Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />synergistic pumped-storage concept. This advanced concept can increase the productivity <br />and quality of existing water supplies and systems in five major river basins. Cities, farms, <br />and environments throughout the Arkansas, South Platte, Upper Colorado, Rio Grande, <br />and untapped Gunnison Branch of the Colorado River would be big winners. CCP is <br />designed to satisfy all Gunnison Basin of origin needs. These needs are clearly outlined in <br />Gunnison County's October 18, 2005 Water Resources Position Statement. <br /> <br />Recent Bureau studies indicate its earthen Pueblo Dam could be overtopped and fail with <br />only 55% of today's engineering criteria for probable maximum flood (PMF). These <br />studies also indicate Pueblo Dam can not be modified and/or enlarged to prevent <br />overtopping and sudden failure during an epic flood event. Up to 17,000 lives are currently <br />at risk. Why does the Bureau prefer SDS, which requires a safe and enlarged Pueblo <br />Reservoir for its long-term efficiency? CCP's modern roller compacted concrete (RCC) <br />Union Park Dam can safely store up to 1.2 million acre-feet of Colorado's currently <br />threatened Aspinall Pool and Colorado River entitlements. Union Park's off-river storage <br />can also mitigate the Bureau's serious Pueblo, Taylor Park, and Blue Mesa Dam safety <br />problems. (see Ueblacker Associates web site: www.ueblacker.us). <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The Bureau's continuing CCP oversight is a serious violation of public safety expectations, <br />and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rules. It also conflicts with Clean Water <br />and Endangered Species Act objectives throughout both sides of the Divide. The Bureau <br />can expect major challenges from Kansas and Nebraska, if it continues to support SOS <br />and other farm dry-up and river reuse schemes, currently favored by Front Range utilities. <br />Why is the Bureau deviating from its basic mission to help western states develop their <br />respective interstate entitlements, including Colorado's unused and overlooked Aspinall <br />Pool and Colorado River rights? <br /> <br />In view of the above regrettable circumstances, Natural Energy hereby requests a proper <br />NEPA required evaluation of the Central Colorado Project alternative in the Bureau's <br />ongoing Southern Delivery System EIS. Please provide your written decision, in this <br />regard, as soon as possible. Thank you. <br /> <br />Added Note: Colorado's 30 year reliance on "bottom-up" <br />water planning has improperly drained its aquifers, rivers, <br />farms, & tourist areas. Colorado now needs emergency <br />strategic water planning, high storage, & Wayne Aspinall <br />type leadership, to save Colorado's threatened interstate <br />rights for droughts and growth. ,,8-m. I 2. -.g - oS- <br /> <br />r~~ <br /> <br />Dave Miller <br />President <br /> <br />Enclosure: Central Colorado Project Paper and Vicinity Map, dated 10-24-05 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />cc: Gale Norton, Secretary of Interior <br />Mike Johanns, Secretary of Agriculture <br />John Keys, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation <br />Carol DeAngelis, Bureau Area Manager, Western Colorado Area Office <br />Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, Chief Army Corps of Engineers <br />Stephen Johnson, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency <br />Russell George, Exec. Director, Colorado Department of Natural Resources <br />Don Ament, Commissioner, Colorado Department of Agriculture <br />John Struthers, Colorado Attorney General <br />Bill Owens, Governor, State of Colorado <br />Colorado Congressional Delegation <br />