BOARD00195

• Board Meeting Date: 3/20/2000
• Description: Water Resources and Power Authority Director's Report
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

,=-~OM LG~L.;CJ

~.:.>< ,',0.

.372 ~~:. 6727

~c~. :.S ~2~O 04:47FM PS

In 1982. i'iECO (David ~(iller is Chairman of t::e Board and President) obrained a
com:itional decree (c;lSe nU:;Jcer 82C'W340) to store 325,000 af of water from the Taylor
River. Lettis Creek and Willow Creek soiel" for hydroelectric purposes in Union Park
R:servoir. Union Park Rese,-voir would be located on Lenis Creek. a tributary of the
Tavlor River about 4 miles due south. of Tavlor Park Reservoir. Tne decree contemplated
filling t.;nion' Park Reservoir from the fol1o~ng three sources. (1) the native flows of Lettis
Creek, (2) water "ll"'~ed rror:J. Taylor Park Rese,-voir about 1.5 miles i::to t1::: Lenis Creek
Basin, and (3) a Willow Creek collection system complete with diversion tunnel capable of
conveying up to 340 cis from Willow Creek to Lottis Creek. The pumping plant, associated
pipeline and Willow Creek collection system would all have to be constructed in order to
have anything dose to a project which is even worth attempting to evaluate in a feasibility
study.

lbree years later, in case number 85CW96, NECO decided to change 4,450 af of the
1982 right to its Rocky Point Reservoir pump back storage hydroelectric site, which it also
proposes to use in conjunction with Taylor P;JIk Reservoir.

In 1986, a flurry of water right applications were filed for water in the Taylor Basin
as follows:

86CW37 City of Aurora
86CW202 Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District
86CW203 Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District
86CW226 NECO (conveyed to Arapahoe County by 8\1988 contract)
88CW178 Re-ftIes and amends 86CW226, applicant is now Arapahoe County

Between 1974 and 1987, the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) had also been
appropriating minimum instream flow water rights on many streams in the Taylor Basin.
Also, shortly after the instream flow legislation was passed in 1972, a Mr. Vader and others,
collectively referred to as the "Taylor Park Poo!," applied for and received decrees from the
Water Court for several private instream flows on the Taylor River and some of its
tributaries under the new law. The CWCB subsequently acted to prevent furore occurrences
by successfully reco=ending le~.slation amending the instream flow statute. However,
after lengthy debate the CWCB decided not to further challenge the Vader decrees and let
them stand on their merits. The Colorado Supreme Court has upheld the validity of the
Vader decrees.

Subsequent litigation of the mentioned =es, all of which were initially opposed by
both state and federal agencies, resulted in Aurora's withdrawal of 86CW37 and denial by
the water court of the claim in 86CW202. On April 16, 1990, Reclamation, Colorado River
Water Conservation District, Upper Gunnison River \Vater Conservancy District and
Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association entered in to a stipulated agreement that
allowed the US to withdraw from the 86CW203 and 202 cases in exchange for assurances
that the rights, if decreed, would be conveyed to the US and that no carryover storage in

3