Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Aspinall Unit itself), and asked how much water has been released to satisfy senior rights of the <br />Gunnison Tunnel and Redlands diversions. Delta meeting participants requested we identify how <br />Blue Mesa ReselVoir has been managed to benefit users today--for both releases and water held <br />in storage. The NPCA and others were concerned about how or if power generation <br />commitments would affect the contract Commissioner Corey and Mr. Jorgenson thought that <br />flatwater and river recreational benefits associated with historic management should be <br />maintained, including fisheries developed in Blue Mesa ReselVoir and the Gunnison River. <br /> <br />The contract analysis should address and defme the various "pools" of water available within <br />Blue Mesa, and relate these amounts to deliveries under the proposed contract. Clarification is <br />needed for commitments for Blue Mesa water to satisfy: Colorado's (and other Upper Basin <br />State's) Compact entitlement; existing contractual commitments; subordination of Aspinall <br />storage rights to existing and future Upper Gunnison developments; releases for satisfaction of <br />downstream senior water rights; water available for sale; and water for endangered fish, <br /> <br />. Gunnison and Delta meeting participants, UGRWCD, and CWCB were concerned that <br />contract operation may impact the 1975 Taylor Park ReselVoir Operation and Storage <br />Exchange Agreement (1975 Agreement). <br /> <br />. Many questioned the source and validity of the 300,000 acre-feet calculation as the <br />amount of storage in Blue Mesa that is available fOT beneficial consumptive use (sale) <br />within the State of Colorado, as identified in the preliminary working draft for the <br />contract. Arapahoe County and the City of Colorado Springs suggested that there is no <br />provision restricting the amount to be stored and available for beneficial use to be only <br />300,000 acre-feet. The City of Colorado Springs suggested that this 300,000 acre-feet <br />is available "above" the Aspinall Unit, including for transmountain diversion; Non- <br />Federal Parties to the 1975 Exchange Agreement and Gunnison meeting participants <br />maintained that under the decrees for the Aspinall Unit, any use of water from the <br />Aspinall Unit must be made within the natural basin of the Gunnison River. <br /> <br />. Congressman Campbell, Commissioner Corey, Gunnison meeting participants and the <br />Non-Federal Parties to the 1975 Exchange Agreement suggest that a historic commitment <br />and/or objective of operation has been to subordinate 60,000 acre-feet of Blue Mesa <br />storage to protect the Upper Gunnison Basin from "calls" by downstream senior water <br />right holders, including decrees of the Aspinall Unit itself. Many, including the NPCA, <br />requested more infonnation on whether this 60,000 acre-feet is part of the 300,000 acre- <br />feet, how this subordination is to be administered, and how it will affect contract <br />alternatives. <br /> <br />· CREDA and the Non-Federal Panies to the 1975 Exchange Agreement requested <br />discussion of Aspinall Unit commitments to' satisfy requirements of the Biological <br />Opinions for the Dolores and Dallas Creek Projects. These opinions identify up to <br />148,000 acre-feet of depletions that must be replaced to offset impacts to endangered fish <br />associated with those projects (see Item 6), <br /> <br />12 <br />