Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Final Draft - Preferred Storage Options Plan <br />Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District <br />June 8, 2000 <br /> <br />The relationship between entities requesting storage and having access to <br />carryover storage in the Project, and the current Project storage allocation is <br />provided as follows: <br /> <br />Project Participants With Storage Storage Project Storage <br />Needs Allocation Request <br /> (at) (at) <br />CSU 55,700(1) 45,000 <br />Other FVA Entities 22,300(1) 22,000 <br />Entities East of Pueblo 37,400 3,600 (2) <br />Entities West of Pueblo 12,400 6,000 (3) <br />Pueblo Bd. of Water Works 31,200 20,000 <br />Total 159,000 96,600 <br /> <br />(1) <br /> <br />Storage allocation tor CSU and other FVA entities is based on the 1979 FVA Contract. Remainder <br />is storage need tor other entities. <br />St. Charles Mesa Water District = 3,600 at. <br />City ot Florence = 2.300 at. <br /> <br />(2) <br />3) <br /> <br />As described in Section 3.4 of the report, the model was run to determine the amount of <br />inflow needed to meet demands with storage of96,600 afwithout re-operation. Average <br />inflow of 147,633 af would be required for the 30-year simulation period. With re- <br />operation, the same demand could be met with 48,000 to 51,000 af of storage depending <br />on the scenario studied. Detailed studies for CSU indicate that 19,000 afofre-operation <br />storage would be effective in partially meeting CSU's long-tenn water need. Re- <br />operation would be as effective, or more so, in meeting the storage need identified for <br />other entities (FV A, St. Charles Mesa, Florence, and Pueblo). <br /> <br />Minimum Flows Below Pueblo Dam <br /> <br />Re-operation storage will facilitate additional river exchanges that could impact stream <br />flows below Pueblo Dam. Currently, the model results show an average monthly <br />minimum flow below the dam of approximately 100 cubic feet per second (cfs) and a <br />minimum flow of 49 cfs, which would occur very infrequently. (The model did not set <br />minimum stream flow criteria below Pueblo Reservoir.) Normally, flows below the dam <br />are 100 cfs or higher. The issue of in-stream flow below Pueblo Dam is being discussed <br />by concerned parties, including Pueblo, the District, Colorado Division of Wildlife, and <br />others. Absent a firm guideline, the model results with respect to flows below Pueblo <br />Dam, are assumed to be acceptable for developing a preferred storage options plan. <br /> <br />J \PROIECTS\9906I\Rqxxu\Preferred SOP Final wpd <br /> <br />3-7 <br /> <br />m GEl Consultants, Inc. <br />