Laserfiche WebLink
12/8/2019 State.co.us Executive Branch Mail - Pueblo West - CS-U/Super Ditch Fallowing-Leasing Pilot Project <br />https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=1f3905cd06&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1650782868965932987%7Cmsg-f%3A16507828689659…1/4 <br />Kosloff - DNR, Tracy <tracy.kosloff@state.co.us> <br />Pueblo West - CS-U/Super Ditch Fallowing-Leasing Pilot Project <br />1 message <br />Bob Krassa <bob@krassa.com>Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 9:06 PM <br />To: Megan Gutwein <MG@bhgrlaw.com>, "Tia M. Gerung" <tmg@bhgrlaw.com>, Abigail Ortega <ajortega@csu.org>, Alan <br />Leak <alan.leak@respec.com>, "alanc@white-jankowski.com" <alanc@white-jankowski.com>, Alexander Funk <br /><alexander.funk@state.co.us>, "amalotte@bbawater.com" <amalotte@bbawater.com>, Ayrton Hendrix <aytron@hendrix- <br />wai.com>, Bill Tyner <bill.tyner@state.co.us>, Chris Beightel <chris.beightel@ks.gov>, Craig Lis <clis@martinandwood.com>, <br />"dniemela@bbawater.com" <dniemela@bbawater.com>, "ewilkinson@csu.org" <ewilkinson@csu.org>, Gerry Knapp <br /><gerrylknapp@gmail.com>, Jeffrey DeHerrera <jdeherrera@pwmd-co.us>, Kevin Salter <Kevin.Salter@ks.gov>, Krystle <br />Ervin <KErvin@martinandwood.com>, "lawma@cminet.net" <lawma@cminet.net>, Lori Lest <lori.les@state.co.us>, <br />"Matthew A. Montgomery (matthewmontgomery@hillandrobbins.com)" <matthewmontgomery@hillandrobbins.com>, Rachel <br />Duran <rachel.duran@ks.gov>, Rachel Zancanella <rachel.zancanella@state.co.us>, Randy Hendrix <Randy@hendrix- <br />wai.com>, Richard Mehren <rmehren@mwhw.com>, Scott Lorenz <slorenz@csu.org>, "Stephen H. Leonhardt <br />(sleonhardt@bfwlaw.com)" <sleonhardt@bfwlaw.com>, Tracy Kosloff <tracy.kosloff@state.co.us>, Wendy Hunker <br /><Wendy.Hunker@state.co.us>, William Caile <WHCaile@hollandhart.com> <br />Cc: "Jeffrey DeHerrera (jdeherrera@pwmd-co.us)" <jdeherrera@pwmd-co.us>, "alan.leak@respec.com" <br /><alan.leak@respec.com> <br />Hi Megan – after reviewing the draft conference report, Pueblo West believes the following terms <br />and conditions need to be added or incorporated into any approval of the proposed Pilot Project. <br /> <br />1. No exchange for the Pilot Project may be operated past the Avondale gauge when the flow at <br />that gauge is below 500 cfs or that would reduce the flow at that gauge below 500 cfs, regardless <br />under which decree, or which administrative approval, the exchange is operated. This is an <br />extremely important provision which would not be sufficiently presented if merely incorporated by <br />reference to some other document. <br /> <br />2. It needs to be clear exactly how each exchange is going to be used to support this project. <br />There are two exchanges mentioned in the engineering report: a) 05CW96 which is Colorado <br />Spring’s exchange, and b) 10CW04 which is the Super Ditch exchange case. The 10CW04 case <br />specifically limits the sources of substitute supply for the exchanges to lease water from the water <br />rights in Paragraph 12 of that decree. We believe that the exchanges in 10CW04 are the only <br />exchanges available to initially move leased water up to Pueblo Reservoir. The exchange from <br />Fountain Creek to Pueblo Reservoir in 05CW96 can then only be used to exchange the return <br />flows from leased water flowing down Fountain Creek. If this is not the case, Pueblo West is <br />concerned that Colorado Springs in 05CW96 may be used as a way to get around limitations in the <br />10CW04 decree, specifically including the Colorado Springs priority date of 8/20/2018 in 10CW04. <br />It should also be specified that using the exchange in 05CW96 for this project is subject to all the <br />provisions in that decree, including specific provisions and identification of what “Class” of water is <br />considered in this Pilot Project. <br /> <br />3. Prior to any approval, Super Ditch’s engineers must explain by a supplemental report sent to all <br />parties, whether the results of the Lease Fallowing Tool (LFT) are consistent with the findings in <br />the Catlin Change Case (12CW94), and if not, why the findings of that case are not being used? A <br />lot of time was spent to assure that the terms and conditions in that case and in 10CW4 were <br />sufficient to prevent injury to Pueblo West’s exchanges and to other water rights.