Southwest - Bauer Lakes Water Activity Summary Sheet

• Basin Roundtable: Southwest
• Applicant: Bauer Lake Water Company
• Description: Bauer Lakes Water Company Dam Outlet Structure Upgrade
• Account Source: Basin & Statewide
• Board Meeting Date: 9/19/2007
• WSRA - Doc Type: Water Activity Summary Sheet - CWCB Evaluation/Approval Documents

?

The outlet pipe was replaced in 1974 with CMP which cannot withstand continuous pressure.
The outlet pipe discharges into a cement tower and, in normal operation, the outlet tube vents to
atmosphere, using only the lower portion of this tower. However, flushing causes this tower to
fill temporarily several feet with water up to the overflow, putting back pressure on the CMP
pipe, technically not allowed.
?

After installation of pipeline in ’06 using an NRCS Salinity grant and a loan provided by
Colorado Water Conservation Board, most of the water is now delivered by pipe – a fixed
volume. Previously, the ditch system could accommodate the variability in flow and still deliver
water to shareholders. The pipe is less forgiving: when supply flow is restricted or demand
increases, the shareholders at the top do not get water as the pipe drains. If you adjust the
headgate so it even slightly exceeds the demand, the excess quickly goes out the overflow, again
wasting water.
?

Users on the pipeline have the ability to adjust flow up or down at their meter stations by the turn
of a valve, changing the demand side (sometimes significantly) without any automated
corresponding change in supply, again wasting water or shorting some members. We tried a
notification system which only marginally allowed us to compensate.
?

The pipeline design did not incorporate any method to manage this supply/demand balance – the
system is decoupled. In ’06 we had to hire a person to “sit” at the headgate twice a day,
sometimes for a much as two hours, to manually tweak this balance. But the results were
unsatisfactory. The headgate adjustment was too sensitive and the system variability too high.
After any adjustment, within a couple of hours it would be out of balance again.
?

Flow measurement (Parshal) was removed when the pipeline replaced the first section of ditch,
eliminating any ability to measure flow at the dam, a requirement we need to rectify, both for our
management and state record keeping requirements.
?

Directly connecting the dam to the pipeline with pressurized pipe will solve the supply/demand
linkage, eliminate the overflow waste and provide additional pressure, satisfying upper members’
flow issues.
?

It will also resolve the downstream safety concerns around the existing pipe integrity under
pressure.

This project will resolve the following issues:
?

The pipeline is indirectly connected to the dam headgate without adequate controls, resulting in
inefficient operation with manual oversight that consumes several man-hours per day. To attempt
to get water to upper members on the pipeline, flow rate is set high, resulting in excess water
spilling over the overflow, wasting it for productive use.
?

Replace the measuring device so members are able to measure actual usage as required.
?

The dam is not officially impaired, but has an issue with pressuring of the outlet pipe, which was
not designed to be pressurized. This problem has been exacerbated with the downstream pipeline
operation.
?

This is a 50 plus year old dam and ditch system that members depend on for their livelihood and
the pipeline has hindered their operation rather than enhanced it.

Threshold and Evaluation Criteria
The application does not explicitly address the Threshold Criteria. It is clear from different parts of the
application that all 4 threshold criteria are met. According to the applicant the project also meets few of the
Evaluation Criteria. Most notably:
?

The applicant has a demonstrated need for financial assistance. They are providing 20% in matching
funds (demonstrating a commitment to the project), but are not able to secure additional funding.
2