BOARD00408

• Board Meeting Date: 5/21/2001
• Description: Report of the Attorney General
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Page 8

t t. Sportsman's Ranch ("SPCUP") South Park Conjunctive Use Project, 96CWt4,
Division t.

.

Issue: The SPCUP is a complex proposal for a so-called conjunctive use project in South
Park. Applicant plans to pump ground water to create a void in the aquifer, then divert surface
water into the aquifer for storage and later withdrawal. The City of Aurora has contracted with
the Applicant for use of the withdrawn water.

Decision: Applicant completed its case in chief on February 23, 2001. Objectors argued
motions to dismiss in Fairplay on April 30, May 1 and May 2, 2001.

Discussion: The Board has three instream flow water right appropriations on Michigan Creek,
Jefferson Creek, and Tarryall Creek, that could be affected by the Applicant's proposal. The
State Engineer and the Division of Wildlife are also objectors in this case. The Project proposes
the removal of 110,000 acre-feet from the Upper and Lower South Park aquifers in order to
make sufficient storage space available to allow water from the recharge facilities to infiltrate
into the South Park aquifers. The Project includes a surface water collection system that
intercepts a number of tributaries to the South Platte River. South Park Sportsmen's Ranch
proposes to divert water from these sources to recharge ponds and ditches located on the
Applicant's ranch and BLM property located near the'fanch. The Applicant claims a storage
capacity of 140,000 acre-feet (70,000 acre-feet in the Upper South Park Aquifer and 70,000 acre-
feet in the Lower South Park Aquifer). The Applicant then proposes to withdraw water from the
underground storage system through 47 wells for ultimate delivery to Aurora.

The Water Judge took tbe motions to dismiss under advisement and stated that be would .
attempt to issue a ruling in mid to late May, so tbe. parties would know wbether to prepare
for the next pbase of this trial scheduled for July 2-August 17, 2001.

12. Unites States v. Elephant Butte Irrl2ation District, et al.

Issue: Should the complaint be dismissed by the federal district court on grounds of lack
of jurisdiction, res judicata, or abstention?

Pending before the 10th Circuit.

Decision:

Discussion: In 1997, the United States filed a quiet title action in New Mexico federal district
court to water rights for the Rio Grande Project and its storage facilities, including Elephant
Butt'e Reservoir. The Rio Grande Project is an irrigation project with lands in New Mexico and
Texas. Elephant Butte Reservoir is the Iynchpin to Colorado's obligations and entitlements
under the Rio Grande Compact. In any year that Elephant Butte spills usable water, Colorado
does not have to make deliveries of water to the state line, which means that water rights need
not be curtailed in that year for Compact deliveries. Any legal determinations and negotiated
discussions regarding the ownership, operation and management ofthe reservoir and its water
rights are critical to Colorado. Texas also filed a motion to intervene.

.