Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(e) The Caldirola Mine Well and Williamsburg Wells No. 1 and No. Z may <br />continue to be maintained and may be used for fire-fighting and emergency use onlYt and <br />shall be kept capped and locked when not so med. <br /> <br />12. Flcrence MURcipBl Wells. Applicants 00 longer desire to transfer these <br /> <br /> <br />wells, described in Paragraphs 5(aX18) and 5(aX19) hereof. <br /> <br />13. Augmentation.. The Court finds that the consumptive me percentage of <br /> <br /> <br />water diverted under the Union Ditch water rights has historically been thirty-two <br /> <br /> <br />percent (32%), and furthermore finds that only twenty-five percent (25%) of water <br /> <br /> <br />diverted for municipal uses by the Florence-Coal Creek-WiUiamsbUl'g system will be <br /> <br /> <br />consumptively med. For this reason, when water is diverted for municipal uses at the <br /> <br /> <br />new Fl~ence Treatment Plant Diversion Wcrks, there is a net benefit to the Arkansas <br /> <br /> <br />River of seven percent (7%) of the water so diverted. Applicants may take credit for <br /> <br /> <br />that amount of water for use in augmenting the water rights applied for in this Court in <br /> <br /> <br />Cases 80 CW9l and 80CW92. <br /> <br /> <br />'a,) Case 80CW91 requests a direct flow water right for municipal <br /> <br /> <br />p1ll"poses. The court finds that the consumptive me of water for municipal purposes <br /> <br /> <br />under Case 80CW91 is the same as above described, to wit: twenty-five percmt (25%). <br /> <br /> <br />Therefore, Applicants may dvert under thaI.' water right in Case 80CW91 at a rate of 4.0 <br /> <br /> <br />times the amount of augmentation water available. For example, if Florence is diverting <br /> <br /> <br />4.0 cis for muricipal purposes under its Union Ditch right one mwt first subtract 2.0 cis <br /> <br /> <br />and then apply a credit of seven percent (7%) of the net amount, or 0.14 cfs, available <br /> <br /> <br />for augmentation purposes, and may then dvert 01,,0 times that quantity, ,or 0.56 cis, <br /> <br /> <br />under its Case 80CW91 water right. The first 2.0 cis of water diverted by Florence <br /> <br /> <br />under its Union Ditch shares may not be applied to the plan for augmentation, because <br /> <br /> <br />historically this amoun t has not been available to the Union Ditch when oot tBed by the <br /> <br /> <br />City. <br /> <br />(b) Case 80CW92 r~quests the right to store water for municipal <br /> <br /> <br />purlX'ses. The court finds that the intent of the Applicants is to I"ovide long term <br /> <br /> <br />storage in an oirstream reservoir and that it is difficult to predict how much water..so <br /> <br /> <br />stored will evel' return to the stream system, bec8llSe evaporation will take place over <br /> <br /> <br />long periods. Therefore, SUbject to petition for modifications by any party hereto within <br /> <br /> <br />10 years after completion of reservoir, the Court finds the consumptive we of water <br /> <br /> <br />diverted from the Arkansas River under the Case 80CW92 water right would be one <br /> <br /> <br />hundred percent (100%). Therefore, under the p-eceding example, if Flcrence chooses to <br /> <br />-9- <br />