Statutory Water Allocation" means the municipal and industrial (M&I) water 

9 allocation delivered to the State through the use of the project components, pursuant to Sec. 

10 6(a)(1 )(ii)(VII) of the Settlement Act, as amended. 

11 (r) "United States" or "Contracting Officer" or "Secretary" either of them means the 

12 Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior or his/her duly authorized 

13 representative. 

14 (s) "Useful Project Life" means the period of time the Project is able to provide the 

15 authorized Project benefits pursuant to Sec. 6(a)(1)(A)(i)(VI) of the Settlement Act, as amended. 

16 (t) "Water Rights Settlement Agreement" refers to the "Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights 

17 Final Settlement Agreement" dated December 10, 1986 among the United States, the State of 

18 Colorado, the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, and the additional 

19 governmental and private entities in Colorado signatory thereto, as implemented by the 

20 Settlement Act, as amended. 

21 

7 
2. PROJECT WORKS 

2 Subject to the terms and conditions of this and other applicable contracts related specifically to 

3 this Project, the United States will construct the following Project Works and appurtenant 

4 facilities, acquire lands, and provide certain moveable property and equipment to the Project 

5 Operator needed for Project operation and maintenance as, in the opinion of the United States in 

6 consultation with the Project Operations Committee, are necessary for Project purposes, without 

7 being limited by enumeration and within the limit of funds made available by the Congress and 

8 the contracting parties. 

9 (a) The Project Works are presently identified as the following: 

I 0 (1) Ridges Basin Dam and Lake Nighthorse and appurtenant facilities, the main storage 

II facility for the Project, are located on Basin Creek in Ridges Basin approximately 3 

12 miles southwest of Durango, Colorado. The reservoir will have a total capacity of 

I3 approximately I20,000 acre-feet. 

14 (2) Durango Pumping Plant and appurtenant facilities are located adjacent to the Animas 

15 River and will pump water from the Animas River for storage in Lake Nighthorse. 

16 (3) Ridges Basin Inlet Conduit and appurtenant facilities extend from the Durango 

I7 Pumping Plant to Lake Nighthorse. 

I8 (4) Operation and Maintenance Facilities will be constructed as determined necessary by 

I9 the United States, after consultation with the Project Construction Coordinating 

20 Committee, for the required operation and maintenance of Project Works. 

2I (b) The United States, after consultation with the State, shall have the right at any time to 

22 increase the capacity of the Project Works or any unit or feature thereof for other than currently 

23 authorized project purposes without additional capital or operation and maintenance cost to the 

8 
State; provided, that the State's use ofthe Statutory Water Allocation shall not be impaired 

2 thereby. The right of use of such increased capacity is reserved to the United States. 

3 (c) Any additions, changes to, or operation of Project Works or changes in use of the water 

4 allocations pursuant to Sec. 6(a)(l)(A)(ii) ofthe Settlement Act, as amended, from that stated in 

5 the Animas-La Plata Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) dated July 

6 2000 and subsequent Record of Decision dated September 25, 2000, will, if required by law, be 

7 subject to further compliance with applicable environmental statutes, which shall include an 

8 analysis of potential impacts on other project participants. 

9 (d) Construction and operation of the Project will be in accordance with the Environmental 

I 0 Commitments in Chapters 4 and 5 of the FSElS, which are attached as Exhibit A to this contract. 

II 

I2 3. PROJECT COORDINATION COMMITTEES 

13 Coordination of Project construction, operations, and maintenance activities has been, in part, 

I4 and will be accomplished through the establishment of two committees: one to focus on those 

I5 activities associated with the construction of the Project Works, the other to oversee the 

I6 operations and maintenance activities. 

I7 (a) The Project Construction Coordination Committee is made up of representatives of 

I8 those entities that have been identified by the Settlement Act, as amended, to receive a water 

19 allocation and the Bureau of Reclamation. This committee has provided and will provide 

20 coordination and consultation on the construction activities among all the project beneficiaries, 

2I seeking common understanding and consensus on decisions associated with such items as final 

22 plans for Project Works, project construction completion schedule, and Project construction 

23 costs. Upon Project completion, this committee will be dissolved. 

9 
(b) The Project Operations Committee consisted of representatives from those entities that 

2 were identified by the Settlement Act, as amended, to receive a water allocation and the Bureau 

3 of Reclamation. This committee determined an appropriate entity to contract with Reclamation 

4 for the operation, maintenance, and replacement (OM&R) of the Project Works and developed a 

5 common understanding among the project beneficiaries of the appropriate level of annual 

6 OM&R activities to be performed on the Project Works to assure the Project's long term 

7 operational integrity and public safety. This committee was essentially replaced by the 

8 Association who subsequently entered into an OM&R contract with Reclamation. Ultimately, 

9 the Association will oversee the ongoing OM&R activities of the Project Works, providing 

I 0 consultation and coordination among Association members on such items as annual OM&R 

11 funding, maintenance schedules, and public safety issues. 

12 

13 4. MEASUREMENT AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR DISTRIBUTION OF STATUTORY 

14 WATER ALLOCATION 

15 (a) The water released or bypassed for the State pursuant to this contract shall be measured 

16 at the outlet works of Ridges Basin Dam, and/or in the Animas River at the Durango Pumping 

17 Plant with measuring facilities installed by the United States as a part of the Project. Additional 

18 points of diversion directly from Lake Nighthorse may be made in the future by the State after 

19 consultation and approval of the United States. Water delivered at these additional points of 

20 diversion on Lake Nighthorse shall be measured at those points of diversion by facilities 

21 provided by the State or its subcontractors. Water will be available at the outlet works of Ridges 

22 Basin Dam and/or the Animas River in such quantities as the State determines, subject to 

23 capacity limitations of the relevant facilities, to ensure that the State annually receives a 

10 
municipal and industrial Statutory Water Allocation with an estimated average annual depletion 

2 not to exceed 5,230 acre-feet. 

3 (b) Once water is released from the outlet works of Ridges Basin Dam, bypassed at the 

4 Durango Pumping Plant or diverted from Lake Nighthorse, the United States will not be 

5 responsible for the control, carriage, handling, use, disposal, or distribution of the Statutory 

6 Water Allocation furnished to the State, or for any damage of any nature whatsoever arising out 

7 of or connected to the control, carriage, handling, treatment, use, disposal of the Statutory Water 

8 Allocation by the State, except when caused by the direct action of the United States. 

9 (c) All facilities required for taking the water furnished under this contract from the points 

10 of delivery and putting it to use by the State and its users or subcontractors will be acquired, 

11 constructed or installed, and operated and maintained by the State or its users or subcontractors 

12 at their sole expense. 

13 

14 5. ALLOCATION AND USE OF PROJECT WATER 

15 (a) The State's allocation of water provided by the Project consists of a municipal and 

16 industrial Statutory Water Allocation with an estimated average annual depletion of 5,230 acre17 feet, except as otherwise provided under Article 7(h) herein. This allocation may be met by a 

18 combination of direct diversion of the natural flows from the Animas River and water released 

19 and/or diverted from Project storage and subsequently diverted from the Animas River. 

20 (b) Except as provided in Article 7(h) herein, the State shall have the right of up to 10,440 

21 acre-feet of storage in Lake Nighthorse to supplement the amount of direct flow diversion as 

22 necessary to fulfill the State's Statutory Water Allocation of 5,230 acre-feet estimated average 

23 annual depletion. Unless the Intergovernmental Agreement is in effect, any portion ofthe 10,440 

II 
acre-feet of unused storage shall be retained in Lake Nighthorse and shall be available for the 

2 State's use in succeeding years. The State shall have the opportunity to purchase excess Project 

3 water from other Project participants. 

4 (c) If required to ensure that the State's Statutory Water Allocation of 5,230 acre-feet 

5 estimated average annual depletion is met, the water may be used and reused to the extent 

6 permitted by the Project decrees and Federal authorizations. In addition, the water may be used 

7 at any location in the State of Colorado, in accordance with all applicable laws, or may be used 

8 by exchange or augmentation. Also, the water may be used for compact compliance purposes. 

9 Any use of water contemplated in this Article shall be subject to the conditions in Article 5(e) 

10 below. 

11 (d) The United States, after compliance with applicable environmental compliance statutes, 

12 shall cooperate with the State, its subcontractors or assignees, to provide appropriate interests in 

13 land needed for delivery of Project Water through non-project facilities. 

14 (e) Any use of the Statutory Water Allocation other than that contemplated in the July 2000 

15 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and subsequent Record of Decision dated 

16 September 25, 2000 for the Animas-La Plata Project shall be subject to compliance with 

17 applicable environmental statutes. 

18 

19 6. WATER RIGHT PROVISIONS 

20 (a) Upon request of the United States, and if the State agrees in writing, the State will 

21 assign the water rights, if any, that it holds associated with the Project water rights to the United 

22 States for the benefit of users ofProject Water. The State, or its assignee, will also protect its 

23 interest in the Project Water rights and in case a dispute arises as to the character, extent, priority 

12 
or validity of the rights of the United States or the State to use or permit use of Project Water, the 

2 State shall promptly bring and diligently prosecute and/or defend judicial proceedings for the 

3 determination of such dispute and shall take all other measures necessary toward the defense and 

4 protection of the Project water supply. The United States, upon request of the State, will enter 

5 into the proceedings to defend such rights. 

6 (b) The construction of the Project Works, the allocation ofthe water supply from those 

7 facilities to the Colorado Ute Tribes, and the provision of funds to the Colorado Ute Tribes in 

8 accordance with section 16 of Public Law 106-554, and the issuance of an amended final consent 

9 decree by the State of Colorado as contemplated in subsection 18( c) of Public Law 106-554 shall 

10 constitute final settlement ofthe tribal claims to water rights on the Animas and La Plata Rivers 

11 in the State of Colorado. 

12 

13 7. METHOD OF PAYMENT FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS 

14 (a) Reclamation has developed a Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12) Update to the May 2001 Interim 

15 Cost Allocation using October 2011 price levels of the estimated Project construction costs. The 

16 FY12 Update to the May 2001 Interim Cost Allocation allocates the reimbursable costs of the 

17 project among the Project beneficiaries based on the pro rata share of Project storage each 

1 8 respective entity receives in Lake Nighthorse. The State's water capital obligation allocable to its 

19 10,440 acre feet of Project water allocation in the FY12 Update to the May 2001 Interim Cost 

20 Allocation is $36,214,474 which includes construction costs of$25,503,436 and estimated IDC 

21 of$1 0,711,038 through January 31, 2012 and which takes into account Section 207 of Public 

22 Law 108-447 as amended. This amount is the State's Estimated Repayment Obligation. 

13 
(b) The construction costs allocated to the State shall accrue interest during construction at 

2 the Project Interest Rate of 8.3I5% as established pursuant to the provision of Section 5(f) of the 

3 Act of April II, I956 (70 Stat. I 05) as amended by the Act of June 27, I960 (74 Stat.255). 

4 (c) The Estimated, Final or Remaining Repayment Obligation may be reduced by 

5 payment(s) of all or a part of that repayment obligation, and may be reduced by any allowable 

6 credits toward Project construction costs, without penalty. It is the State's intent to make 

7 payments not to exceed $36,000,000 toward its allocable capital obligation with an initial 

8 $I2,000,000 payment upon execution ofthis contract and the remaining $24,000,000 after July 

9 0 I, 20 I2, subject to the State's additional appropriations for such funds and the State's 

I 0 discretion. Upon contract execution and the State's first payment of $I2,000,000, IDC on the 

II State's reimbursable Project construction cost allocation will end, and annual amortization 

I2 interest at the Project Interest Rate on the Estimated Repayment Obligation of$36,2I4,474 will 

I3 begin, as demonstrated by the repayment schedule provided in Exhibit C. Reclamation will 

I4 adjust the repayment schedule to account for reductions in the State's capital obligation as a 

I5 result of the State's intended payments and will transmit to the State at the end of the calendar 

I6 year the adjusted repayment schedule. The State will have the option in any year of the 

I7 repayment period to: I) pay, as a minimum, the annual amortization payment as adjusted from 

I8 the previous year; 2) pay all or part of the remaining capital obligation; or 3) declare their Project 

I9 allocation assigned to the Remaining Repayment Obligation relinquished as provided by Section 

20 6(a)(3)(B) of the Settlement Act, as amended. Amortization interest will stop accruing on the 

2I Remaining Repayment Obligation assigned to the State's Project allocation under relinquishment 

22 at the year the State declares its relinquishment option as provided under Article 28. 

I4 
(d) At the end ofthe construction period of the multipurpose Project Works a final cost 

2 allocation will be performed by the Secretary pursuant to Section 6(a)(3)(B) of the Settlement 

3 Act, as amended. The State will pay only its allocable share of joint costs of the Project Works. 

4 Any additional repayment shall be warranted only for reasonable and unforeseen costs associated 

5 with project construction as determined by the Secretary in consultation with the State, taking 

6 into account Section 207 of Public Law 108-447 as amended and, Reclamation's Decision 

7 Memorandum, "Methodology Regarding Implementation of Section 207 on Up-Front Cost8 Sharing and Repayment, Animas-La Plata Project (August 2, 2006)" as amended and attached, 

9 and other appropriate documents. Section 207 limits the non-tribal repayment obligation to $43 

10 million for the $500 million project (1 0/03 prices). The language, as amended, results in: 

11 • No repayment of the $163 million of cost increases 

12 • No repayment of the effects of inflation on the $163 million of cost increases 

13 • Implies repayment on the effects of inflation on the $337 million ($500 million -$163 

14 million), which implies some inflation of the reimbursement cap. 

15 (e) The details of said costs and a draft final cost allocation will be furnished to the State by 

16 the United States, and the State reserves the right to review the input to the cost allocation, 

17 including the assignment of costs to the municipal and industrial water purpose and the 

18 allocation thereof to the State's repayment obligation. Following consultation and review by the 

19 State, the final allocation of reimbursable costs will be prepared by the United States. These 

20 costs will be subject to alternative dispute resolution as described in Article 8 ifthere remains a 

21 dispute in the allocation of costs. 

22 (f) The United States shall give the State written notice ofthe State's Final Repayment 

23 Obligation as established by the final cost allocation. In the event the final cost allocation 

15 
establishes that the Final Repayment Obligation is in excess of any payments made by the State 

2 toward the Estimated Repayment Obligation of$36,214,474 the State will have the option to pay 

3 the remaining balance of the Final Repayment Obligation 180 days from the date of written 

4 notice. 

5 (g) After the 180-day final payment option established in Article 7(f) has expired, the 

6 unpaid portion of the Final Repayment Obligation shall become the Remaining Repayment 

7 Obligation of the State. The United States will assign that Remaining Repayment Obligation, on 

8 a pro rata basis, to a portion of the State's Project allocation, subject to the procedures of Section 

9 6(a)(3)(B) of the Settlement Act, as amended. The formula to determine the portion of the State's 

10 Project allocation that this Remaining Repayment Obligation will be assigned is as follows: 

11 

12 

Remaining 

Project Allocation 

Requiring 

Re ayment 

(Final Repayment Obligation - Repayment Received) 

Final Repayment Obligation 

X 

10,440 

AcreFeet 

13 The above calculation to identify the Project allocation assigned to the Remaining Repayment 

14 Obligation will be rounded to the nearest whole acre-foot of storage. 

15 (h) Upon final cost allocation, if the State elects not to pay the Remaining Repayment 

16 Obligation to the United States for the remaining Project allocation (including storage) described 

17 and calculated in Article 7(g), then this portion of the State's Project allocation shall be subject 

18 to the procedures of relinquishment as specified by Section 6(a)(3)(B) ofthe Settlement Act, as 

19 amended. 

20 (i) It is agreed that during construction every attempt will be made to keep Non-Contract 

21 Costs at or below 30 percent of the final contract costs. The United States will continue to 

16 
annually report to the State the dollar amount of the Non-Contract Costs and all other 

2 construction costs. 

3 G) The United States has consulted and will consult annually with the State concerning the 

4 allocation of construction costs and any interest during construction to be payable by the State 

5 under this Contract. The Use of Facilities Procedure, whereby each participant is allocated its 

6 share of joint costs proportionate to its use of joint facilities, is the methodology used to allocate 

7 construction costs for the Project, and it will not be changed for the administration of this 

8 Contract. 

9 (k) All payments required under this Contract are due on the specified due date and will be 

1 0 made by electronic fund transfers. 

11 (I) Pursuant to section 9(c)(l) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939, 43 U.S.C. § 485h, 

12 following payment of the Final Repayment Obligation or as adjusted pursuant to Article 7, all 

13 other contract terms will remain in full force and effect for the Useful Project Life, or until 

14 mutually agreed upon by the State and the United States. 

15 (m) Upon payment of the State's Final Repayment Obligation as defined in the final cost 

16 allocation or as adjusted pursuant to Article 7, the State's Project allocation shall not be subject to 

17 relinquishment to the Secretary for any reason, subject to applicable law. 

18 

19 8. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION 

20 (a) If a dispute pertaining to the terms of this contract should arise between the State and 

21 the United States, each party shall communicate in good faith and seek to resolve the dispute 

22 expeditiously and amicably. Prior to seeking judicial review of the final cost allocation, the State 

23 may pursue non-binding Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") of any issue arising out of the 

17 
final cost allocation which affects the State and remains unresolved after direct communication 

2 between the parties. 

3 (b) Either party may demand ADR in writing, which demand shall include the name of a 

4 qualified individual suggested by the party demanding ADR, together with a statement of the 

5 matter of controversy. 

6 (1) Within twenty (20) days after such demand the other party shall either agree to the 

7 named individual, or suggest another arbitrator. If the parties cannot agree on such 

8 naming within 20 additional days, such individual shall be named by the American 

9 Arbitration Association. 

I 0 (2) The ADR costs and expenses of each party shall be borne by that party and all the 

11 joint fees and other expenses pursuant to this Article shall be borne equally by both 

12 parties. 

13 (3) The hearing shall be held at such time and place as designated by the arbitrator on at 

14 least twenty (20) days written notice to the parties. 

15 ( 4) All decisions determined by this ADR process shall be sent to all parties to the 

16 proceedings. 

17 (5) As to any procedures regarding the conduct of the ADR that are not specified either 

18 in this Contract or in any other written agreement signed in advance of the hearing, 

19 the parties shall follow the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration 

20 Association. 

21 (c) Nothing in this Article shall be construed to restrain or prevent the United States from 

22 performing any act required or authorized under federal law, or the State from otherwise 

23 challenging any such act. 

18 
(d) Nothing contained in this Article shall be deemed to give the arbitrator any authority, 

2 power, or right to alter, change, amend, add to, or subtract from any of the provisions of this 

3 Contract. Nothing in this Article shall be construed as a delegation of authority by the United 

4 States. 

5 (e) Nothing in this Article shall be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity by any 

6 party or consent to suit by any party in any forum. 

7 

8 9. PAYMENT OF OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPLACEMENT COSTS 

9 (a) The operation, maintenance, and replacement (OM&R) costs allocated to the State will 

10 be comprised of: 

11 (1) Fixed OM&R costs, as defined in the Intergovernmental Agreement. The State's 

12 share of total fixed OM&R costs will be as agreed to by the State and the Association. 

13 The final allocation of Fixed OM&R costs will be finalized and stated in the OM&R 

14 Contract between Reclamation and the Association, which transfers OM&R 

15 responsibility to the Association; 

16 (2) Variable OM&R costs, which are actual costs of replacing Project Water released by 

17 request of the State, are further defined in the Intergovernmental Agreement; 

18 (3) Provided, however, that the Intergovernmental Agreement contains provisions for a 

19 Variable OM&R fund, designed to pay all or part of the Project Variable OM&R 

20 costs. 

21 (b) The State agrees to pay, in advance, its share of the OM&R costs associated with said 

22 Project Works. 

19 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

IO 

II 

I2 

(I) While the Intergovernmental Agreement is in effect, the Project Operator shall 

annually prepare an OM&R charge notice which shall be furnished to the Association 

and to the State, which the State shall pay in advance annually. 

(2) If the Intergovernmental Agreement is voided or is otherwise terminated, the State 

agrees to pay the Project Operator, in advance, its share of OM&R costs associated 

with said Project Works. An OM&R charge notice shall be furnished annually by the 

Project Operator, which will be paid by the State in advance annually. 

(3) If the funds advanced by the State under this Article are less than the actual cost of 

OM&R properly chargeable to the State for the period advance, a supplemental notice 

will be issued and the State shall advance such additional funds by the date specified 

in the supplemental notice. If the actual costs are less than the funds advanced, an 

appropriate adjustment will be made in the notice issued the next succeeding period. 

I3 (c) If the Intergovernmental Agreement is voided or is otherwise terminated, the State's 

I4 OM&R allocation will be comprised of: 

I5 (I) The State's pro-rata share of OM&R costs actually incurred by the Project Operator 

I6 in connection with Project facilities and/or operations that benefit all users of the 

I7 Project, based on the amount ofwater storage actually purchased and paid for by the 

I8 State, in accordance with Article 7 above; 

I9 (2) The actual cost of replacing Project Water released by request of the State. 

20 

2I I 0. USE AND DISPOSAL OF WATER DURING CONSTRUCTION 

22 During construction, Project Water that is not made available to the State may be disposed of by 

23 the United States at terms and charges fixed by the United States. The charges shall only be 

20 
sufficient to cover the operation, maintenance, and replacement costs appropriate for such water 

2 delivery. Payment for use of such water shall be in advance and the proceeds shall be applied to 

3 operation and maintenance expense and other appropriate accounts as determined by the United 

4 States, and shall accrue to the benefit of the United States. The State shall, however, have the 

5 first opportunity to purchase said Project Water paying only the applicable OM&R costs. 

6 

7 11. WATER SHORTAGES 

8 There may occur at times during any year a shortage in the quantity of water available for 

9 furnishing to the State through and by means of the Project, but in no event shall any liability 

10 accrue against the United States or any of its officers, agents, or employees for any damage, 

11 direct or indirect, arising from a shortage, on account of any cause beyond the control of the 

12 Contracting Officer, including but not limited to, drought, failure of facilities, flood, earthquake, 

13 storm, lightning, fire, epidemic, war, riot, insurrection, civil disturbance, labor disturbance, 

14 sabotage, and any action taken to meet legal or regulatory requirements. Unless the 

15 Intergovernmental Agreement is in effect, in any year in which there may occur a shortage 

16 caused by those referenced above, the United States reserves the right to apportion the available 

17 water allocation pursuant to the Settlement Act, as amended, and applicable laws, including the 

18 Animas-La Plata Project Compact, among the State, Colorado Ute Tribes, and others entitled to 

19 receive water from the Project in accordance with conclusive determinations of the Contracting 

20 Officer. 

21 

21 
12. STATE'S OBLIGATIONS FOR APPROPRIATIONS 

2 Consistent with Article 26 herein, the State intends to fulfill its obligations under this Contract. 

3 The State reasonably believes that funds in amount sufficient to fulfill these obligations lawfully 

4 can and will be available for this purpose. In the event funds are not appropriated in amounts 

5 sufficient to fulfill these obligations, the State shall use its best efforts to satisfy any requirements 

6 for payments or contributions of funds under this contract from any other source of funds legally 

7 available for this purpose. Nothing herein shall constitute, nor be deemed to constitute, an 

8 obligation of future appropriations by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado where 

9 creating such an obligation would be inconsistent with Colorado Revised Statutes or the 

10 Colorado Constitution. 

11 

12 13. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES 

13 The State warrants that it has not employed or retained any person or selling agency to solicit or 

14 secure this contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, 

15 brokerage or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial 

16 or selling agencies maintained by the State for the purpose of securing business. For breach or 

17 violation of this warranty, the United States shall have the right to annul this contract without 

18 liability, or at its discretion, to add to the repayment obligation or consideration the full amount 

19 of such commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee. 

20 

21 14. THIRD-PARTY CONTRACTS 

22 Consistent with applicable law, any contract entered into between the State and any third-party 

23 for the use of the State's Statutory Water Allocation under this Contract will be approved by the 

22 
United States unless it negatively affects the Project operations, benefits, or authorized purposes 

2 or is not in compliance with environmental requirements. Nothing in these third party contracts 

3 shall interfere with other contractual, legal, or regulatory obligations of the United States. The 

4 third party contract will require the third party to be bound to the provisions of this Contract 

5 including, but not be limited to, terms of measurement, operations, environmental compliance, 

6 and the impact of defaults on Project Works. Approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The 

7 United States shall have 60 days after receipt of the proposed third-party contract to inform the 

8 State of its approval or denial of the contract. If additional environmental compliance is 

9 required, the State and the United States shall proceed in accordance with Article 5(e) herein and 

I 0 will develop a schedule to complete review. 

II 

I2 I5. TITLE TO PROJECT WORKS AND PROJECT REPAIR 

I3 Title to the Project Works shall be held by the United States, unless specifically provided 

I4 otherwise by Congress, notwithstanding transfer of the care, operation, and maintenance of any 

I5 said works to the Project Operator. 

I6 

I7 I6. SEVERABILITY 

I8 If any provisions of the contract shall, for any reason be determined to be illegal or 

I9 unenforceable, the parties, nevertheless, intend that the remainder ofthe contract shall remain in 

20 full force and effect. Furthermore, any adjustments or variations to this contract necessitated by 

2I future negotiations with other Project beneficiaries can be accomplished by amending this 

22 contract. 

23 

23 
STATE of COLORADO- STANDARD ARTICLES 

2 

3 17. CONTROLLER'S APPROVAL CRS §24-30-202(1) 

4 This contract shall not be valid until it has been approved by the Colorado State Controller or 

5 designee. 

6 I8. FUND AVAILABILITY CRS §24-30-202(5.5) 

7 Financial obligations of the State payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds 

8 for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted, and otherwise made available. 

9 

10 I9. GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY 

II No term or condition of this contract shall be construed or interpreted as a waiver, express or 

I2 implied, of any ofthe immunities, rights, benefits, protections, or other provisions, ofthe 

13 Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, CRS §24-I 0-I 0 I et seq., or the Federal Tort Claims Act, 

I4 28 U .S.C. §§ I346(b) and 267I et seq., as applicable now or hereafter amended. 

I5 

16 20. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW 

I7 Contractor shall strictly comply with all applicable federal and State laws, rules, and regulations 

I8 in effect or hereafter established, including, without limitation, laws applicable to discrimination 

19 and unfair employment practices. 

20 

21 21. CHOICE OF LAW 

22 Federal law, rules, and regulations govern this Contract; however, the laws of the state of 

23 Colorado shall apply where Federal law is silent. 

24 
2 22. BINDING ARBITRATION PROHIBITED 

3 The State of Colorado does not agree to binding arbitration by any extra-judicial body or person. 

4 Any provision to the contrary in this contact or incorporated herein by reference shall be null and 

5 void. 

6 23. SOFTWARE PIRACY PROHIBITION 

7 Governor's Executive Order D 002 00. State or other public funds payable under this contract 

8 shall not be used for the acquisition, operation, or maintenance of computer software in violation 

9 of federal copyright laws or applicable licensing restrictions. Contractor hereby certifies and 

1 0 warrants that, during the term of this contract and any extensions, Contractor has and shall 

II maintain in place appropriate systems and controls to prevent such improper use of public funds. 

I2 If the State determines that Contractor is in violation of this provision, the State may exercise 

13 any remedy available at law or in equity or under this contract, including, without limitation, 

I4 immediate termination of this contract and any remedy consistent with federal copyright laws or 

I5 applicable licensing restrictions. 

16 

17 24. EMPLOYEE FINANCIAL INTEREST/CONFLICT OF INTEREST 

I8 CRS §§24-18-20 I and 24-50-507 

I9 The signatories aver that to their knowledge, no employee of the State has any personal or 

20 beneficial interest whatsoever in the service or property described in this contract. Contractor has 

2I no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, that would conflict in any manner 

22 or degree with the performance of Contractor's services and Contractor shall not employ any 

23 person having such known interests. 

24 

25 
UNITED STATES- STANDARD ARTICLES 

2 25. CHARGES FOR DELINQUENT PAYMENTS 

3 (a) The State shall be subject to interest, administrative, and penalty charges on delinquent 

4 payments. If a payment is not received by the due date, the State shall pay an interest charge on 

5 the delinquent payment for each day the payment is delinquent beyond the due date. If a payment 

6 becomes 60 days delinquent, the State shall pay, in addition to the interest charge, an 

7 administrative charge to cover additional costs of billing and processing the delinquent payment. 

8 If a payment is delinquent 90 days or more, the State shall pay, in addition to the interest and 

9 administrative charges, a penalty charge for each day the payment is delinquent beyond the due 

I 0 date, based on the remaining balance of the payment due at the rate of 6 percent per year. The 

II State shall also pay any fees incurred for debt collection services associated with a delinquent 

I2 payment. 

I3 (b) The interest rate charged shall be the greater of either the Current Value of Funds Rate 

I4 prescribed annually in the Federal Register by the Department of the Treasury for application to 

I5 overdue payments or the interest rate of 0.5 percent per month. 

I6 (c) When a partial payment on a delinquent account is received, the amount received shall 

I7 be applied first to the penalty charges, second to the administrative charges, third to the accrued 

I8 interest, and finally to the overdue payment. 

I9 

20 26. GENERAL OBLIGATION--BENEFITS CONDITIONED UPON PAYMENT 

2I (a) The obligation of the State to pay the United States as provided in this contract is a 

22 general obligation of the State notwithstanding the manner in which the obligation may be 

23 distributed among the State's water users and notwithstanding the default of individual water 

24 users in their obligations to the State. 

25 (b) The payment of charges becoming due pursuant to this contract is a condition precedent 

26 to receiving benefits under this contract. The United States shall not make water available to the 

27 State through Animas La Plata project facilities during any period in which the State is in arrears 

28 in the advance payment of any operation and maintenance charges due the United States or is in 

29 arrears for more than I2 months in the payment of any construction charges due the United 

30 States. The State shall not deliver water under the terms and conditions of this contract for lands 

3I or parties that are in arrears in the advance payment of operation and maintenance charges, or is 

32 in arrears more than I2 months in the payment of construction charges as levied or established 

33 by the State. 

34 

35 27. CONFIRMATION OF CONTRACT 

36 Promptly after the execution of this contract, the State shall provide evidence to the 

3 7 Contracting Officer that, pursuant to the laws of the State of Colorado, the State is a legally 

38 constituted entity and the contract is lawful, valid, and binding on the State. This contract shall 

39 not be binding on the United States until such evidence has been provided to the Contracting 

40 Officer's satisfaction. 

4I 

26 
28. NOTICES 

2 Any notice, demand, or request authorized or required by this contract shall be deemed to 

3 have been given, on behalf of the State, when mailed, postage prepaid, or delivered to the 

4 Regional Director, Upper Colorado Region, Bureau of Reclamation, 125 South State Street, 

5 Room 6107, Salt Lake City, Utah 84138-1102, and on behalf of the United States, when mailed, 

6 postage prepaid, or delivered to the State of Colorado, Department of Natural Resources, 

7 Colorado Water Conservation Board, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 721, Denver, CO 80203. The 

8 designation of the addressee or the address may be changed by notice given in the same manner 

9 as provided in this article for other notices. 

10 

11 29. CONTINGENT ON APPROPRIATION OR ALLOTMENT OF FUNDS 

12 The expenditure or advance of any money or the performance of any obligation of the United 

13 States under this contract shall be contingent upon appropriation or allotment of funds. Absence 

14 of federal appropriation or allotment of funds shall not relieve the State from any obligations 

15 under this contract. No liability shall accrue to the United States in case funds are not 

16 appropriated or allotted. 

17 

18 30. OFFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT 

19 No Member of or Delegate to Congress, Resident Commissioner or official of the State shall 

20 benefit from this contract other than as a water user in the same manner as other water users. 

21 

22 31. CHANGES IN STATE'S ORGANIZATION 

23 While this contract is in effect, no change may be made in the State's organization, by 

24 inclusion or exclusion of lands or by any other changes which materially affect the respective 

25 rights, obligations, privileges, and duties under this contract of either the United States or the 

26 State including, but not limited to, dissolution, consolidation, or merger, except upon the 

27 Contracting Officer's written consent, which shall not be reasonably withheld. 

28 

29 32. ASSIGNMENT LIMITED-SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS OBLIGATED 

30 The provisions of this contract shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the 

31 parties hereto, but no assignment or transfer of this contract or any right or interest therein by 

32 either party shall be valid until approved in writing by the other party. 

33 

34 33. BOOKS, RECORDS, AND REPORTS 

35 The State shall establish and maintain accounts and other books and records pertaining to 

36 administration of the terms and conditions of this contract, including the State's financial 

37 transactions; water supply data; project operation, maintenance, and replacement logs; project 

38 land and rights-of-way use agreements; the water users' land-use (crop census), land-ownership, 

39 land-leasing, and water-use data; and other matters that the Contracting Officer may require. 

40 Reports shall be furnished to the Contracting Officer in such form and on such date or dates as 

27 
1 the Contracting Officer may require. Subject to applicable Federal laws and regulations, each 

2 party to this contract shall have the right during office hours to examine and make copies of the 

3 other party's books and records relating to matters covered by this contract. 

4 

5 34. RULES, REGULATIONS, AND DETERMINATIONS 

6 (a) The parties agree that the delivery of water or the use of Federal facilities pursuant to 

7 this contract is subject to Federal reclamation law, as amended and supplemented, and the rules 

8 and regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior under Federal reclamation law. 

9 (b) The Contracting Officer shall have the right to make determinations necessary to 

10 administer this contract that are consistent with its provisions, the laws of the United States and 

11 the State of Colorado, and the rules and regulations promulgated by the Secretary ofthe Interior. 

12 Such determinations shall be made in consultation with the State. 

13 

14 35. PROTECTION OF WATER AND AIR QUALITY 

15 (a) Project facilities used to make available and deliver water to the State shall be operated 

16 and maintained in the most practical manner to maintain the quality of the water at the highest 

17 level possible as determined by the Contracting Officer: Provided, That the United States does 

I 8 not warrant the quality of the water delivered to the State and is under no obligation to furnish or 

19 construct water treatment facilities to maintain or improve the quality of water delivered to the 

20 State. 

21 (b) The State shall comply with all applicable water and air pollution laws and regulations 

22 of the United States and the State of Colorado, and shall obtain all required permits or licenses 

23 from the appropriate Federal, State, or local authorities necessary for the delivery of water by the 

24 State; and shall be responsible for compliance with all Federal[, State, and local] water quality 

25 standards applicable to surface and subsurface drainage and/or discharges generated through the 

26 use of Federal or State facilities or project water provided by the State within the State's Project 

27 Water Service Area. 

28 (c) This article shall not affect or alter any legal obligations of the Secretary to provide 

29 drainage or other discharge services. 

30 

31 36. WATER CONSERVATION 

32 Prior to the delivery of water provided from or conveyed through federally constructed or 

33 federally financed facilities pursuant to this contract, the State shall develop a water conservation 

34 plan specific to Project water, as required by subsection 210(b) ofthe Reclamation Reform Act 

35 of 1982 and 43 C.P.R. 427.1 (Water Conservation Rules and Regulations). 

36 

37 37. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

38 During the performance of this contract, the State agrees as follows: 

39 

40 (a) The State will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment 

41 because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, or national origin. The State will take affirmative 

42 action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during 

28 
I employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, disability, or national origin. Such 

2 action shall include, but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or 

3 transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms 

4 of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The State agrees to post in 

5 conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be 

6 provided by the Contracting Officer setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 

7 (b) The State will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on 

8 behalf of the State, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment 

9 without regard to race, color, religion, sex, disability, or national origin. 

I 0 (c) The State will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a 

11 collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice, to be provided by 

12 the Contracting Officer, advising the labor union or workers' representative ofthe State's 

13 commitments under section 202 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965 (EO 11246), 

14 and shall post copies ofthe notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants 

15 for employment. 

16 (d) The State will comply with all provisions of EO 11246, and of the rules, regulations, 

17 and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. 

18 (e) The State will furnish all information and reports required by EO 11246, and by the 

19 rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit 

20 access to his books, records, and accounts by the Contracting Agency and the Secretary of Labor 

21 for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. 

22 (f) In the event ofthe State's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses ofthis 

23 contract or with any of such rules, regulations, or orders, this contract may be canceled, 

24 terminated or suspended in whole or in part and the State may be declared ineligible for further 

25 Government contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in EO 11246, and such other 

26 sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in EO 11246 or by rule, regulation, 

27 or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. 

28 (g) The State will include the provisions ofparagraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract 

29 or purchase order unless exempted by the rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor 

30 issued pursuant to section 204 of EO 11246, so that such provisions will be binding upon each 

31 subcontractor or vendor. The State will take such action with respect to any subcontract or 

32 purchase order as may be directed by the Secretary of Labor as a means of enforcing such 

33 provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided, however, that in the event the State 

34 becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of 

35 such direction, the State may request that the United States enter into such litigation to protect 

36 the interests ofthe United States. 

37 

38 38. COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS AND REGULATIONS 

39 (a) The State shall comply with Title VI ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88-352; 

40 42 U.S.C. § 2000d), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Pub. L. 93-112, Title V, as amended; 29 

41 U.S.C. § 791, et seq.), the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (Pub. L. 94-135, Title III; 42 U.S.C. § 

42 610 I, et seq.), Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 1 01-336; 42 

43 U.S.C. § 12131, et seq.), and any other applicable civil rights laws, and with the applicable 

44 implementing regulations and any guidelines imposed by the U.S. Department of the Interior 

45 and/or Bureau of Reclamation. 

29 
(b) These statutes prohibit any person in the United States from being excluded from 

2 participation in, being denied the benefits of, or being otherwise subjected to discrimination 

3 under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from the Bureau of Reclamation on 

4 the grounds of race, color, national origin, disability, or age. By executing this contract, the State 

5 agrees to immediately take any measures necessary to implement this obligation, including 

6 permitting officials of the United States to inspect premises, programs, and documents. 

7 (c) The State makes this agreement in consideration of and for the purpose of obtaining any 

8 and all Federal grants, loans, contracts, property discounts, or other Federal financial assistance 

9 extended after the date hereof to the State by the Bureau of Reclamation, including installment 

I 0 payments after such date on account of arrangements for Federal financial assistance which were 

II approved before such date. The State recognizes and agrees that such Federal assistance will be 

I2 extended in reliance on the representations and agreements made in this article and that the 

I3 United States reserves the right to seek judicial enforcement thereof. 

I4 (d) Complaints of discrimination against the State shall be investigated by the Contracting 

I5 Officer's Office of Civil Rights. 

I6 

17 39. MEDIUM FOR TRANSMITTING PAYMENTS 

I8 (a) All payments from the State to the United States under this contract shall be by the 

I9 medium requested by the United States on or before the date payment is due. The required 

20 method of payment may include checks, wire transfers, or other types of payment specified by 

2I the United States. 

22 (b) Upon execution of the contract, the State shall furnish the Contracting Officer· with the 

23 State's taxpayer's identification number (TIN). The purpose for requiring the State's TIN is for 

24 collecting and reporting any delinquent amounts arising out of the State's relationship with the 

25 United States. 

26 

27 40. CONTRACT DRAFTING CONSIDERATIONS 

28 This Contract has been, negotiated and reviewed by the parties hereto, each of whom is 

29 sophisticated in the matters to which this Contract pertains. Articles I through 24 of this Contract 

30 have been drafted, negotiated, and reviewed by the parties, and no one party shall be considered 

3I to have drafted the stated articles. 

32 

33 4I. CONSTRAINTS ON AVAILABILITY OF WATER 

34 (a) In its operation of the Project, the Contracting Officer will use all reasonable means to 

35 guard against a condition of shortage in the quantity of water to be made available to the State 

36 pursuant to this Contract. In the event the Contracting Officer determines that a condition of 

37 shortage appears probable, the Contracting Officer will notify the State of said determination as 

38 soon as practicable. ' 

39 If there is a condition of shortage because of errors in physical operations of the Project, drought, 

40 other physical causes beyond the control of the Contracting Officer or actions taken by the 

4I Contracting Officer to meet current and future legal obligations, then no liability shall accrue 

42 against the United States or any of its officers, agents, or employees for any damage, direct or 

43 indirect, arising therefrom. 

30 
I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this contract to be duly executed as of 

the day and year first above written. 

Approved: THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

9 

I2 

:~ C1~~f--- Solicitor's Office ~.J Re£(o11illir 

By:~ ~ 

I3 

I4 

I5 

I6 

I7 

I8 

I9 

20 

2I 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

3I 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

4I 

42 

43 

44 

45 

Upper Colorado Region 

Bureau ofReclamation 

Legal Review STATE OF COLORADO 

John W. Suthers, Attorney General John W. Hickenlooper, Governor 

By: Mlf+ 

Mike King, Executive Director, Department of 

Natural Resources 

Assistant Attorney General irector, Colorado Water 

rd 

CRS §24-30-202 requires the State Controller to approve all State Contracts. This Contract is 

not valid until signed and dated by the State Controller or delegate. 

State Controller 

DavidJ.MfD 

List of Attachments: Exhibit A- Environmental Commitments. 

Exhibit B- Methodology Regarding Implementation of Section 207 on 

Up-Front Cost-Sharing and Repayment, Animas-La Plata Project (August 

2, 2006), as amended. 

Exhibit C- Repayment Schedule for I 0,440 Acre-Feet. 

3I 

EXHIDITA 

ENVffiONMENTAL COMMITMTENTS 
4.6.4.3 Impact Analysis 

CHAPTER4 

OTHER IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

The following sections discuss potential impacts to ITAs and Environmental Justice of Refined 

Alternatives 4 and 6 and the No Action Alternative. In addition, mi_tigation measures are proposed to 

reduce or eliminate potential significant impacts. 

4.6.4.3.1 Refined Alternative 4 

Indian Trust Assets 

Refined Altemntive 4 lmJlact 1 - Potentially Significant: Refin d Alternative 4 does not meet the 

tenus and conditions ofthe Settlement Agreement for the Colorado Ute 'rribes. 

Refined Alternative 4 would provide storage for a po1t ion of the Colorado Ute Tribes' assured water 

rights. However, the 39,960 aty of allowed depletion for the Colorado Ute Tribes is 13,240 afy less than 

that identified in the Sct.tlcrnent Agreement. All water provided under Retined Alternative 4 must be 

used for M&I purposes, while the Settlement Agreement specified that 3,400 afy of depletion be used for 

irrigation purposes by the Southem Ute lndinn Tribe, and 26,300 afy be used for irrigation purposes by 

the lJte Mountain Ute Tribe. Because of the reduced amount t)f depletion, the lack of irrigation water 

and facilities, the precise terms of the original Settlement Agreement would not be met under Retim:d % 

Alternati ve 4. 

llowevcr, Refined Alternative 4 would provide the Colorado Ute Indian Tribes a menr~s to purchase 

approximately 13,000 afy through the use of a $40 million water acquisition fund . This amount could be 

used to acquire private water rights on a willing buyer/willing seller basis. These funds could also be 

redirected for on-farm development, water delivery infrastructure, or other economic development uses. 

Most important, the Colorado Ute Tribes have endorsed Retined Alternative 4 as being sufficient % 

subsHtutc for the original elements of the 1986 Settlement Agreement. % 

Mitigution fot· Refined Altcmntive 4 Impact 1: Seek modification of Settlement Agreement. 

Refi ned Alternative 4 would meet the Settlement Agreement if Congress passes any legislation, with the % 

support of the Colorado Ute Tribes, that specifics that the terms and conditions of Refined Alternative 4 % 

satisfy the Colorado Ute Tribes' water rights. Doth Colorado Ute Tribes have passed resolutions % 

supporting the selection of Retined A ltcrnativc 4 for settlement of all their remaining water rights claims. % 

Refined Altcmative 4 Impact 2 - Significant: Under present conditions, Refined Alternative 4 

reduces the water SUJ>ply ;.vailablc for the Jicarilla Aprsche Tribe wate~· rights in t!te San Juan 

River. 

Relative to no action, Refined Alternative 4 reduces the present supply available to the Jicarilla Apache % 

Tribe to allow utilization of its water rights consistent with the ESA. Section 7(a)(2)of the ESA states % 

that each federal agency shall, in consultation with the Secretary, insure that any action authorized, % 

funded, or carried out by that agency shall not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or % 

result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. For federal actions in the San Juan % 

basin, such as ALP, the SeJvice has issued reasonable and prudent alternatives which have allowed the % 

action to go forward. In the recent past, these RPA's have required Reclamation to participate in % 

research to determine the t1ows needed to recover endangered fish species and then to operate Navajo % 

Dam to mimic a natural hydrograph. Thus, according to currertt modeling, full implementation of the % 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUST ASSETS 
CHAPTER4 

OTHER IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

% tlow recommendations, Nl IP, and ALP could limit fur1her tribal water development in the San Juan 

% l3asin. Additionally, there is a potential for an increased risk of an ESA Section 9 violation (Section 9 

% prohibits the "take" of any listed species) by arw non-federal developer of San Juan River Basin water. 

% Because Section 9 ofthe ESA prohibits a range of activities that include habitat modification, any non-

% federally related tribal water development activities will incur the potential for an increased risk of "takc" 

% or a listed species. 

% Mitigntion for Refined Altemative 41mpact 2: The following measures would l)rovidc some 

% mitigation fot· the projected impncts. 

% While Reclamation agrees that future Jicarilla Apache Tribe water development may be adversely 

% affected because of Section 7 concerns, Reclamation also believes that it is still possible that some 

% Jicarilla Apache Tribe water development could occur even if associated with a federal action. The 

% Service, working with Reclamation and other relevant federal agencies, could develop other potential 

% measures, including water management strategies (e.g. appropriate shortage sharing based on actual 

% water use), that can be undertaken as RPA's that would allow development offuture water projects. 

% Whether such RPA 'sexist is something that will only be determined through the section 7 consultation 

% process. Thus, it is premature to conclude that development ofNIIP and ALP will preclude further 

% federally-related water development in the San Juan basin. The Section 7 consultation process, including 

% participation of the tribe seeking to use water, will need to evaluate aJI potential IU>As. 

% It shou ld also be noted that tho Administration Proposal, as represented by Refined Alternative 4, was 

% developed, in part, to eliminate the impact of the original ALP Project on the Ji~.:arilla Apache Tribe. The 

% original project envisioned the depletion of 149,000 afy from the San Juan River Basin. Although the 

% fu ll project has not been cleared to proceed under ESA, the tinality of the Administration Proposal 

% intended to ensure that both the Jicarilla Apache Tribe and Navajo Nation will not be competing with 

% additional ALP Project depletions in the future. In sum, this proposed action, in and ofitselt: is a partial 

% mitigation measure lor other water development in the San Juan Rasin, intended to protect the trust assets 

% of the .licarilla Apache Tribe (as well as the Navajo Nation). 

% I lowever, Reclamation recognizes that only a minimal amount of water is available under today's 

% cir'cumstances and the Preferred Alternative will have some effect on the trust resources of the Jicarilla 

% Apache Tribe, parti.cularly if no RPAs arc eventually developed to offset or allow t\rture additional 

% depletions. Reclamation has lherefore developed 0ther mitigation measures, including: 

% Q Continue active participation in the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to 

% promote the dual goals of recovery of endangered species and proceed with water dcvclopmcrlt in 

% the basin. The SJRRlP is key to facilitating additional water development by the Jicarilla 

% Apache Tribe. Reclamation's participation includes: 

% Provide substantial technical support in the development and refinement of a 

% comprehensive hydrology model to allow realistic, supportable projections of future 

% water uses within the basin; 

% Continue to optimize the operating rules for Navajo Dam to provide more efficient 

% fulfillment of the now recommendations necessary fot endangered species recovery; 

% Implement an adaptive management program associated with the operation ofNavajo 

% Reservoir to evaluate biologic responses to a more natural hydrograph. 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUST ASSETS 4-24 
CHAPTER4 

OTHER IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

a Operate the Durango Pumping Plant to lirnit pumping during dry years, allowing more water to % 

be available in Navajo Reservoir to meet project demands (see Section 3.2). % 

0 Facilitate discussions between the Jicarilla Apache Tribe and other parties with interests in the % 

San Juan River Basin. Interested parties will include, but not be limited to, the Colorado Ute % 

Tribes, Navajo Nation, the Service, and private parties with existing contracts from Navajo % 

Reservoir. Discussions will aim to develop options foi' obtaining the 25,500 afy depletion from % 

Navajo River or Reservoir, which is authorized under lhe Jicarilla Apache Tribe Water Rights % 

Settlement Act. Such discussions among Reclamation, the J icari II a Apache Tribe, and Public % 

Service Company ofNcw Mexico (PNM) are currently underway to lease 16,200 afy of their % 

water rights to PNM. If successful, this would place a portion of the Jicarilla Apache Tribe's % 

depletion allocation in the baseline. % 

a Reclamation will work with the Navajo Nation and the Jicarilla Apache Tribe to combine % 

resources in evaluating options for proceeding with the Navajo·Gallup Project, the Navajo River % 

Water Development Plan, and restoration if the llogback Project to try and minimize the % 

likelihood that any single Tribe bears a disproportionate burden for the conservation of listed % 

species under the ESA. % 

D Reclamation, through its Native American AITairs and technical assistance programs, will work % 

with the Jicarilla Apache Tribe to facilitate its ability to independently utilize the San Juan River % 

basin hydrologic model to ensure more effective participation in the SJRBRlP and other % 

appropriate uses. % 

0 Reclamation will initiate an independent review of the hydrologic model to ensure its accuracy % 

and value as a tool in future water planning activities. % 

0 Reclamation will consult with the Jicarilla Apache Tribe on the implementation of the above % 

mitigation measures and will commence such consultation early in the implementation process. % 

l~cfined Alte•·nativc 41rnpnct 3 - Significant: Refined Alten1ativc 4 limits the water supflly 

a-vailable for the development of the p•·oposed Navajo-Gallup Pm,jcct designed to delivc•· th·inking 

water to pot·fions of the Navajo Nation with limited or no supply. 

Relative to no action, Refined Alternative 4 reduces the present supply available to the Navajo Nation to % 

allow utilization of its water rights consistent with the ESA. Section 7(a)(2)ofthe ESA states that each % 

federal agency shall, in consultation with the Secretary, insmc that any action authorized, funded, or % 

carried out by that agency shall not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the % 

destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. For federal actions in the San Juan 13asin, such as % 

ALP, the Service has issued reasonable and prudent alternatives which have allowed the action to go % 

forward. In the recent past, these RPA's have required Reclamation to participate in. research to % 

determine the flows needed to recover endangered fish species and then to operate Navajo Dam Lo mimic % 

a natural hydrograph. Thus, fu ll implemt:ntation of the flow recommendations, NIIP, and ALP could % 

potentially limit further tribal water development in the San Juan basin. Additionally, there is a potential % 

fbr an increased risk of an ESA Section 9 violation (Section 9 prohibits the "take" of any listed species) % 

by any on~ federal developer of San Juan River 11asin water. Because Section 9 of the ESA prohibits a % 

range of activities that include habitat modification, any non-federally related tribal water development % 

activities will incur the potential for an increased risk of''take" of a listed species. % 

4-25 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUSr ASSETS 
CHAPTER 4 

OTHER IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

The 2,340 afY depletion provided under the ALP Project ~1ld only satisfy a portion of the water needs 

of the Navajo Nation. The new NNMP would help meet CUITent water demands ih the Shiprock area. 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Impact 3: 'l'hc following measures would provide some 

mitigation for the projected impacts. 

% While Reclamation agrees that future Navajo Nation water development may be adversely affected 

% because of Section 7 concerns, Reclamation also believes that it is still possible that some Navajo Nation 

% water development could occur even if associated with a federal action. The Service, work ing with 

% Reclamation and other relevant federal agencies, could develop other potential measures, including water 

% management strategies, that can be undertaken as RPA's that would allow development of future water 

% projects. Whether such R.PA's exist is something that will only be determined through the Section 7 

% consultation process. Thus, it is premature to conclude that development of N II P and ALP will preclude 

% further federally-related water development in the San Juan basin. The Section 7 cousultation process, 

% including participation of the tribe seeking to 11se water, will need to evaluate all potential RPAs. 

% It should be reiterated that the Administration Proposal, as represented by Refined Alternative 4, was 

% developed, in part, to diminate the impact ofthe original ALP Proj ect on the Navajo Nation. The 

% original project envisioned the depletion of 149,000 afy from the San Juan River Basin. Although the 

% full project has not been cleared to proceed under ESA, the finality ofthc Administration Proposal 

% intended to ensun: that both the Navajo Nation and J icarilla Apache Tribe will not be competing with 

% additional ALP Project depletions in the future. In sum, this proposed action, in and of itselt: is 

% mitigation to the trust assets of the Navajo Nation (as well as the Jicarilla Apache Tribe)_ Other 

% mitigation includes: 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

1)(, 

% 

% 

% 

% 

0 

D 

0 

Continue active participation in the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to 

promote the dual goals of recovery of endangered species and proceed with water development in 

the basin. The SJRBRIP is key to facilitating additional water development by the Navajo 

Nation. Reclamation's pa1ticipation includes: 

Provide substantial technic<ll support in the development and refinement of a 

comprehensive hydrology model to allow realistic, supportable projections of fu ture 

water uses within the basin; 

Continue to optimilc the operating rules for Navajo D<un to provide more efficient 

fulli llment of the flow recommendations necessary tor endangered species recovery; 

Implement an adaptive management program associated with the operation of Navajo 

Reservoir to evaluate biologic responses to normative hydrograph. 

Operate the Durango Pumping Plant to limit pumping during dry years, allowing more water to 

be available in Navajo Reservoir to meet project demands (see Section 3.2). 

Facilitate discussions between the Navajo Nation and other partie1> with interests in the San Juan 

River 11a!l in_ Interested parties will include, but not be limited to, the Colorado Ute Tribes, 

Jicarilla Apache Tribe, the Service, and private pa1t ies with existing contracts from Navajo 

Reservoir. Discussions will aim to develop options for obtaining adequate water tor the NavajoGallup Project. 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUST ASSETS 4-26 
Q 

0 

0 

CHAPTER 4 

OTHER IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

Reclamation will work with the Navajo Nation and the Jicarilla Apache Tribe to combine 

resources in evaluating options for proceeding with the Navajo-Gallup Project, the Navajo River 

Water Development Plan, and restoration of the Hogback Project to try and minimize the 

likelihood that any single tribe bears a disproportionate burden for the conservation of listed 

species under the ESA. 

Reclamation will initiate an independent review ofthc hydrologic model to ensure its accuracy 

and value as a tool in future water planning activities. 

Reclamation will ~.:o ult with the Navajo Nation on the implementation of the above mitigation 

measures and will commence consultation early in the implementation process. 

The following tnitigation measures may affect the ability of the Navajo-Gallup Project to go forward, but 

<~ e beyond the control of Reclamation as a part of the ALP Project: 

0 t\n alternate project design that would take water from the San Juan River below its contluence 

with the Animas River inay increase the potential yield for the project wh ile protecting tlows for 

endangered fish. In this case, releases from Navajo Dam would be supplemental to river flows, 

leveraging the limited storage volume available and making use of times when there are flows in 

excess offish needs in the river. 

0 The Navajo-Gallup Project could be moditied to reduce demands. 

0 The Navajo Nation could elect to utilize a por1ion of the N II P allocation to meet these needs. 

Refined Altcl'llativc 4 Impact 4 - Significnnl: Refined Alternative 4 reducc.s the watca· supply 

available foa· rcstoa·ation of the Hogback Pa•oject in the San Juan Rivea·. 

')6 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

Relative to no action, Refined Alternative 4 reduces the present supply available to the Navajo Nation to % 

allow utilization of its water rights consistent with the ESA. Section 7(a)(2)of the ESA states that each % 

federa l agency shall, in consultation with the Secretary, insure that any action authorized, funded, or % 

catTied out by that agency shall notjeorardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the 'X1 

destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Por federal actions in the San .Juan Basin, such as % 

ALP Project. the Service has issued reasonable and prudct1t alternatives which have allowed the action to % 

go forward. In the recent past, these RPA's have required Reclamation to participate in research to % 

determine the tlows needed to recover endangered fish species and then to operate Navajo Dam to mimic % 

a natural hydrograph. Thus, full implementation of the flow recommendations, N II P, and the ALP % 

Project could potentially limit fut·ther tribal water development in tJ1e San Juan basin. Add itionally, there % 

is a potential for a11 increased risk of an ESA Section 9 violation (Section 9 prohi bits the "take'' of any % 

listed species) by any non-federa l developer of San Juan River Basin water. Because Section 9 ofthe % 

8SA prohibits a range of activities that include habitat modification, any non~ federally related tribal % 

water development activities will incur the potential for an increased risk oft'takc" of a listed species. % 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 41mpact 4: The following mcasua·cs woutd provide some % 

mitigation for the projected impacts. % 

Again it is reiterated that the Administration Proposal, as represented by Refined Alternative 4, was % 

developed, in part, to eliminate the impact oflhc original ALP Project on the Navajo Nation. The % 

original project envisioned the depletion of 149,000 afy from the San Juan River 11asin. Although the % 

4-27 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUST ASSETS 
CHAPTER4 

OTHER IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

% full project has not been cleared to proceed under ESA, dle fi nality oftheAdministration Proposal 

% intended to ensure that both the Navajo Nation and Jicarilla Apache T•·ibe will not be competjng with 

% additional ALP Project depletions in the future. In sum, this proposed action, in and of itself, is 

% mitigation to the tnlst assets of the Navajo Nation (as well as the Jicarilla Apache Tribe). Other 

% mitigation includes: 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

% 

CJ 

0 

a 

0 

CJ 

a 

Continue active participation in the San Juan River 13asin Recovery Implementation Program to 

pmmotc the dual goals of recovery of endangered species and proceed with water development in 

the basin. The SJRBRIP is key to facilitating additional water development by the Navajo 

Nation. Reclamation's participation includes: 

Provide substantial technical suppm1 in the development and refinement of a 

comprehensive hydrology model to allow realistic, supportable projections of future 

water uses within the basin; 

Continue to optimize tht:: operating ru les for Navajo Dam to provide more efficient 

fulfi llment of the flow recommendations necessary for endangered species recovery; 

Implement an adaptive management program associated with the opemtion of Navajo 

Rese1voir to evaluate biologic responses to more natural hydrograph. 

Operate the Durango Pumping Plant to limit pumping during dry years, allowing more water to 

be available in Navajo Reservoir to meet project demands (sec Section 3.2). 

r:acilitate discussions between the Navajo Nation and other parties with interests in the San Juan 

River 13asin. Interested parties will include, bulnot be limited to, the Colorado Ute Tribes, the 

Jicarilla Apache Tribe, the Service, and private parties with existing contracts !Tom Navajo 

Reservoir. Discussions will aim to develop options for obtaining the 16,420 afy depletion from 

the San Juan River to meet the needs of the Hogback Project. 

Reclamation will work with the Navajo Nation and the Jicarilla Apache Tribe to combine 

resources in evaluating options for proceeding with the Hogback Project, the Navajo-Ga llup 

Project, and the Navajo River Watt::r Development Plan to h-y nnd minimize the likelihood that 

any single tribe bears a disproportionate btlrden for the conservation of listed species under the 

ESA 

Reclamation will initiate an independent review of the hydrologic model to ensure its accuracy 

and value as a tool in future water planning activities. 

Reclamation will consult with the Navajo Nation on the implementation of the above mitigation 

measures and will commence consultation early in the implementation. 

The fo llowing mitigation measures may affect the ability of the Hogback Project to be restored, but are 

beyond the control of Reclamation as a part of the ALP Project: 

0 Private rights could be acquired to meet these needs. 

0 The project could be modified to reduce demands. 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUST ASSETS 4-28 
CHAPTER 4 

OTHER IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

0 The Navajo Nation could elect to utilize a portion of the NIJP allocation to meet these needs. 

Refined Alternative 41ntpact 5- Potentially Positive: Land purchased with funds could potcntinlly 

become trust lands. 

If land is purchased with associated water rights using the water acquisition fund, such land has the 

potential to remain as fee land or to be taken into trust. That process may result in the Tribes needing to 

conduct an analysis ofthe impact, under NEPA, to local non-Indian communities, and providi1'g means 

to mitigate such impacts as taxation and regulation of trust lands. 

Mitigntion for Reliued Altcmative 4 lmpnct 5: No mitigation is proposed. 

Refined Alternative 4 Impact 6 - Potentially Significant: Sections of the conveyance structures 

prOI)Osed under the non-binding water use scenarios would cut act·oss Colorado Ute Tribal lands, 

tJOtentially impacting the use of such lands. Relocation of natunll gas pipeline(s) may also im(mct 

Tt·ihallands. 

Certain sections of the non-binding conveyance structures cut across Colorado Ute Indian reservation % 

lands. Construction of these laterals may result in negative impacts to farmlands, homes, or various other 

structures in the l'ight-of-way. Natural gas pipelines within Ridges Basin rnay need to be relocated across 

the Southern Ute Indian Reservation, potentially impacting such lands. 

Mitigntion for Refined Altcmativc 4 lmlulct 6: Routing of pipelines to avoid impacts and 

restorntiou of lands to theit· original conditions. 

Obviously, no conveyance structure will be constructed, nor pipelines relocated, without consultation % 

with and approval of the appropriate Indian tribe. Any homes or other structures on Indian lands would % 

be avoided by routing of the conveyance pipelines. Any Tribal lands disturbed by construction of the 

conveyance structures would be restored to their Ql'iginal condition. Land would be regraded to the 

original contour. If croplands arc impacted, farmers would receive financial compensation for any crop 

losses. 

Refined Altcmative 4 Impnct 7- Potentially Significant: Dishubnnce during construction of % 

NNMP may affect crop productiou. 

During construction, land would be disturbed along the NNMP corridor. Cropland would be affected. If 

t:onstruction activities occur during the crop production season, cropland in some locations could be 

taken out of production for a single season, and crops in production could be damaged. 

Mitigation for Refined Altemative 4 Impnct 7: Any lands distut·bcd by construction of the NNMI' % 

would be restored to their original condition. % 

Land would be regraded to the original contour. Cropland topsoil would be stockpiled during % 

construction and replaced on croptlelds at the completion of construction. As much as possiblt:, % 

construction would occur during periods when crops arc not cultivated. Farmers would receive financial % 

compe ~ation for any crop losses. % 

Rcti11ed Altcm ative 4 Impact 8 - Positive: Pro,icct water could allow the Colorado Ute Tribes to 

fm·ther develop their mineral resources. 

4-29 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUST ASSETS 
CHAPTER 4 

OTHER IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

One non-binding water use scenario considered by the Southern Ute Indian Tribe involves opening a coal 

mine and building a coal-fired power plant, while the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe is considering building a 

gas-fired power plant. This would allow the Colorado Ute Tribes to develop their coal and natural gas 

reserves on the reservation, resulting in an economic benefit to the Tribes by providing increased jobs 

and revenue. 

MitignCion for Refined Altemntivc 4 lmr>act 8: No mitigation is proposed. 

'!b Refined Alternative 4 lmpnd 9 - Less than Significant: The construction of the NNMJ• may affect 

% Navajo Nation ITA mineral resources. 

% Oil and gas wells, sand and gravel, and coal resources occur near the NNMP. Existing oil and gas wells 

% and sand and gravel and coal mining operations would not be affected, but in the future the opportunity 

% to extract these resources could be limited to the presence or the pi pel inc. 

% Mitigntion for Refined Altcrruative 4 Irnr>act 9: No mitigation is pr·oposed. 

% Refined Alternative 4 Impact 10 - Less than Significant: Project development could negatively 

% impact the Colorado Ute 'f1·ibes' huntjng and fishing l'ights. 

Any project development that would negatively impact hunting and fishing resources, or access to such 

% e~ources, within the Brunot Agreement Area or otherwise provided through legal seHlement or consent 

% decree, would negatively affect the Ute Mountain Ute Tribes' hunting and ~ishihg rights. 

% Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Impact 10: No mitigation is proposed. 

Environmental Justice 

% Refined Alternative 4 Impact 11 - Significant: Refined Alternative 4 limits the wnter supply 

available for the development of the proposed Nuvujo-Gnllup Pt·oject designed to deliver dt•inking 

water to portions of the Navajo Nation witl1 limited or no supply. 

See discussion under Refined Alternative 4 Impact 3. 

% Mitigation for Refined Alten1ntive 4 lmpnct 11 -See discussion undct· Mitigntion for Relined 

% Alternative 4 Impact 3. 

% Relined Alternative 4 Impact 12 - Significant: Refined Alternative 4 reduces the water· supply 

% available fo•· the .Jicarillu Apnche Tribe Water Rights in the Snn Junn River. 

% Mitigation for Relined Alternative 4 Impact 12- Sec discussion under Mitigation tor Relined 

% Alternative 4 lmpnct 3. 

% Refined AlternnHve 4 Imtlact 13- Potentially Significant: Effects on •·esidcnces, school, and 

% cemetet-y along tJ1e NNMP corridor. 

% The NNMP corridor would pass within I 00 feet of a minimum o'f20 residences or in-use areas. A school 

% and a cemetery on the Navajo Nation arc just outside the project area. Short-tenn noise and vibration 

% impacts would occur during construction and affect nearby residences and the school. 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUST ASSETS 4-30 
CHAPTER4 

OTHI;R IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Imt>act 13: Reduce imr>acts on residences, school, and 

cemetery. 

The NNMP corridor would be routed to minimize, and to the maximum extent possible, prevent 

disturbance or relocation of residences_ Prior to initiating any construction activities, project planners % 

would meet individually with all property owners wit11in I 00 feet of the corridor. If any residences are 

required to be relocated, the residents and the Navajo Nation would be compensated according to the 

stipulations of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Renl Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 

(42 USCA 4601 -4655. Project planners would work to avoid any disturbance to the cemetery. As 

required under NAGPRA, consultation would take place with the Navajo Nation Historic Preservation 

Department and representatives from affected Navajo Nation chapters prior to disturbing any human 

remains or funerary objects. Additional mitigation measures would be used to minimize noise and 

vibration impacts. Construction activities would be scheduled during daytime hours (7:00a.m. to 6:00 

p.m.) when within 0.25 mile of a residence. Construction activities would be scheduled during non· 

school hours when feasible. 

4.6.4.3.2 Refined Alternative 6 

Potential impacts associated with Refined Alternative 6 as they relate to water resources are listed below. 

Impacts lhat could result to land and mineral resources and hunting and fishing rights would be similar to 

those described under Refined Alternative 4. 

Indian Trust Assets 

Refined AltcmntiYc 6 Impact l -Significant: ReJ1ncd Alternative 6 docs not fulfilllhe terms and 

conditions of the Settlement Act for the Colol'ado Ute Trjbes. 

While Refined Alternative 6 is me<mt to provide the same a111ount of water as the Settlement Agreement 

and as Refined Alternative 4, the Colorado Ute Tribes seem unwilling to accept the terms and conditions 

of Refined Alternative 6. In response to the Adtninistration Proposal, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe and 

the Ute Mountain lJte Tribe senl a joint letter to the Secretary of the Interior expressing their desire to 

have legislation enacted that would authorize the settlement of the outstanding tribal claims on the 

Animas and La Plata Rivers on the following terms, among other things: 

" '- 'l11e construction uf a reservoir at Ridges Basi11 . .. to deliver the average annual % 

depletion of57,100 acrefeet allowed under the previous biological opinions ... '' % 

"2. An allocation qf those annual depletions among the affected parties that i8 similar to that % 

envisioned under "ALP Lite" except that the share of depletiomfor the hen~fit of the % 

non·lndian irrigators would instead he devoted to non-agricultural local or regional % 

1/0n· lndian communi~y purposes. '' % 

"3. The decision whether to huild the reservoir and its ultimate size would be resolved % 

following the completion of the ongoing environmental analysis. 'l11at analysis would % 

determine the size of/he inactive pool . . . '' % 

Additionally, on August 24, I 999, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe adopted a resolution (Resolution No. 

99·137) in support of the proposed legislation found in H.R. 31 12, which states: 

4-3 1 

4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND 

INDIAN TRUST ASSETS 
CHAPTERS 

PURPOSE AND NEED, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 

This section discusses the enviroumcntal cormn.itments that have been made by Interior or Reclamation 

during the development of Refined Alternative 4 (Reclamation's Prefen·cd Alternative). Reclamation 

would share responsibility for implementing measures that would avoid or reduce potential 

environmental impacts orthe ALP Project. This responsibility would be shared with other federal 

agencies, the Colorado Ute Tribes, and other· ALP Project beneficiaries, as wel l as third-party entities 

which could include Colorado and New Mexico state agencies, local governments, and private 

developers. 

The commitments in this chapter summarize commitments made during the planning process and 

incorporated into ALP Project plan as discussed in Chapter 2 of this Final Supplemental Environmental 

hnpact State (FSEfS), and mitigation measures proposed in Chapter 3 to reduce or avoid impacts that 

would otherwise occur as a result of the implementation of the Preferred Alternative. These 

commitments supersede comtuitments made by Reclamation in previous ALP Project National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents. 

As discussed below, the commitments described herein would be implemented by Interior, or Interior 

would require their implementation by constrtJction contractors, management authorities, or third-pm1y 

developers. Commitments for pre-construction activities would genera lly be completed by Reclamation 

% or by contractors during the final design process and prior to constmction activities. Wildlife, wetland, 

% cultural resources and other mitigation would be completed by Reclamation as described in the following 

% paragraphs. Some commitments, such as monitoring or additional studies, would continue beyond 

completion of construction of structural facilities. 

The non-structural component of the Preferred Alternative (i.e., the $40 million water acquisition fund) 

would be administered by Interior through the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). It was assumed that the 

use of this fund would be for acquisition or irrigated agricultural lands and that these lands would remain 

in irrigated production. In the event that the Colorado Ute Tribes were to elect to fund alternative 

activities with the water acquisition fund or were to apply for water l'ights transfers, it would be the 

responsibility ofthe water acquisition fund's administering agency to determine appropriate 

environmental protection measures. ft is possible that additional NEPA compliance may be required for 

sLich alternative uses. 

The use of ALP Project water by either the Colorado Ute Tribes or other ALP Project beneficim·ies 

would result in environmental impacts that would require the implementation of avoidance design 

specifications and mitigation measures. To the extent that Reclamation can require developers of ALP 

Project water enc! uses to implement environmental protection elements into design, Reclamation 

commits to requiring certain measures as discussed in the following sections. llowever, all compliance 

responsibilities and costs associated with end use development would be the responsibility of the third· 

party developers. As discussed previously, additional NEPA compliance would likely be required for the 

deveiQpment of end usc facilities to occur. At such time, the lead agency would be responsible for 

identifying additional environmental commitments specific to the proposed end uses. 

5.4.1 General Commitments 

Throughout the planning process for the project, efforts have heen made to avoid impacts where 

practicable. Jf avoidance was not possible, then mitigation measures have been developed to reduce the 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
CHAPTER5 

PURPOSE ANO NEED RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

level of impact. 'fhe mitigation measures for each resource impact were di!>q•ssed in Chapter 3. Jn 

addition to the spt:cific mitigation measures identified iu Chapter \ other management practices will be 

employed during construction activities to minimize environmental effects and will be included in 

construction specifications. Many of these measures are required in order to comply with federal, state, 

or local laws and regulations, regardless of whether lhey arc specit1cally identified in the report. 

Reclamation will comply with all relevant federal, slate and local h•ws, ord inances, regulations, and 

standards during the implementation of the Preferred Alternative. Reclamation will prepare and % 

implemenl an Environmental Commitment Plan for the project to document and track the completion of % 

the environmental commitments. % 

5.4.2 Water Resources and Hydrology Commitments 

Reclamation will develop an operations plan for the Ridges Basin Pumping Plant that will sched ule 

pumping from the Animas River in a manner to limit irnpacts to non-Colorado Ute Tribal entities' ability 

to obtain water from the San Juan River as described under Mitigation for the Refined Alternative 4 

llydrology Impact 2 in Seetio11 3.2. 

Reclamation will work with all appropriate state and federal agencies to pursue a method to prolect ALP 

Project water return flows in the La Plata River dtainage as a water supply for endangered .fish as 

described under Mitigation for Retined Alternative 4 Hydrology Impact 3 in Section 3.2. 

Reclamation will design and develop Ridges Basin Reservoir with a minimum pool of30,000 af. 

5.4.3 Water Quality Commitments 

Reclamation will develop and implement a program to reduce, minimize or eliminate temporary, shortterm increases in suspended sediment loading or other water quality constituents, potentially caused by 

project construction, through the incorporation of permits, Best Management Practices (13MPs), and 

sediment control structures as described under Mitigation for Relined Alternative 4 Water Quality 

Impacts 1-3 in Section 3.3. 

Reclamation will develop and implement a program designed to reduce, minim ize or eliminate the 

temporary, shmt-term increases in suspended sediment loading that may potentially occur during 

construction of the non-binding end uses and water conveyance systems through requiring developers 

and construction ontra~; s to incorporate BM Ps and sed imcnt control devices as described under 

Mitigation for Relined Alternative 4 Water Quality Impact 6 in Section 3.3. 

Reclamation will develop, with the Southern Ute Indian Tribe and the States of Colorado and New % 

Mexico, and implement a program to monitor water quality in the Animas River from the Durango % 

Pumping Plant to the confluence with the San Juan River for five years after the Durango Pumping Plant % 

begins operation. The progran1 will be developed to monitor compliance with Tribal and state water % 

quality standards and criteria. The plan should include: objectives, quality assurance and control plans, % 

and noncompliance measures. % 

5.4.4 Vegetation Commitments 

Reclamation will ensure that construction contractors limit ground disturbance to the smallest feasible % 

areas, and will ensure that construction contractors implement BMPs, along with the planting or re- % 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
CHAPTER 5 

PURPOSE AND NEED, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

% seeding disturbed areas using native plant species to assist in the re-esta bli hm nt of native vegetation as 

% described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Vegetation lrnpact 5 in Section 3.4. Where 

% feasible, directional borings will be used for river pipeline crossings. 

% Reclamation will compensate the loss of approximately I ,645 acres of upland vegetation resulting from 

% the construction of the Ridges Basin Reservoir, the Durango Pumping Plant, and other features as 

% described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Vegetation Impacts I and 2 in Section 3.4 as patt of 

% the wildlife mitigation plan. The compensation wil l be part of the total estimated 2,700~2,900 acres of 

% wildlife habitat to be acquired and enhanced to compensate the loss of wildlife habitat in Ridges 11asin. 

% The mitigation land acquisition will be completed prior to initiation of ground-breaking construction 

% activities at the reservoir and pumping plant sites. Reclamation will at1cmpt to acquire large contiguotls 

acreage and will attempt to acquire these lands first in the river basins that will be affected by the ALP 

Project, and then outside of those basins, with the final decision made in consultlltion with state and 

federal wildlife agencies. 

Reclamation will compensate the loss of 134 acres of wetland/riparian habitat at a mitigatjon ratio 

sufficient to replace or exceed the habitat value of wetland/riparian habitat lost as described under 

Mitigation for Retined Alternative 4 Vegetation Impacts 3 and 4 in Section 3.4. Reclamation will 

% replace lost wetland/riparian areas at a planned ratio of 1.5: I, thus creating approximately 200 acres of 

replacement wetlands. Mitigation will involve a program of land acquisition, wetland development, and 

long-term management. 'To the extent possible, this progr<~m will be integrated into the wildlife habitat 

mitigation program to expand bcnctits atld provide large blocks of contiguous wildlife habitat. For 

purposes of this FSElS, it is assumed 600 acres will be necessMy for the wetland program. Because of 

limited water supplies for new wetland creation in the region, restoration of degraded wetlands wi ll be an 

important component of any wetland plan, As with wildlife habitat mitigation, the La Plata River 11asin 

% will be given first priority for wetland development. Lands for wetland mitigation will be acquired prior 

% to initiation of construction of Ridges l3asin Dam and overall wetland mitigation physical features will be 

% at least 95 perceut completed prior to beginning reservoir filling. 

% Reclamation will also monitor the AnimAs River riparian corridor to help determine any effects ofthc 

% pumping regime on these downstream resources. The monitoring will also include Basin Creek 

% wetlands. Reclamation will also limit ground disturbing activities due to construction of the NNMP and 

% other pipelines and will replace in a 2: I ratio, riparian trees (cottonwoods) lost due to construction. 

Reclamation will req uire that development of non-binding end uses avoids or mi nimizes construction 

impacts to wetland and riparian vegetation located within corridor alignments of the non-binding water 

conveyance pipelines. Reclamation wi ll require that construction zones be kept to the minimum size 

needed to meet project objectives. If avoidance is not possible, a riparian/wetland mitigation and 

monitoring plan will be developed to compensate for the loss of vegetation cover as described under 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Vegetation lmpact 8 in Section 3.4, 

5.4.5 Wildlife Commitments 

% Reclamation will mitigate the direct and indirect loss of approximately 2,700-2,900 acres of wildlife 

% habitat through the purchase, enhancement, and management of approximately 2, 700-2,900 acres of 

suitable land as described under Mitigation for Refined Altemative 4 Wildlife Impact I in Section 3.5. 

The actual amount of land that will be acquired to obtain this level of mitigation will depend on the 

potential wildlif~ value of the lands acquired. All reasonable attempts will be made to acquire interests 

in lands on a willing seller basis, usjng fee simple purchases, conservation easements, purchase options, 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
CHAPTERS 

PURPOSE AND NEED RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

or life estates, to name a few. However, this does not. preclude the use of other authorities available to 

acquire such land interests. Priority will be given to lands in the La Plata River drainage, as well as in 

the vicinity of Ridges Basin, to provide replacement habitat for displaced deer, elk, and other wildlife 

that utilize Ridges Basin and adjacent areas that will be affected. Large, contiguous parcels will be given 

pl'iority to create unfragmcnted habitat and to facilitate management. Lands will be managed for wildlife 

and other uses will not be allowed if it is determined that they will interfere with the wildlife habitat 

benefits. Acquisition, enhancement, and management plans will be coordinated with the U.S. Fish and % 

Wildlife Service (Service), Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW), and possibly the Southern Ute 

Indian Tribe. Because of the preference to acquire interests in lands on a willing seller basis, it is 

recognized that the specific parcel location is difficult to establish at this time. If La Plata or Ridges 

Basin areas are unavailable, lands in other areas of the San Juan River Basin will be sought. Based on 

similar past programs, it will be lcasiblc to acquire the lands; however, it should be noted that they may 

not be in the immediate project impact 11-rea. Wildlife mitigation land will be acquired prior to award of % 

the contract for construction of Ridges 13asin !)am, and development will occuf concurrently with the % 

construction of the dam. % 

Reclamation will develop construction specifications to include noise, traffic, and human use restrictions 

to minimize disttlrbancc to wild lite near the construction zone of Ridges Basin as described under 

Mitigation for Relined Alternative 4 Wildlife rmpact 2 in Section 3.5. The Carbon Mountain gas 

pipeline route, which could significantly impact golden eagle nesting, will not be considered. 

Reclamation will make effotts to avoid construction during the May-July period in the vicinity of elk 

calving areas to minimize impacts to elk. 

Reclamation will ensure that recreational facilities and the new alignment for County Road (CR) 21 I are 

sited or restricted in such a way to rninimize the disruption of deer and elk habitat utilization and 

behavior as described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Wildlite Impact 3 in Section 3.5. 

Designs of road crossings, particularly in the vicinity of Wildcat Creek, will contain special provisions to % 

minimize wetland/riparian resources as described in Section 3.4, Mitigation for Refined Altemative 4 % 

Impacts I and 2. Habitat impacts discussed previously include indirect Impacts. Indirect impacts will be % 

managed through a plan that will support the minimization o•· elimination of those conflicts/impacts. 

Recreation facilities will not be permitted on the west or south sides ofthe reservoir to reduce impacts to 

big game migration corridorf> . Trails will be restricted to foot traffic. Wildlife-related activities will be % 

encouraged. Future use of Reclamation lands for cabin sites or similar uses will not be allowed. % 

Suflicicnt land wi ll be acquired at the time reservoir right-of-way is acquired at the upper (westem) end 

of the reservoir (at least one-quarter mile) and along the southern shore to maintain a wildlife migration % 

corridor around the reservoir and to winter ranges to the south. % 

Reclamation will collaborate with raptor specialists fi·om the Service and CDOW on road realignment 

and construction activities at Ridges Basin Dam to identify and implement measures minimizing effects 

on existing golden eagles and their nests on Carbon Mountain as described under Mitigation for Refined 

Alternative 4 Wildlife lmpact 4. !\II reasonable means to pi·cclude human activity on Carbon Mountain 

will be pursued. All power lines will be designed raptor-proof. 

Reclamation will require that a 0.25-milc buffer around the existing golden eagle nests be identified and 

that all reasonable measures are pursued to preclude human activity on Carbon Mountain during the 

nesting period of golden eagles (December I through July IS), as described under Mitigation for Refined 

Alternative 4 Wildlife lmpac{ 5 in Section 3.5. 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
CHAPTER 5 

PURPOSE AND NEED RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

Reclamation will ensure that development of non binding end uses and conveyance systems avoid or 

minimize construction ir11pacts to wetland and tiparian vegetation wildlife habitat located within the 

potential corridor alignments of the non-binding water conveyance pipelines and that construction zones 

are the minimum necessary to meet project objectives as described under Mitigation for Refined 

Alternative 4 Wildlife Impact 7 in Section 3.5. If avoidance is not possible, Reclamation will require that 

a riparian/wetland habitat mitigation and a monitoring plan is developed to compensate for the loss of 

habitat value. 

5.4.6 Aquatic Resources Commitments 

% The Service recommended that water pumped to Ridges Basin Reservoir from the Animas River be 

% delivered into the reservoir at an elevation below the thermocline. This could lessen the likelihood or 

% periodically having reservoir water temperatures becoming too warm to support trout and could increase 

% oxygen levels in the reservoir. Reclamation does not believe there is sufficient information to adopt th is 

% measure at this time. Reclamation will, therefore, fund a more further detailed evaluation of Ridges 

% Basin Reservoir's expected limnological conditions to better determine whethct or not there is a 

% significant concern to Include this recommendation in the pmject plan. This commitment is described 

% under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Aquatic Resources lmpac.;t2 in Sectjon 3.6. The evaluation 

% will be completed in coordination with the Service as part of the design data collection activities. 

% Reclamation will develop and implement a monitoring program at Ridges Basin Reservoir to determine 

% the e-xtent of bioaccumlation of trace elerncnts in fish within the reservoir. The reservoir basin 's 

% vegetation will be largely cleared in order to reduce the magnitude of productivity and !'eduction 

% potential. This, in turn, will limit mercury becoming methylatedJ the form in which it is available to 

% bioaccumulate within the food chain. Trout will be the only fish stocked. Trout are not at the top ofthe 

% 11sh food chain; therefore, they will not be expected to accumulate signilicant levels ofbioaccumulated 

% trace elements. The program will last two consecutive years and be initiated two years after the reservoir 

% is tilled. If significant bioaccumulation effects are identified, Reclamation will work with the appropriate 

% local, state or fede tl agencies to either minimize the impact or otherwise offer protection to potentially 

% impacted tlsh and wildlife species and to possibly post human fish consumption advisories at the 

% reservoir. This commitment is also described under mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Aquatic 

% Resources Impact 3 in Section 3.6 

% To minimize downstream stranding offish due to the operation of the pumping plant, changes in the 

% pumping will be staged in the fo llowing mamwl': An increase in pumping not to exceed 50 cfs per hour 

% (hr) stage decrease and a decrease in pumping not to exceed 100 cfs/hr (stage increase) when natural 

% river flows are above 500 cfs. At lower flow, these ramping rates could substantially change river stage. 

% Therefore, when river flows are at or below 500 cfs, increases in pumping will not exceed 25 cfs/hr and 

% decfeases in pumping will not exceed 50 cts/hr. This commitment is also described under Mitigation for 

% Relined Alternative 4 1\qltatic Resources Impact 6 in Section 3.6. Seasonal bypass nows will be met 

% (ranging fi·orn 125 - 225 cfs) as described under mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Aquatic Resources 

% Impact 1. 

% Monitoring studies of project-affected waters on the Animas Rivet' will be in'lplemcnted both prior to and 

% continuing for at least four years after project operations begin (project pumping). These studies will be 

% designed to better define the native 11shcry, to include better understanding apparent problems with 

% native sucker recruitment, and lo monitor trout populations. If it is concluded that the operation of the 

% project js having significant adverse impacts to the downstream aquatic ecosystem, Reclamation will 

% make every reasonable effort to modify project operations to either reduce or eliminate these impacts. 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
CHAPTERS 

PURPOSE AND NEED RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

The potential impact to native fishes in the Animas River, especially the effects of chronic habitat % 

reduction, may not be directly mitigatable on the Animas River. Investigations should be inHiated to % 

determine whethe1' or not fish barriers exist, whether small fish/young-of .. the-year fish are significantly % 

lost through entrainment in canals, and whether any significant loss to the trout fishery occurs. The % 

monitoring program will be initiated in 2000 that will incorporate these additional elements into a % 

monitoring study currently being conducted on the Animas River. A finn recommendation for mitigation % 

due to the effects on native fishes will be made by no later than 2005, at least two years prior to project % 

pumping from the Animas River. Once this mitigation recon1mendation is apptovcd and agreed to by the % 

Service, CDOW, New Mexico Department of Game and rish (NMDGF), and perhaps the Southern Ute % 

Indian Tribe, its implementation will hnmcdiatcly begin. This commitment is also described under % 

mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Aquatic Resources lmpact4 in Section 4.6. % 

Reclamation Will review and adopt established guidelines for screening facilities to minimize fish % 

entrainment and impingement at the Ridges Basin Pumping Plant. Reclamation will also ensure that % 

design spccitications include Best A vallable Technologies as described under Mitigation for Refined % 

Alternative 4 Aquatic Resources Impact 5 in Section 3.6. % 

Reclamation will either screen or implement other physical structures to prevent live fish from being 

released from Ridges Basin Reservoir. The reservoir outlet system will be designed and fitted with 

devices to eliminate survival or fish escaping the reservoir. Reclamation will monitor escapement from 

the reservoir and Basin Creek as described under mitigation ror Refined Altemative 4 Aquatic Resources 

Tmpact 7 in Section 3.6. 

Reclamation will fund the acquisition and stocking of wild strains or trout' annually in the Animas River 

within the boundaries ofthe Southern Ute Indian Reservation to compensate fo r fish loss due to the 

reduction in usable trout habitat. fndividual stocks of trout will be marked in such a manner that age 

groups could be monitored over time. This monitoring plan will be developed in consultation with the 

Service, C110W, NMDGF, and the Tribe. The relative success of this effort will be assessed after four 

years. !fit is deemed a success that is, ifthe trout biomass within the stocked reaches ofthe river is 

elevated to a point of supporting a rccreatjonal fishery- the stocking program will continliC. For the 

acquisition of trout stock, Reclamation will consider the development of a new hatchery in cooperation 

with the Southem Ute Indian Tribe and others. This same hatchery could very well be utifjzed for 

providing for fish stocking for Ridges Ba!>in Reservoir. 

Reclamation will commit to providing trout to be stocked at Ridges Basin Reservoir to provide a % 

recreational fishe1y. The source of fish could be from an existing Colorado River Storage Project % 

(CRSP) hatchery facility or from the acquisition and/or construction of a new hatchery racility. This % 

commitment is for the purposes of enhancing the lisht:ry at Ridges Basin Reservoir. % 

As described in Section S.4.l l, Reclamation will acquire at least two new public access points on the % 

Animas River for fishing and other recreational use. % 

5.4.7 Special Status Species Commitments 

Reclamation will irllplement conservation measures found in the latest Biological Opinion on the project % 

(see Attachment G for complete list). These measures address the Colorado pikcminnow and razorback % 

sucker that are found in the San Juan River and the bald eagle that is found throughout the project area. % 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
CHAPTER 5 

PURPOSE AND NEED, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

% The conservation measures include Reclamation's commitment to operate Navajo ~serv ir and the 

% Durango Pumping Plant to mimic the natural hydrograph of the San Juan River to benefit the endangered 

% fish and their habitat. Also, Ridges Basin outlet facilities will be designed to prevent escapement of 

% nonnative fish, that might compete with native fish, into the Atlimas or other area waterways. 

% Reclamation will develop and implement a monitoring program for potential adverse bioaccumulation of 

% trace elements in bald eagle food items in Ridges Oasin Reservo ir. ff the progJ'am identifies a problem 

% with trace elements, Reclamation will clevelop and implement an action plan to minimize impacts to bald 

% eagles. Bypass flows compatible with the endangered fish recovery efforts will be incorporated into the 

% project plan to promote natural recruitment of cottonwood trees. This should avoid impacts to future 

% bald eagle habitat. Also, electrical transmission lines associated with the project will be desighcd to 

% avoid injury to raptors, including bald eagles. 

% Project wildlife and wetland mitigation areas should provide high quality, protected habitats for species 

% such as the southwestern willow t1ycatcher and bald eagle in the area. 

5.4.8 Geology and Soils Commitments 

% Reclamation will reduce or eliminate the potential for earthquake damage to lhe Ridges Basin Dam site 

% through specific design specifications. Dam specifications will require design performance to withstand 

a maximum credible ea1ihquake for seismic sources in the vicinity of Ridges Basin Dam site as described 

under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Geology Impact I in Section 3.8. 

Reclamation will develop and implement a controlled program for filling Ridges Basin Reservoir to 

reduce the potential fo r induced seismic impacts as described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 

Geology Impact 2 in Section 3.8. 

Reclamation will develop and implement a facilities operation program that includes monitoring the 

reservoir shoreline and slopes for landslide and slumping. Reclamation will also provide for public 

notification and control public access in areas where high landslide and slumping potential exists as 

described tmdcr Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Geology Impact 3 in Section 3.8. 

Reclamation will develop an engineered process plan lo limit, control, and manage dam site methane gas 

releases dul'ing construction. Reclamation will also monitor the area for methane gas releases during 

% operations as dcscribccl under Mitigation for Retlncd Alternative 4 Geology Impact 4 in Section 3 .8. 

Reclamation will investigate the potential of gas release due to man~madc intru ~ within Ridges 13asih 

and the proposed darn site. Specitically, construction investigations will study the integrity of abandoned 

exploration wells and the Gates Coal Mine as described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 

Geology lmpact 5 in Section 3.8. 

Reclamation will mandate that construction contractors usc and implement measures contained in erosion 

control guidelines and BMPl'; to control soil erosion from construction areas as described under 

% Mitigatiou for Refined AlteJ'native 4 Soils Impact l in Section 3.8. 

Reclamation will develop and implement a program to control reservoir filling and drawdown at rates 

sufficient to reduce significant erosion and sedimentation potential as described under Mitigation for 

Refined Alternative 4 Soils Impact 2 in Section 3.8. 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 5-16 
5.4.9 

CHAPTER 5 

PURPOSE AND NEED, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

Cultural and Paleontologic Resources Commitments 

Reclamation will ensure compliance with historic/archaeological treatment measures and disseminate % 

results pursuant to the Programmatic Agreement executed to meet Section 106 requirements for Refined % 

Altcmativc 4 Cultural Impacts 1-3 in Section 3.9. Attachment H contains a Draft An1ended 

Pmgrammatic Agreement for the ALP Project. Reclamation will also finalize a Historic Preservation % 

Management Plan which puts the J'>rogrammatic Agreement into operation. % 

Reclamation will ensure compliance with mitigation measures developed in accordance with the Native 

American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and Executive Order 13007 as described 

under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Cultural Impact 4 in Section 3.9. Appendix 11 contains a (It-aft 

NAGPRA Plan for the ALP Project. 

Reclamatjon will ensure that areas to be disturbed arc field surveyed prior to construction disturbance 

and will ensure that construction monitoring is conducted where deemed appropriate as described under 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Paleontologic Impact I in Section 3.9. 

Reclamation will ensure that periodic shoreline monitoring is conducted as part of the facilities 

operations plan as described under· Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Paleontologic Impact 2 in 

Section 3.9. 

5.4.10 Agriculture Commitments 

Location, design, and construction timing ofthe NNMP would protect agricultural lands as described % 

under Mitigation fo r Refined Alternative 4 Agriculture Impact 2 in Section 3.1 0. % 

5.4.11 Recreation Commitments 

Reclamation will pursue pumping regimes that reduce adverse tlow effects on boating opportunities 

within the Animas River when possible and will take steps to improve public access to the river as 

described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Recreation Impacts I and 2 in Section 3. 11. 

Reclamation will alter pumping regimes during periods of competitive events as described under 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Impact 3 in Section 3. 1 I. 

Reclamation, as part of both the fishery and recreation mitigation program, will acquire or provide % 

funding (not to exceed $500,000) for the acquisition of public access at a minimum of two points on the 

Animas River between the J Iigh Bridge and Basin Creek to reduce effects to anglers on the Animas River 

as described under Mitigation for Refined Altcmative 4 Recreation Jmpact 4 in Section 3. 11. 

5.4.12 Socioeconomics Commitments 

No environmental commitments are made for socioeconomic resources. 

5-17 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
CHAPTER 5 

PURPOSE AND NEED. RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

5.4.13 Land Use Commitments 

No environmental commitments are made for land usc resources. 

5.4.14 Hazardous Materials Commitments 

Reclamation will ensure tlwt the Dmango Pumping Plant is designed to minimize the disturbance of 

contaminated materials. Reclamation will also ensure that procedures will be developed for rad iological 

mouitoring of excavated soils and groundwater encountered and that remedial procedures are planned in 

advance to counteract the potent itt I for human exposure and fm the prevention of contaminated 

groundwater release from the construction site as described under Mitigati011 for Refined Alternative 4 

Hazardous Materials Impact I in Section 3. 14 

Reclamation will ensure that all federal and state requirements pertaining to the management and 

% handling of hazardous materials, mixed wastes and radioactive waste arc followed and will include those 

requirements within construction contract language inclusive of construction safety nnd envimnmcntal 

compliance as described under mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Hazardous Materials lmpact 2 in 

Section 3 .14. 

% Reclamation will require that construction specifications for Ridges Basin Dam and Reservoir, the 

% Ridges nasin Inlet Conduit, road relocation, and related work prohibit contractors from disturbing the 

% disposal cell. Reclamation will take steps to ensure that the disposal cell has appropriate signage to make 

% the public aware of its presence and any personal hazards that it could present, as described undeJ· 

% Mitigation for Retined Alternative 4 Haz:ardous Material!) Impact 3 in Section 3. 14 . 

% Reclamation will confer with DO£ and their Long-Term Stuveillance and Maintenance Program to 

% understand the current operational scheme and parameters fo1· the Bodo Canyon disposal ce ll. As well, 

% Reclamation will reactivate sampling and monitodng of wells DH-228 and DH-229 tbr indicator 

% parameters including but not limited to Molybdenum, Selenium, and Uranium, as described under 

% Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 1-lazardous Materials Impact 5 in Section 3.!4. 

Reclamation will require that prcconstruction surveys are conducted for non-binding water end use 

facilities and conveyance system development and that hazardous material standards relating to 

construction are adhered to as described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Hazardous Materials 

% Impact 6 in Section 3. 14. 

5.4.15 Transportation Commitments 

Reclamation will conduct a transportation survey prior to construction of Ridges Basin Dam and 

Reservoir and will implement methods to reduce traffic-related impacts as described under Mitigation tor 

Rel1ned Alternative 4 Transportation Impacts I and 2 in Section 3. 15. 

Reclamation will ensure w maintain CR 2 11 J'Oadway, shoulder, drainage, and roadside to standards 

adequate to avoid noticeable degradation as described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 

Transpmtation Impact 3 in Section 3.15. 

Reclamation will require third-party developers of recreation facilities at Ridges 13asin Reservoir to 

conduct traffic engineering impacts analysis studies and to mitigate recreation facility impacts accot'ding 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 5-18 
CHAPTER5 

PURPOSE AND NEED RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

to state and county standards. Associated costs will be the responsibility of the developing entity as 

described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Transportation Impact 7 in Section 3. 15. 

5.4.16 Air Quality Commitments 

Reclamation will require that construction contractors implement 111easures to control fugitive dust and 

exhaust emissions during construction as described under Mitigation for Refined Altemative 4 Air 

Quality Impact I in Section 3. 16. 

Reclamation, or other responsible federal agency. will require third-party developers to implement 

measures to control fu gitive dust and other emissions during construction ru1d operation of non-binding 

end uses. 

5.4.17 Noise Commitments 

Reclamation will require that the Durango Pumping Plant construction contractor restrict operation of 

heavy equipment during the nighttime hours as described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 

Noise Impact 1 in Section 3. 17. 

Reclamation wi ll ensure lhat construction contractors provide blasting notification to residents, sound 

pre-blast alarms, and follow the construction safety plan as described under Mitigation for Refined 

Alternative 4 Noise Impact 2 in Section 3. 17. 

Construction and operation of the Durango Pumping Plant will be carried out to reduce noise impacts as % 

described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Noise fmpacts 3 and 4 in Section 3.17.4. 1. Noise % 

reduction wi II be provided in the fonn of sound insulation within the pumping plant and vegetation % 

screen ing designed as part of site landscaping. Rjdges Basin specifications will provide for noise % 

control, par·ticularly relating to golden eagle nesting. % 

Reclamation will ensure that construction contractors schedule construction activities to avoid or 

minimize loud activities in the vicinity of golden eagle nesting areas dm·ing the nesting season and that 

nesting areas are "off limits" to construction forces and visitors as described under Mitigation for 

Refined Alternative 4 Noise Impact 4 in Section 3. 17. 

Reclamation will require that third-party developers of recreation facilities at Ridges Basin Reservoir 

incorporate in a recreation development/management plan the requirement to prohibit particularly loud 

forms of watercraft and to include signing to advise people of eagle nesting sensitivity to hurnan presence 

and noise as described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Noise Impact 5 in Section 3. 17. 

Reclamation will ensure that developers and contractors associated with construction and operation of 

the non-binding end uses incorporate methods to minimize noise disturbances as described under 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Noise Impact (lin Section 3. 17. 

5.4.18 Public Health and Safety Commitments 

Reclamation will ensure that ptJblic access to structural component construction areas will be controlled 

by signage and by fencing around construction areas as described under Mitigation tor Refined 

Alternative 4 Public Health and Safety Impact I in Section 3.18. 

5- 19 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
CHAPTER5 

PURPOSE AND NEED. RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

Reclamation will ensure that contractors configure haul routes and access roads to prevent or discoutage 

public vehicular entry, including placement or signs warning aga inst entry as described under Mitigation 

for Refined Alternative 4 Public Health and Safety Impact 2 in Section 3.18. 

Reclamation will ensure that all the potentially affected gas companies will be contacted prior to 

construction crossings of gas pipelines which wi ll be precisely located and appropriately marked in the 

field and on the specifications as described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Public Health and 

Safety Impact J in Section 3. 18. 

Reclamation will ensure that public access to end use and delivery system construction areas is 

contmlled by signage and by fencing around construction areas as described under Mitigation for 

Refined Alternative 41 Public Health and Safety Impact 4 in Section 3. 18. 

% Rcclarnation will investigate the potential for gas release due to man-made intrusions, prior to 

% construction, and will monitor excavations for the presence of coal bed methane gas, as described under 

% Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4, Public Health and Safety lrnpact 5 in Section 3. 1 H. 

% Reclamation wi ll control public access to operation areas that could pose a threat to public safety as 

% described under Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Public Health and Safety Impact 6. 

Reclamation wi ll ensure that recreation mea planning, final design of facilities, and reservoir access 

points arc developed to promote safety and usc of accident management techniques as described under 

Mitigation for Retlned Alternative 4 Public llealth and Safety Impact 7 in Section 3. 18. 

5.4.19 Public Services and Utilities Commitments 

% Reclamation will ensure that constntction contractors adequately secure and patrol their work sites and 

% will coordinate with city or county law enforcement agencies as described under Mitigation for Refined 

Alternative 4 Public Services and Utilities Impact I in Section 3.19. 

Reclamation will ensure that contractors wi ll rnark the locations of existing buried utilities and develop a 

notification system for coordination with affected utilities during construction as described under 

Mitigation for Rct1ncd Alternative4 Public Services Utilities lmpact4 in Section 3. 19. 

5.4.20 Visual Resources Commitments 

Reclamation will ensure that as part of construction design, the Durango Pumping Plant blends into the 

natural landform and that, following construction, the site is adequately revegetated as described under 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Visual Impact I in Section 3.20. 

Reclamation will ensure that the design of strtlctural facilities incorporates, to the extent practicable, non· 

intrusive design elements and thai restoration of disturbed ar·eas be conducted as described under 

Mitigation for Refined Alternative 4 Visual Impact 2 in Section 3.20. 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
5.4.21 

CHAPTER 5 

PURPOSE AND NEED. RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITMENTS 

Indian Trust Assets and Environmental Justice Commitments 

Interior will support the n10d ification of the Settlement Agreement, through legislated amendments to the 

ScttlctneJlt Acr, to rccogn ize the new I im its placed on the use and amount of water provided to the 

Colorado Ute Tribes and establishment of the water acquisition fund. 

Interior will pursue the development of operation plans for Ridges I3asin and Navajo Reservoirs that will 

optimize more efficient d~livery of the flow recommendations for endangered fi~h in the San Juan River 

and limit certain project pumping to allow for making additional ep etion~ and developable water 

available for other Indian tribes' present and future water needs. 

Interior will facilitate discussions between the Jicarilla Apache Tribe and other parties with interest in the 

San Juan River Basin to develop options of ohtaining 25,500 afy deplelion as authorized under the 

Jicarilla Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act. 

5-21 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS 
EXHIBIT B 

METHODOLOGY REGARDING 

IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 207 ON 

UP-FRONT COST-SHARING AND REPAYMENT 
United States Department of the Interior 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATJON 

ANlMAS·LA PLATA CONSTRUCI'JON OFFICE 

ALP-100 

FlN-6.20 

Mr. Randy Seaholm 

Colorado Water Conservation Boan1 

1313 Shennan Street, Room 721 

Denver, CO 80203 

P.O. BOX 5107 

I 03 Everett Street 

Durango, CO 81301 

AUG -2 200G 

Subject: Mcmorandwn Regarding Section 207 Up·Ftont Cost·Sharing and Repayment 

MethodoJogy - Animas-La Plata Project, Colorado and New Mexico 

Dear Mr. Sea.h.ohn 

Enclosed for your records is a copy of the fmal signed subject memorandum. The enclosed 

memo•d.lldum acknowJedges consult.Jtion occurred and allo~s the Bureau of Reclamation to 

begin implementation oftlle accounling and methodology described in the memorandum. 

We appreciate all of your effous in achieving this goal. 

lf you should have any questions. please do not hesitate to contact me at 970·259~1 I J 0, ext. 

1004. 

Enclosure 

Identical L-etter Sent To: 

Mr. Dan Law, Executive Director 

Colorado Water Resoun:es and 

Power Development Authority 

J 580 Logan Street, Suite 62() 

Denver, CO 80203 

Mr. Randy Kirkpatrick 

Executive Director 

San Juan Water Commission 

1450 East Main 

Farmington, NM 87402 

Continue on Next Page, 

Sincerely, 

({;${ .. 

Rick Ehat, Project Construction Engineer 

Auimas-La Plata Construction Office 
., 

• i 

.. ··4 

Continue from Previous Page. 

Ms. Stella Montoya, President 

La Plata Conservancy District, New Mexico 

1592 Hwy 172 La Plata, NM 87418 

(w/encl to ea) 

be: UG.JOO (Gold), UC·446 (Loring). UC·3 00~ 84-27700, WCG-DeAngelis, 

WCO-PSchumacher, ALP-250, ALP-25 1, ALP .. 252 

(w/encl toea) 

WCD-PPage 

(w/originaJ memo) 

WBR:REbat:BFox:OB/Ol/06 

L:Common/'Tchat/Ltr trans signed agnnt 

2 
United States Department of the Interior 

BUREAU OY RECLAMATION 

2764 Compass Drive, Suire 106 

Grand JUDction CO 81506-8785 

Upper Colorado Region 

Weslem Colorado Aru Office 

835 E 2"" Avenue, Suite 300 

Durango CO 8JJOI·S475 

ALP-100 

WCG-CDeAngeiis 

WTR-4.00 

JlJJ -7 2008 

MEMORANDUM 

ContractOISIPotential Repa)'ment Sponsors /("' /"? / 

Carol 

ruck Ehat, 

DeAngelis, 

Animas 

Western 

LaPJata 

Colorado 

· 

Area Office MU ~ ~ 4.4~ 

To~ 

From: 

Subject: Methodology Regarding Implementation of Section 207 on Up-Front Cost~ 

Sharing and Repayment, Animas-La Plata Project 

A. Background. The passage of Section 207 of P.L. 108-447, as amended, affects upfront cost-sharing and repayment ofd1c Project. The statute provides: 

Sec. 207. Animas-La Plata Non-Indian Spor;sor Obligations. In accordance with the 

nontrlbal repayment ob/igatioiJ specified in Suhsecrion 6(a)(3)(B) of the Colorado Ute 

Jndi1»1 Rights Settlement Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-SBS), as amended by the Colorado 

UMSett/ement Act Amendments of2000 (Public Law 106~554). the reimbursable cost 

upotJ which the cost allocaJion shall be based shall not exceed $43, 000, 000, plus interest 

during construction for tlwse parties not utilizing the up front payment option, of the first 

$500.000.000 (January 2003 price level) of the total project costs. C01mequently, the 

Secretary may forgive tile obligation of the non-Indian sponsors relative to the 

$163,000,000 increase. nnd any effects in. inflation thereon, in estimated total project 

costs that occurred in 2003. · 

This document is to record and acknowledge certain decisions .made by the Bureau of 

Reclamation regardin8 implementation of the provision cited above after consultation 

with all Project sponsors, including the Tribes. 

B. bnplementation Methodology. 

1. CostAJJocation Method: The current contracts are based on the 2001 Interim 

Cost AJlocation Method. This method wiD continue to be used for allocating costs. 

2. Specific Qlsls and the Reimbursement Cap: The statutory language provides 

that the reimbursable oosts shaH not exceed $43 million for the first $500 miHion of total 

project costs, thereby establishing a reimbursement cap that covers both specjfic costs 

and joint costs. Therefore. the reimbursable specific costs for the City ofDurango shall 
be subtracted from the $43 million reimbursement cap before the remainder is distributed 

among t11e sponsors paying the joint reimbursable costs. 

3. Quarterly Billing Method: Reclamation has developed a "Cap Conversion 

Factor" to be applied to post-1999 actual joint cost expenditures to adjust escrow draws 

in accordance with the reimbursement cap. The current Cap Conversion Factor and its 

application to post-'99 joint cost expenditures are set forth on Attachment 1 and 4 hereto. 

The methodology disc11ssed in this paper; and the computed Cap Conversion Factor, are 

applicable until tlte actual jojnt cost expenditures exceed $346t399,000, (the total joint 

costs included in the $500,000,000 Project Cost estimate from July, 2003). Once actual 

joint cosl expenditures exceed $346,399,000, an adjusted Cap Conver~ion Factor will be 

developed as discussed in Section C.3. · 

4. Quarterly billings through December 2004 reflected the allocable percentages. 

for each sponsor as applied to the reimbursable portion of the $500 million cost e-stimate. 

As a result of the passage of the Section 2071anguage in December 2004, subsequent 

quarterJy billings have been adjusted to reflect the $43 million reimbursement cap and all 

previous payments. Previous payments in excess of the required amount as recalculated 

pursuant to Section 207 were applied as credits to future quarterly billings for allocable 

reimbursable cost-s, joint and specific, until tlie allocable reimbursable costs, joint and 

specific, required additional payments by the sponsors. 

C. Other. 

1. Estimate oflnflated Reimbursement Cap. The language of Section 207 in 

effect provides that repayment wiU not be required for $163 million in cost increases (and 

on the effects of inflation thereon) included in the $500 miJlion total Project Cost 

estimated by Reclamation in July 2003 based on January 2003 price levels. It is 

Reclamation's position that, since tl1e origil)al project costs were subject to inflation, the 

S43 niillion reimbursement cap is also subject to inflation. A simple ratio and proportion 

method will be used to estimate the effect of inflation on the reimbursement cap, as' set 

forth in Attachment 2. 

2. Proj~t Cost Projection for Escrow Planning. In order to assist contractors in 

projecting overall project costs for escrow planning, a process was presented to the 

sponsors during an August 29.2005 meeting. A synopsis of that process is described in 

At1achment 3. 

3. Adjustment of Cap Conversion Factor. At such time as the actual joint cost 

expenditures exceed $346,3~9,000, (the estimated total joint costs included in the 

$500;000,000 Project Cost estimate from July 2003), Reclamation will develop an 

adjusted Cap Conversion Factor to re.flect the Inflated Rejmbursement Cap. At that time, 

the remaining reimbursable costs to be recovered, due to the effects of inflation, will be 

calculated. AdjustnttJlts to the remaining reimbursable cost.~ due to inflation on the 

estimated City of Durango specific costs wil1 be considered in this calculation. A revised 

Cap Conversion Factor w.ill be developed as a ratio of the calculated remaining 
. . ' 

reimbu!Sable costs to be recovered under Section 207 to the calculated remaining 

reimbursable costs without the effect of Section 207. Tbe Cap Conversion Factor will be 

reviewed each year as indexed project cost estimates are released. 

4. Final Cost Allocation and Determination of Reasonable and Unforeseen Costs. 

The language of the Colorado Ute Settlement Act Amendments of2000 addressing final 

cost allocation, relinquishment of water, and reasonable and unforeseen costs, remains 

tmchanged and unaffected· by Section 207 or its implementation as set forth herein, The 

matut~ is in full effect and reads as foJlows: 

Section 302(a)(3)(B). 111e nontribal repayment obligation set forth in subparagraph (a) 

shall be subject to a final ccst allocation by the Secretary upo~1 project completion. In 

the event that the final cost allocation indicated. that additional r~payment is warranted 

based em t/18 appHcab/e entity ·s share of project water storage and determtnation of 

overall reimbursable cost, that entity may elect to enter into a new agreement to make 

additional payment necessary to seeure the full water supply identified in paragraph 

(l){A){iij. If the repaymem entity elects not to en_ter into a new agreement, the portion of 

projcd storage relinquished by such election shall be available (o other project purp0$es, 

Addfticmal repayment shall only be warraht~dfor reasonable and unforeseen costs 

associated with project coJJStrucJion as determined by the Secretary in consultation with 

the re/eva11t repayment entities. 

~The non-federal entities acknowledge that: 1) Reclamation has consulted with them 

regarding the substance of this memorandum, 2) Reclamation will implement the 

accounting and cost methodologies in this memorandum, and 3) without waiving any of 

their rights under statute or their repayment contracts, they will not object to Reclamation 

proceeding in accordance with this memorandwn. 

This memo is not intended and does not constitute a contract between the Bureau of 

Reclamation and any entity that currently has a repayment contract, and does not change 

auy term in existing contracts between the Secretary and project sponsors. Project 

sponsors C"Xpressly reserve the right to review and chaJlepge the methods presented in the 

memorandum to the extent they conflict with repayment contra ts or other authority. 

Colorado 

A1..Ja?: 

Water Resolll'Ces dr'~ and 

P~oe. opment Authority 

- ~z~ ~~ State of ColoradO 

Attaclunents 
• 

• 

Attacb ment 1 

DiscpssJon on Development of Cap Conversion Factor 

A simplified approacb to accotmting for the effect of Section 207 on Escrow Agreement 

interim quarterJy payments was presented to 1he two contractors that hold repayment 

contracts. A draft worksbeet (Attachment 4) provided proposes a method of applying 

the intent of Section 207 to actual joint cost expenditures for use in the quarterly billing 

process. The methodology applies a ratio, or 'cap conversion factor, to post·1999 actual 

joint cost expenditures to ·reflect the cap on repayment liability esUiblishcd in Section 

207. The use ofthe.ratio is intended to meet the requirement of Section 207 for the 

reimbursab]e costs not to exceed $43.000,000 for the .first $500.000,000 of the total 

project costs. To simp1uy the administration of tho escrow accoun~ the cap conversion 

factor is applied to aU joint costs incurred from 1999 to the present. This results in a 

difference between the amount actually paid to date by contractors and the amount due as 

a result of Section 207. It is Reclamation's position that tlrls difference is not an 

oveq>aymen~ as the amounts paid to date were billed and paid in accordance with the 

applicable tigreements and law at tho time the payments were made . 
. .. 

Attachment Z 

Method to Estimate the Inflated Rc~mbursement Cap 

PURPOSE: 

To outline a method for estimating the potential overall project cost and repayment in 

order to facilitate administration ·ofescrow a.ccounts and payments under the up-front 

cost-share agreements. Actua1 repayment will be based on the final cost allocation, after 

application of applicable tests. 

SBCTTON 207 LANGUAGE, AS AMm.«lED~ 

Section 207 limits the non-tribal repayment obligation to $43 miJlion for the $500 million 

project (1 0/03 prices). The language, as amended, results in: · 

- No repayment of the $163 million of cost increases 

• No repayment of the effects of inflation on the $163 million of cost increases 

• Implies repayment on the e.tfec~ of inflation on the $337 million ($500 

million- $163 milliou), which implies some inflation of the reimbursement 

~- . 

MFffiOD: 

A simple method of calculating repayment oftbe current indexed project ($522 million 

@ 10/05 prices) is! 

~43 milliQP (Original Reimbursement Cmi) 

$500 nu1lion (CCE @ 1 0/03) 

= InJJated Reimburs£..mcnt Cap@ 10/Q~ 

$522 nrillion @1 0/05 

Ju:flnted Rcimbn.rsement Cap@ 10/05 prices = $44, 892,000 
• 

Attachment 3 

Process for Projeetl.og Project Costs for Escrow Planning 

The process involves projecting indexed projept costs using a worksheet that shows 

actual project costs through the end of the current fiscal year, and projected costs 

(indexed) in future years. fu order to project overall costs, one would aBBllDle 

construction indices> appropriations and a schedule for construction contracts in each of 

the future years. The ae<:umcy of these assumptions and other factors could affect the 

accuracy oftbe overaJJ cost projection. Reclamation has offered to help the contractors 

develop this worksheet every February after the President•s budget for the following 

fiscal years is revealed. The resulting worksheet would be a contractor product, not a 

Reclamation product 

'Using the worksheet descnoed nbove, a contractor can then use a separate worksheet to 

a1locate the projected costs among spon.sors using the 2001 Interim Cost Allocation 

Method, with the reimbursable cost limited by the $43 million reimbursement cap and 

subject to inflation on the $337 million ($500 million- $163 million). Using the method 

of ratio and proportion in Attachment 2, the contractor can determine the inflated 

reimbursement. cap; and then estimate the reimbursable cost to each entity based on the 

assumptions made. This will aJlow the contractor to plan for escrow needs. 
United States Department of the Interior 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

Upper Colorado Regional Office 

Western Colorado Area Office IN R6Pl.l' REFER 10 

WCD~RRandol 

FIN~6.20 

2764 Compass Drive, Suite 106 

Grand Jonctio11, CO 8150G-878S 

Mr. Dan Law 

Executive Director 

Colorado Water Resources and Power 

Development Authority 

1580 Logan StTeet, .suite 620 

Denver, CO 80203 

~ - 3 '08 83.5 B 20<1 Avenue, Suite 300 

Durango, co 8130 I .5475 

Subject: Modification to the Methodology to Estimate the Inflated Reimbursement Cap~ 

Section 207 ofP.L. 108-447, as Amended, Animas-La Plata Project, Colorado and New 

Mexico 

Dear Mr. Law: 

The pwpo'se of this Jetter is to consult with you regarding a change necessru-y in the metnodology 

to calculate the Inflated Rejmbursement Cap (IRC) for the Animas-La Plata Project (P~oject). 

The original methodology was described in a memorantium to existing and potential Project 

repayment sponsors, dated June 7, 2006 (see attached table for example of the original 

methodology). This proposed change in methodology was discussed at the March 20,2008 

Project Construction Committee (PCC) meeting and those attending requested a letter from 

RecJamation describing the change. 

We have recently determined that when the IRC was updated to reflect the latest co~t indexing of 

the Construction Cost Estimate (CCE), the increase was proportionally greater than incr~ases in 

the joint Project costs. This has the effect of artificially over-inflating the reimbursable cap. This 

disproportionate incrc;:asc can be attributed to the inclusion of the following three items in the 

amount to be inflated: 

l) The pre.1999 sunk costs t1ave been expended and, as such, are not subject to inde"ing; 

2) CalcuJ~tion of the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority (CWRPDA) 

indexed specific costs is <;onducted separately, as these costs are not djstributed among the 

Project sponsors; and 

3) The costs associated wit11 the Navajo Nation Municipal Pipeline (NNMP) are specific to the 

Navajo Nation' and do not impact the reimbursable joint costs. These oosts have not been 

expended and as such, are being indexed in their entirety. The effect ofindexing on this. 

substantial portion of Project costs resulted in further dhproportionate jocrease in the IRC. 
' ' 

Page 2 of3 

In order to ensure that the method used for inflating the reimbursable cap best reflects the 

increases in joint construction costs due to inflation, an alternative method for calculation of the 

IRC was developed. 

The modified method of calculating the lRC (see attached table) is as follows: 

To calculate an appropriate indexing rcentage ~ 

• The non-Indian reimbursable baseline of $43,000,000, which was established by Section 207 of 

P.L, 108-447 .. is reduced by the amount of the oon-lndian pre-1999 sunk costs and the 

CWRPOA specific costs (from the Interim Cost Allocation (ICA) for the January 2003 CCU) to 

establish a baseline amount to be indexed. 

• ·tne non-Indian reimbursable costs from the ICA for the January 2003 CCE are reduced by the 

CWRPDA specific costs and the pre-1999 sunk costs. 

• The baseline amount to be indexed is divided by the adjusted non-indian reimbursable costs to 

establish an ;ndexing percentage. 

To apply the indexing percentage to updated cpsts -

• The FY2009 Jnterlm Cost Allocation non-Indian reimbursable total is reduced by the FY2009 

CWRPDA specific costs and the pre-1999 sunk costs. 

• ihe result is multiplied by the indexing percentage to obtain an inflated baseline. 

• The total of the non-lndiw1 pre-99 sunk costs and the current CWRPDA specific costs from the 

fY09 Interim Cost Allocation is added to the inflated baseline to calculate the balance to be 

repaid. 

Utilizing the originaJ methodoJogy, the IRC would have been $49,120,922 for the FY2009 

Interim Cost Al1ocation, as shown in upper box of the attached table. Utilizing the modified 

methodology, the lRC is $48,670,161 for the FY2009 Interim CostA11ocation, as shown in the 

lower right box of the attached table. This adjustment to the calculation of the lRC more closely 

represents increases in joint costs due to inflation. As such, this method wilJ be used in future 

Cost Allocations, provided no significant objections are raised by you or your agency. 

If you have any questions, please contact Ryan Randol at 970~3 85w6531 , 

~ Si(lcerel~ ~ 

'a..-.! <'(f(p ~~.L . Carol DeAngelis ·- · ~ 

Area Manager, 

Western Colorado Area Office 

Enclosure 

Identical Letter Sent To: 

Continued on next page. 
. ( Page 3 of 3 

Subject: Modification to the Methodology to Estimate the Inflated Reimbursement Cap 

Identical Letter Sent To: 

Continued from previous page. 

Mr. Randy Kirkpatrick 

Executive Director 

San Juan Water Commission 

1450 East Main 

Farmington, NM 87402 

Mr. Randy Seaholm 

Colorado Water Conservation Board 

1313 Shennan Street, Room 721 

Denver, CO 80203 

Ms. Stella Montoya 

President 

La Plata Conservancy District 

1592 Highway 172 

ta Plata, NM 87418 

be: UC-446; 

FCCD· J 00; FCCD-11 0; 

·-IMJWCO...EWamer; WCD- RRandol; 

(w/encl to each) 

WBR:RRandol:MDale:8~1 3-2008: 970-385-6531 :ALPJnflatedReimbursemnetCapRevision.doc 
--

COMPARISON OF INFLATED REIMBURSEMENT CAP CALCULATION METHODS 

ORIGINAL CALCULATION METHOD 

$43,000,000 (Q!!~INAL I3EIM!M! EMEMT CAP! • INFlll"'l:O REIMBURSEMF,NT CAP ~10/08 {FY2000) 

$500.000,01» (~ Ulol03) SSfl, f7M08 (COSTS 0 FY2009 PRICE l EVEl.) 

INFI...ATEO REIMBURSEMI!fll CAP G N211DI PRICES ~ $ 4t,t20_.?2l 

MODIFIED CALCULATION METHOD 

Vlll.UES FRO~ RUH #4 {i<lttflm CO!!t AIIDC.4Cioo bil•ltd on U11 "Ofllelal'' $SOOM J~nuary 2003 CCf) 

SECllON S REMAINIHG JOINT WSTS S3<16,845 1~ 

~~ ReiMBURSA9LF. (WIO SEC <OJ) V $ 66 ~.07.3 

NQN.INOIAN M&l SPECifiC'S $ 1,09a,f'T4 

NON·INOIJIN PRI:$ SUNK COST'S 21 s 7,142,0104 

GAP CAtCUI.A'nON 

WfQ SEC21J1 W SEC207 

NOM-.INOIAN itEWURSABU! s 66~69,o1a NON· INDIAN R~IMBU"SAtl LE $ 43,000,000 

NOI'f.!NOIAW M&l Sf>ECIFICS . s ~~ 174 NON-INDIAN M&l SPECIFICS . $ 1,000,174 

NQN.cNI)WI PRI!-OG Sl*IK CUSTS . s 7,142,084 NON·INOIAN Pf'lf,gg SUNK COSTS s 1142 ou BAI..ANC~ TO BF. IUWAIO " $ S8.350,.835 BN.ANCE TOllE REPAIO . $ 34.701.7&2 

IHFt..ATJ!O R!;IMOURSMEHT CAP CAI..CtJv.llOH I'ERCSITAGl! 

! 3.f. GU~ ~ 59.5737182% 

s 5&,300,.83$ 

Vl\l.UES f'RC* RUN 1M tn~ at 1~eoet ~ (FYOII) Prlcelevol! $$71 ,173,,08) 

CTION 5 AaMINING .101tff COSTS $396.226,356 

NON.lNOIAfl ru:,iMtJUASABt.€ (WIO S£C '2111) 1 16,026,733 

N~ tNDWI M&l $PECIFICS s 1.211.497 

NOH4NOIAN pru;.gg SUNK COSTS s 7 142 004 

CN' CAI.CUUI'f'IOM 

W/OSEC4117 wsec zo7 

NON.IIIl)IAH REWIBURSABLE s 76J)2li,13!1 81\LANCF. TO BE REPAiD $ 67.675,212 

N()N..INOWI M&lSf'ECFICS . s UH.~57 CAP CAI.CULATION PERCENTAGE I( 59.S737182% 

NOH·INOIAH PR€.99 SUNk' coors i~ 2,0.U AOJUSlEO OAlANCE: TO DE REPAID • $ 40,316,040 

llAI.NoiCE TO 8E REPAID .. $ 67,6711,212 NON·INOIAN SPECIFICS • $ 1,211.1&7 

NON-INDIAN PRE-99 SliNK COSTS . $ 7 1~2 OG4 

1NFlATiiO R~IMI!URSEMENT CAP .. s 48 67o.181 

1/llle ~R~~ls ooos1denwll0 'Ullle NON -!NOlAN PRE~ SI)NI( COSTS~ calctAaled by rnulllpl'flng I he 

be !he 'urn ot. 11>e .•,U'WCO JM11 Qll$t$, 11\t AtP't'oiCD Non-4ncb'o prsecntll!lt (t8 86~) tJy137,82J,804 WlliCh Is lhe valuo ot the JOin! 

>p<:c:k co~. the $.MIC jolnl c;osts, lh& LCO jQi!ll m;t, ~ Ccn!G as giv1111 ~ lfle AiM~ ... "-QIIm Cofl AJocadon OUIICI on lh8 SfiOOM 

and U~e COtOfW)() ~ oosts. e<:E. 
EXHIBITC 

REPAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR 

10,440 ACRE-FEET 
EXHIBIT A 

14-Mar-12 

State of Colorado 

Repayment Schedule For 10,440 Acre-Feet 

Animas-La Plata Project 11 

Article 7(c) Payment Payment 

Calendar Payment r=lective Annual to to Unpaid Plant in 

Year Period Ps't.meats 21 Pa'{.ment Interest PriaciQal Balance Service 31 

8.315% 

2011 0 $36,214,474 $36,214,474 

2012 1 2,898,833 $2,898,833 33,315,641 36,214,474 

2013 2 2,898,833 $2,770,196 128,637 33,187,004 36,214,474 

2014 3 2,898,833 2,?59,499 139,334 33,047,670 36,214,474 

2015 4 2,898,833 2,747,914 150,919 32,896,751 36,214,474 

2016 5 2,898,833 2,735,365 163,468 32,733,283 36,214,474 

2017 6 2,898,833 2,721,772 177,061 32,556,222 36,214,474 

2018 7 2,898,833 2,707,050 191,783 32,364,439 36,214,474 

2019 8 2,898,833 2,691,103 207,730 32,156,709 36,214,474 

2020 9 2,898,833 2,673,830 225,003 31,931,706 36,214,474 

2021 10 2,898,833 2,655,121 l43,712 31,687,994 36,214,474 

2022 11 2,898,833 2,634,857 263,976 31,424,018 36,214,474 

2023 12 2,898,833 2,612,907 285,926 31,138,092 36,214,474 

2024 13 2,898,833 2,589,132 309,701 30,828,391 36,214,474 

2025 14 2,898,833 2,563,381 335,452 30,492,939 36,214,474 

2026 15 2,898,833 2,535,488 363,345 30,129,594 36,214,474 

2027 16 2,898,833 2,505,276 393,557 29,736,037 36,214,474 

2028 17 2,898,833 2,472,551 426,282 29,309,755 36,214,474 

2029 18 2,898,833 2,437,106 461,727 28,848,028 36,214,474 

2030 19 2,898,833 2,398,714 500,119 28,347,909 36,214,474 

2031 20 2,898,833 2,357,129 541,704 27,806,205 36,214,474 

2032 21 2,898,833 2,312,086 586,747 27,219,458 36,214,474 

2033 22 2,898,833 2,263,298 635,535 26,583,923 36,214,474 

2034 23 2,898,833 2,210,453 688,380 25,895,543 36,214,474 

2035 24 2,898,833 2,153,214 745,619 25,149,924 36,214,474 

2036 25 2,898,833 2,091,216 807,617 24,342,307 36,214,474 

2037 26 2,898,833 2,024,063 874,770 23,467,537 36,214,474 

2038 27 2,898,834 1,951,326 947,508 22,520,029 36,214,474 

2039 28 2,898,834 1,872,540 1,026,294 21,493,735 36,214,474 

2040 29 2,898,833 1,787,204 1,111,629 20,382,106 36,214,474 

2041 30 2,898,833 1,694,772 1,204,061 19,178,045 36,214,474 

2042 31 2,898,834 1,594,654 1,304,180 17,873,865 36,214,474 

Z043 32 2,898,833 1.486,212 1,412,621 16,461,244 36,214,474 

2044 33 2,898,833 1,368,752 1,530,081 14,931,163 36,214,474 

2045 34 2,89~,834 1,241,526 1,657,308 13,273,855 36,214,474 

2046 35 2,898,833 1,103,721 1,795,112 11,478,743 36,214,474 

2047 36 2,898,833 954,457 1,944,376 9,534,367 36,214,474 

2048 37 2,898,833 792,783 2,106,050 7,428,317 36,214,474 

2049 38 2,898,834 617,665 2,281,169 5,147,148 36,214,474 

2050 39 2,898,834 427,985 2,470,849 2,676,299 36,214,474 

2051 40 2,898,833 222,534 2,676,299 36,214,474 

TOTAL: So $115,953,326 $79,738,852 $36,214,474 

1/ Annuity Due Formula. 

2/ Article 7(c) of Contract No. 12·WC·40·456. 

3/ Plant-ln·Servlce will be revised upon Final Cost Allocation approval.