Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br /> <br />Artificial Recharge of Ground Water in Colorado <br />A Statewide Assessment <br /> <br />have been terminated. These projects are listed in Table VI-3 and are shown in Figure VI-4. <br />The table includes the reasons for the inactive status. Many of these projects were one-time <br />research projects that had no follow-up. Several of the community systems that were cited by <br />Moulder and others (1963) as utilizing AR have since discontinued their operations; satisfying <br />their objectives through facility upgrades. <br /> <br />AR operations that are in the planning stages include Parker WSD's Denver Basin ASR and the <br />Cherokee Metropolitan District's (Cherokee MD) Upper Black Squirrel Creek AR project <br />(CPW-1 and CBS-2 in Figure VI-4). Parker WSD has recently received approval for <br />construction of the Reuter-Hess Reservoir that wilI provide a source of water for ASR in their <br />Denver Basin aquifer wells. Once implemented, the Cherokee MD's operation in the Upper <br />Black Squirrel Creek drainage wilI be the first AR application in Colorado to use treated <br />wastewater as the source water for recharge. <br /> <br />Factors limiting implementation of AR in Colorado that were cited during the interviews <br />conducted for this inventory include <br />. lack of source water, <br />· lack of a sponsor or operator to follow up after a pilot study, <br />. lack of funding, and <br />· concerns with the complex permitting process to initiate and continue to operate an AR <br />project. <br /> <br />49 <br />