BOARD00054 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'I' .' . . .. Dave Miller has filed a petition for rehearing on a Sept. 11 decision by the Colorado Supreme Court to uphold a Gunnison water court decision to deny an application for water rights by the Natural Energy Resources Corp. Miller is president of the company. Water Judge Steven Patrick dismissed Miller's claim for a hydroelectric power right at the proposed Union Park Reservoir because he could not obtain federal permission to use Taylor Reservoir, a Bureau of Reclamation facility, to operate a pump-back power generator. Miller is arguing Patrick's decision denied him due process. The Sept. 11 decision by the state Supreme Court indicated there were no more issues to litigate in the case. Miller said his petition is arguing the case from the constitutional right to due process rather than strictly water law. He acknowledged, however, that such petitions are rarely granted by the court. Platte River Basin Chatfield Reservoir Reallocation Study: Excitement abounds and interest has peaked regarding the continued progress of the Chatfield Reservoir Reallocation Study in the Denver Metropolitan area. Temporary contracting issues between the Corps and their contractor, Tetra Tech, have been resolved and the EIS work is now up and running again. The expected delay in releasing the preliminary EIS is approximately three months with a schedule shift from September 30, 2006 to December 31, 2060 as estimated by the Corps. Several pivotal issues are now being discussed by project sponsors and interests, most notably the question as to whether the original Storage Reallocation Study will be merged with the more recent Ecosystem Restoration (ER) effort by the instream and downstream project interests. The CWCB Project Manager has weighed the options carefully and is recommending that the two efforts remain on separate tracks, and that the Corps and CWCB should proceed with completing the EIS and other necessary work to accomplish the storage reallocation goals. There is a concern that unwanted project delays will arise as a result of formally merging the two studies. The concept of Ecosystem Restoration as part of the Chatfield study, on its own merits, has always been supported by CWCB staff with a realization that environmental and financial incentives could result. Staffwill continue to meet and discuss all relevant issues as necessary. The Corps has pledged to hold an "Issues Resolution Conference" in mid December or late January to assist with resolving all or most ofthe tough questions now facing the project team. Staffwill advise the Board at its January 2007 meeting regarding project management decisions that will likely be made during the next 60 days. To recap the project, the fundamental scope of the study is to look at the feasibility of converting flood control storage space in Chatfield Reservoir, owned by the U.S. Corps of Engineers (Corps), into water supply storage space. The target amount of space for the reallocation analysis has been 20,600 acre-feet, and the Corps released the approval of their Antecedent Flood Study which confirms that the new water supply storage space of 20,600 acre-feet is available. Work is in progress to complete the Feasibility Report, Environmental Impact Statement, Recreation Impact Study, and other components of the project that will hopefully lead to successful contracting between local Water Users and the Corps for purchase of water supply storage space in the reservoir. All in all, the team is very optimistic about a successful outcome resulting from the time and effort spent on developing an important opportunity for additional water supply storage space along the Front Range. The Corps and the CWCB have entered into a legal contract, known as a Feasibility Cost Share Agreement (FCSA), to complete the tasks necessary for the storage supply reallocation work and to specify the cost-share requirements and other logistics related to the study. The FCSA has not been modified since its execution and the Corps is, at this point in time, obligated solely to the CWCB as the non-federal sponsor of the reallocation study. Several amendments to the contract have been executed to simply increase the amount of non-federal cash, including nearly 29