BOARD00146 ‎(2)‎

• Board Meeting Date: 3/12/2007
• Description: CWCB Director's Report
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

I
I
I r
I

scheduled for the Pueblo area during the week of April 9 - I I. In addition, staff continues to ~ork on the
ongoing Ten Year Review of the Trinidad Projedt, with a modeling group meeting in Denver or Feb. 14
and the LA WMA proposal to add a new water s~pply to the John Martin Reservoir permanent pool with a
technical meeting with LAWMA and Kansas scHeduled for March 14. ~
! :
Reclamation Wants Water Reuse as SDS Alte~native: A new alternative that incorporates ~ater reuse
will be added to the environmental review of the) Southern Delivery System, a proposed $1 billion
pipeline project to provide water to Colorado Springs, Fountain and Security. :

The Bureau of Reclamation notified Colorado S~rings in Mid-February it found its proposed n~-action
alternative - pumping water from Fremont Counh' and returning it down Fountain Creek - "reasonable"
and would accept it subject to certain conditions! One of those conditions will be developing an eighth
alternative to the SDS environmental impact stuay that looks at indirect potable reuse of existing water
supplies. ! I
, I

Indirect potable reuse means filtering some was~ewater flows through aquifers, lakes and treatfnent plants
for use in the drinking water system. Colorado ~prings imports about 80 percent of its water supply and
can reuse return flows.

Colorado Springs uses some return flows for golf courses, parks and power plants through its ponpotable
water system. It also exchanges return flows on Fountain Creek for fresh water through the Otero
I
Pumping Station.

Among the dozens of comments received on SDS was a request by Pueblo County to look at the
possibility of building a multipurpose dam on Fbuntain Creek that would contain flood flows and serve as
part of a potable reuse system.' I

On Jan. 24, Colorado Springs submitted a new rio-action alternative that included a pipeline from
Fremont County to supply additional water frotit the Arkansas River to meet its needs until 2046.
I
,

Reclamation also added five alternatives designed to meet public concerns identified during aiscoping
process. The no-action alternative reflects what!probably would happen if Reclamation takes rto action on
the other alternatives.; J

Reclamation will issue an addendum to its alternative analysis report issued in March 2006 prior to
issuing a draft environmental impact statement.

Creative Deal Ensures Water Flow: The Col6rado Division of Wildlife and State Parks have agreed to
split the cost ofleasing 3,082 acre-feet ofwatet] from the Pueblo Board of Water Works. The water will
be released from Pueblo Dam when needed as ~O cubic-feet- per-second minimum flows for fish through
the City of Pueblo. :

.

.

More than 100 miles downstream, the same wa~er will boost John Martin Reservoir's permanent pool and
keep fish alive there when water is almost exha~sted, as it was late last summer. Downstrea~ near
Kansas, the newly acquired water will keep a minimum pool in John Martin sufficient to pre~ent a total
wipeout offish after irrigators take their lion's ~hare of water. :
The new water will build John Martin's minimJm pool for fish up to about 3,000 acre-feet (800 surface
I
acres). I
I

Utilities Considers Loaning Pipelines: The Cherokee Metropolitan District wants to use Colorado
Springs Utilities' pipelines and water treatmen~ facilities to deliver water from the Arkansas River. The .
district east of Colorado Springs overcommitte~ its allocation of groundwater, and is hoping t~ secure a
supplemental supply under a one-year lease with the Pueblo Board of Water Works. i
I

20