Laserfiche WebLink
established). However, there are control and safety issues with the current structure that make the current <br />situation unacceptable. <br /> <br />? <br /> <br />An unscreened, oversized headgate (30”) can only be opened fractionally to supply the needed <br />water. This means it is very sensitive to minor adjustments and regularly gets clogged by <br />crawdads and trash which restricts the flow. Clearing this obstruction requires frequent cycling of <br />the headgate to flush the debris through the outlet structure and out the overflow. This is a <br />manual operation AND wastes water. <br />? <br /> <br />The outlet pipe was replaced in 1974 with CMP which cannot withstand continuous pressure. <br />The outlet pipe discharges into a cement tower and, in normal operation, the outlet tube vents to <br />atmosphere, using only the lower portion of this tower. However, flushing causes this tower to <br />fill temporarily several feet with water up to the overflow, putting back pressure on the CMP <br />pipe, technically not allowed. <br />? <br /> <br />After installation of pipeline in ’06 using an NRCS Salinity grant and a loan provided by <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board, most of the water is now delivered by pipe – a fixed <br />volume. Previously, the ditch system could accommodate the variability in flow and still deliver <br />water to shareholders. The pipe is less forgiving: when supply flow is restricted or demand <br />increases, the shareholders at the top do not get water as the pipe drains. If you adjust the <br />headgate so it even slightly exceeds the demand, the excess quickly goes out the overflow, again <br />wasting water. <br />? <br /> <br />Users on the pipeline have the ability to adjust flow up or down at their meter stations by the turn <br />of a valve, changing the demand side (sometimes significantly) without any automated <br />corresponding change in supply, again wasting water or shorting some members. We tried a <br />notification system which only marginally allowed us to compensate. <br />? <br /> <br />The pipeline design did not incorporate any method to manage this supply/demand balance – the <br />system is decoupled. In ’06 we had to hire a person to “sit” at the headgate twice a day, <br />sometimes for a much as two hours, to manually tweak this balance. But the results were <br />unsatisfactory. The headgate adjustment was too sensitive and the system variability too high. <br />After any adjustment, within a couple of hours it would be out of balance again. <br />? <br /> <br />Flow measurement (Parshal) was removed when the pipeline replaced the first section of ditch, <br />eliminating any ability to measure flow at the dam, a requirement we need to rectify, both for our <br />management and state record keeping requirements. <br />? <br /> <br />Directly connecting the dam to the pipeline with pressurized pipe will solve the supply/demand <br />linkage, eliminate the overflow waste and provide additional pressure, satisfying upper members’ <br />flow issues. <br />? <br /> <br />It will also resolve the downstream safety concerns around the existing pipe integrity under <br />pressure. <br /> <br />Threshold and Evaluation Criteria <br />The application addresses and meets the Threshold Criteria. <br /> <br />Funding Overview <br />Engineering has put the cost of this project at $109,700. The applicants are asking for $40,000 in grant <br />funding from the WSRA. The overall project will be funded as follows: <br /> 2 <br />