WSP08336

• File Number: 8281.980
• Description: Colorado River Studies and Investigations - Upper Gunnison/Uncompahgre Basin Water Study
• Basin: Gunnison
• Water Division: 4
• Date: 12/6/1989
• Title: Technical Summary - Union Park VS Collegiate Range
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

Collegiate can not increase Metro Denver's safe annual yield without extensive
additional East Slope storage,

Collegia~e's small diversion and replacement reservoirs above Taylor Park
Reservo,ir and Town of Almont are environmentally unacceptable, because of the
sensitive nature of these locations and high cost of mitigation, (Aurora's own
study indicates 34 to 42 million dollars),

Collegiate's low-head, continuous-flow diversion to the East Slope would
substantially reduce the Bureau of Reclamation's current ability to regulate Taylor
Park Reservoir levels and West Slope river flows. In contrast, periodic releases
from Union Park's massive West Slope storage can be managed to optimize
reservoir levels, river flows and drought protection for both slopes,

Collegiate's continuous-flow diversion above Taylor Park Reservoir would
exacerbate Taylor's shoreline fluctuations, which would create a direct
environmental conflict with Natural Energy's senior Rocky Point Pumped Storage
Project. '

Collegiate does not have Union Park's multi-year back-up storage which will give
Metro Denver the unprecedented, proven ability to multiply its safe annual yield by
2 acre feet for every acre foot actually diverted from the Gunnison Basin.

When Qollegiate's necessary East Slope multi-year, carry-over storage is
included; Collegiate's true safe yield cost would be almost triple that of Union Park
and douf::lle that of Two Forks.

Note: The transmountain comparisons in the Colorado Water Resources and Power
Development Authority's Phase I Upper Gunnison Study should be disregarded. These
comparisons were 'politically engineered' with erroneous cost estimates and unequal
evaluations of project yields, system costs, and environmental impacts and benefits.
This improper. treatment drastically skewed the study results to favor the Taylor
Reservoir diverSion alternative preferred by the Gunnison's water district representative
on the AuthoritY's board.

I::>
..~)
~

CO)

~
...

4)

5)

6)

.

.

December 6,1989

Technical Summary
UNION PARK VS COLLEGIATE RANGE

An independent technical evaluation of the Gunnison's Union Park and Collegiate Range
transmountain. water alternatives would quickly show Union Park can substantially
enhance the etwironmental, recreational, and economic values for Colorado's West and
East Slopes. Collegiate is not technically acceptable for either slope for the following
basic reasons:

1)

2)

3)

Dave Miller, President
Natural Energy Resources Co,
Box 567, Palmer Lake, CO 80133
[phone]

(,..