Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />000273 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />5. On June 25, 2003, Reclamation announced a different type of restriction on the <br />release of water from Green Mountain Reservoir. Specifically, Reclamation <br />imposed restrictions on drawdown rates from Green Mountain Reservoir, that <br />prohibit releases above specified rates as the amount of water remaining in the <br />Reservoir falls below certain levels. <br /> <br />6. The above described restrictions on drawdown rate in effect create a smaller <br />reservoir because the rate of release required for the replacement pool and the <br />compensatory pool cannot be achieved. The usable capacity of Green Mountain <br />Reservoir will be reduced as a result of the above described restrictions on <br />drawdown rate and the benefit of Green Mountain Reservoir, as specified in <br />Senate Document 80, is not available. <br /> <br />7. Compounding the problem created by the ""Heeney Slide," Reclamation has taken <br />the position that the burden ofthe reduction in the usable capacity of Green <br />Mountain Reservoir falls exclusively on the West Slope compensatory pool and, <br />therefore, on Western Slope water users, including Petitioners. Reclamation's <br />decision to allocate the ""operational restriction" caused by the Heeney Slide (the <br />"Heeney Slide Restriction") on the West Slope compensatory pool has no impact <br />on the replacement pool and the transmountain diversion component of the C-BT <br />Project, but rather places the entire onus of the reduced water supply on the <br />compensatory pool and the amount available for release to Petitioners. <br />Reclamation has declared that it will operate Green Mountain Reservoir in a <br />manner to provide a preference to releases for transmountain diversions and a <br />subordination of the needs of the intended beneficiaries of the Reservoir, the <br />West Slope Petitioners and other Western Slope water users. <br /> <br />8. Reclamation's actions are in violation of Senate Document 80. Reclamation has <br />an obligation to maintain Green Mountain Reservoir at an operational capacity of <br />152,000 acre feet and has failed to do so. Reclamation's 2002 decision to deny <br />Petitioners their right to releas e of water in storage in Green Mountain Reservoir <br />is unlawful and a breach of Reclamation's obligations. Therefore, Petitioners <br />seek a declaration that Reclamation is required to maintain a reservoir with at <br />least 152,000 acre feet of active capacity, and a mandatory injunction requiring <br />Reclamation to take whatever steps are necessary to provide that capacity. <br /> <br />9. Petitioners also seek a declaration that, in the event of any reduction in the <br />usable capacity of Green Mountain Reservoir caused by operational limitations <br />(as opposed to hydrologic drought conditions), the water remaining must be <br />allocated first to actual uses of the beneficiaries of the compensatory pool and <br />then to replacement for transmountain diversions. <br /> <br />II. PARTIES <br /> <br />1. Petitioners and Reclamation are parties to the Findings of Fact and Conclusions <br />of Law, Final Judgment and Final Decree entered by the U.S. District Court for <br />the District of Colorado in these Consolidated Cases dated October 12, 1955 and <br /> <br />3 <br />