Colorado River Return Project

• Year: 2002
• Title: Colordao River Return Project
• Author: Boyle Engineering Corporation
• Description: Colorado River Return Project
• Publications - Doc Type: Other

Executive ,Summary
Understanding of the Study Ohiectnves
Planning for the wise development of our future water supplies is a complex process
governed by federal, state and local laws and policies; public expectations; and
continually increasing demands for increasingly limited sources of supply. Our current
drought and economic conditions heightened our sense of urgency in the identification of
these long -term water supply options.
The Colorado River Return Project (CRRP) will provide valuable information on one option
for Colorado's long -term water security. Pumping water upstream for additional in -state
use is not a new concept. Previously identified options, including the Green Mountain
Exchange Project and a Blue Mesa Reservoir pump -back, have had serious consideration,
but the CRRP is certainly the most ambitious concept identified to date.
A key element of the proposed study is the identification and evaluation of alternatives to a
CRRP that could accomplish many or all of the CRRP goals without the huge up -front
capital investment required to construct such a large project. Therefore, the two main
aspects of this study as we understand it are to: 1) document the positive and negative
attributes of the full CRRP and 2) creatively identify both structural and non - structural
alternatives to the CRRP that may allow our State to make fuller use of its Colorado River
Compact entitlements.
Key Issues
There are many issues to address in assessing the feasibility of the CRRP. Some of these
issues, going beyond the obvious issues of the project's affordability and compatibility with
endangered species needs include the following:
1. Legal right to use the water — There is no doubt that our State has the right to use
additional water under the provisions of the Colorado River Compact. This
diversion and use is, however, legally constrained by the provisions of state and
federal laws, especially the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Clean Water
Act (CWA).
2. Statewide equity — Implementation of the full -scale CRRP will result in construction
related impacts in the Colorado and /or Gunnison basins so an equitable
approach to project implementation should at least consider the options for
addressing water supply issues in all areas along the alternative corridors.
3. Water quality — water available near the state line is degraded in quality to
enough of a degree that any anticipated upstream uses or discharges into natural
water bodies will likely require advanced water treatment processes including
membrane filtration and /or ion exchange. These processes that are becoming
!- more competitive and much more effective than conventional processes but are
" still costly and technically complex. Disposal of the waste streams for these
processes will be a major consideration in the feasibility assessment of large -scale
alternatives using state -line water.
_ 4. The inclusion of non - structural elements could significantly reduce the magnitude
1 of new construction and the length of required pipelines while still achieving most