|
|
|
|
HISTORY AND
DESCRIPTION OF THE FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Table of
Contents
|
Early History So they began pushing heavily for a project to bring water from the western slope -- with its abundant snowfall and sparse population -- to the Arkansas River basin, where irrigated agriculture and city water systems depended on a river that often was only a trickle by the time it reached the state line. The project originally envisioned a diversion from the Gunnison River and other tributaries of the Colorado River. As it progressed over the years, the scope of the entire project became limited to the first phase of the original project construction of a reservoir on the Fryingpan River near Aspen, Colorado, transporting it through the Continental Divide via tunnel and moving it into the Arkansas River basin for storage in mountain lakes and a new reservoir near Pueblo, Colorado. While the original Gunnison Project envisioned 357,000 acre-feet of imports each year, the eventual project would be limited to an average of just 69,100 acre-feet. The popular shorthand for
the project became the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. The name
took on even more significance when backers of the project began peddling golden
frying pans
up and down the Arkansas valley to raise money for the lobbying effort that was
soon to come. An estimated $30,000 was spent in 1954 trying to defeat the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, which was authorized by the Senate that year, but failed to gain House approval. Senator Eugene Millikin was given widespread credit for obtaining continual support both in the Senate and from President Eisenhower. Charles Boustead was elected president of the waters users' group in late 1954. At the same time, the groundwork was laid to form the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, which now encompasses a nine-county area in southeastern Colorado. The sale of golden frying pans in the valley were brisk. Burros were used to carry the frying pans to towns up and down the Arkansas Valley. During Water Week in January of 1955 groups were able to buy small frying pans for $5 and large ones for $100 or more. More than $30,000 was raised by the end of the week. The money was used to send backers of the project to Washington D.C. |
| Representative J. Edgar
Chenoweth faithfully led the fight for the project in the House of
Representatives through the 1950's. Year after year the struggle for
approval remained the same -- the project passed the Senate, but failed in the
House. Finally on June 13, 1962, the House passed the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. The Senate approved the project on August 6th. President John F. Kennedy signed the project into law on August 16, 1962. |
|
|
Authorization-- Construction began with Ruedi Dam and Reservoir in 1964, and continued without interruption until September 28, 1990 when the project was declared completed with the dedication of the Fish Hatchery at Pueblo Reservoir. Construction is completed on all the water supply-related features that were expected to be initially developed. There exists a potential to expand the North Side Collection System to Las Chance and Lime Creeks, tributaries of the Fryingpan River. However, plans to pursue this expansion have been deferred. Plans to construct the Arkansas Valley Conduit to serve towns and cities east of Pueblo with treated project water are currently in process. |
| Description of Project
Facilities-- There are two distinct areas of the project. The western slope, located in the Hunter Creek and Fryingpan River watersheds, and the eastern slope in the Arkansas River Valley. These areas are separated by the Continental Divide, which in many places, exceeds an elevation of 14,000 feet. The project consists of diversion, conveyance, and storage facilities designed primarily to divert water from Colorado River tributaries on the western slope for use in the water-short areas in the Arkansas River on the eastern slope. The North and South Side Collection System and Ruedi Dam and Reservoir are located on the western slope in the Fryingpan River basin. Sugar Loaf Dam and Turquoise Lake, Mt. Elbert Conduit, Halfmoon Diversion Dam, Mt. Elbert Forebay Dam and Reservoir, Twin Lakes Dam and Reservoir, and Pueblo Dam and Reservoir are all located on the eastern slope in the Arkansas River basin. |
|
The Western Slope Features--
Ruedi Dam and Reservoir provides storage for replacement and regulation of water for the western slope users. This water is used for irrigation, municipal, industrial, recreation, and fish and wildlife purposes. The project provides water for uses on the west slope in response to the requirements of the Conservancy District Act, which directs that water conservancy districts removing water from the Colorado River basin must be designed and operated so that existing apportions and perspective uses of water on the western slope will not be impaired nor increased in cost to the western slope water users. |
|
| The North and South Side Collection Systems on the western slope collect the high mountain runoff and convey the diverted waters into the inlet portal of the Charles H. Boustead Tunnel. Sixteen diversion structures on the western slope are used to divert water into the project collection system. The system includes eight tunnels with a combined length of 21.5 miles. The five mile-long Boustead Tunnel conveys the water from the North and South Collection Systems under the Continental Divide to Turquoise Lake. |
The Eastern Slope Features--
The Mt. Elbert Conduit, a 10.7 mile, 90 inch diameter pipe, conveys water from Turquoise Lake to Mt. Elbert Forebay. The Halfmoon Diversion Dam diverts available flows to Halfmoon Creek into the Mt. Elbert Conduit. Water delivered to the forebay is used to generate power at the Mt. Elbert Pumped-Storage Powerplant. The Mt. Elbert Pumped-Storage Powerplant is located approximately 13 miles southwest of Leadville, Colorado at the northwest corner of the lower lake of Twin Lakes. The powerplant has two pump-generator units, each with a nameplate capacity of 100 megawatts. After use at the
powerplant project water flows into Twin Lakes. From Twin Lakes
project water is released to Lake Creek and the Arkansas River for delivery to
water
users upstream of Pueblo Dam and Reservoir Project water is released from Pueblo Reservoir to the Arkansas River for irrigation and municipal use, to the Fountain Valley Conduit for municipal use by the members of the Fountain Valley Authority, City of Colorado Springs, City of Fountain, Security Water District, Stratmoor Hills Water District, and Widefield Water District; and to the Bessemer Ditch for irrigation use. Pueblo Reservoir is the terminal storage feature for the project, and nonproject water is conveyed to Pueblo West and Pueblo through the municipal outlet works in Pueblo Dam. |
|
Project Water Rights-- Decrees for the east slope project facilities were entered in District Courts in and for the counties of Chaffee and Pueblo, in the State of Colorado. The Chaffee County District Court decree entered in Civil Action No. 5141 includes Turquoise Lake, Twin Lakes Reservoir, Mt. Elbert Forebay, Mt Elbert Conduit, and Halfmoon Diversion Dam. This decree, dated July 9, 1969, established a date of appropriation of February 10, 1939. However, the decree states, "As to water rights heretofore adjudicated in this district (11), priorities for irrigation granted by this decree shall be enforceable only as of July 14, 1942, and priorities for purposes other than irrigation granted by this decree shall be enforceable only as of December 15, 1942." The Pueblo County District Court decree entered in Civil Action No. B-42135 for Pueblo Reservoir, dated June 24, 1962, established a date of appropriation of February 10, 1939. The east slope water rights allows the project to store native water during periods when the conservation pool at John Martin Reservoir is spilling and the east slope decrees are in priority. The Colorado River Water Conservation District (River District) holds the decree for storage at Ruedi Reservoir. The decree was entered in Civil Action No. 4613 in and for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, and dated May 12, 1958, with a date of appropriation of July 29, 1957. Even though the River District holds the water rights the District pays a portion of the construction costs and annual operation and maintenance costs of Ruedi Reservoir, and has the right to use Ruedi Reservoir water for replacement purposes. The estimated average annual yield of the project facilities and water rights available for use in the Arkansas River basin by entities within the boundaries of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District is 80,400 acre-feet. This estimate includes water diverted from the west slope and any east slope (native) water stored pursuant to the 1939 storage decree. |
|
Fryingpan-Arkansas
Project Operating Principles-- |
|
Southeastern Colorado
Water Conservancy District (SECWCD)-- The District is the legal agency responsible for repayment of the reimbursable costs of the project. In addition to administering this repayment responsibility, the District makes supplemental water from the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project available for use by approximately 280,600 acres of irrigated land under various private and mutual ditch companies, and for use by the many municipal and domestic water suppliers who directly serve the District's approximately 600,000 constituents. The District is governed by a 15 member board of directors representing the nine counties within the District. Each board member is appointed by the state's district court system. Director positions may also be elected if citizens petition the court for such an election. Members serve for four-year terms and are then subject to re-appointment. |
 |
|
Demand for Project
Water-- The Arkansas River is considered an over appropriated system with a continuous call on the river. There is usually a constant demand for supplemental water. |
|
|
Irrigation Demand--Reclamation conducted land classification investigations prior to Fry-Ark Project authorization in 1962. The total irrigable area within the District was estimated to be approximately 280,600 acres. This includes 12,538 acres above Pueblo Reservoir, 12,805 acres on Fountain Creek, and 255,254 acres below Pueblo Reservoir. Many of the irrigable acres located within the District have very senior decreed water rights and generally have not requested supplemental water from the District. Also, a portion of the District's irrigable acres have been taken out of production, or are not eligible to receive a project water allocation, because of sales and changes or use of their decreed water rights. The District's Allocation Policy states "...that is the policy of the District not to replace with Project Water decreed water sold by persons or entities." This results in a reduction of the total irrigable acreage that are eligible to receive project water. However, in all but the wettest years total requests to the District for supplemental water for irrigation purposes exceed the available supply from the Fry-Ark Project, with the exception of 2002. |
|
| Municipal Demand--The municipal demand for project water is associated with the Arkansas Valley cities, towns, and entities lying east and west of Pueblo, Pueblo, and the Fountain Valley Authority. The District's policies require an allocation of "...a minimum of 51 percent of the annual project water supply to municipal and domestic use." This allocation is distributed, as requested, to Arkansas Valley cities, towns and entities lying east of Pueblo (12%), and towns west of Pueblo (4%), Pueblo (10%), and the Fountain Valley Authority participants (25%). Finally, after all other municipal and agricultural have been met, Pueblo West Metro District is given notice that they can make a request. |
"In making these allocations, the board acknowledges that it is unlikely any entity receiving municipal and domestic will require its minimum allocation for a number of years. Demands will gradually increase...if such full demand is not asserted for many years, such will not constitute an abandonment of this allocation and such undemanded water may, during such time be allocated first to municipal and domestic users...may thereafter be offered to any other uses on such basis as the Board of Directors may then determine." As a result, no municipal water user is required to take a minimum amount of project water in a given year.
Pursuant to its contractual arrangements with the District, and in turn through the District contract with the United States for conveyance service from the Fountain Valley Conduit, the Fountain Valley Authority is obligated to make payments based on a schedule that reflects a minimum number of acre-feet of project water expected to be conveyed in a given year. The member entities are not obligated to use the minimum acre-feet in the schedule, but the minimum annual payment must be equivalent to that associated with the scheduled minimum use.
From 1972 through 2000 project water allocations for municipal and domestic use have averaged 25 percent of the total allocation, and agricultural allocations have averaged 75 percent of the total allocation for the same period.
District's Current
Allocation Principles, Water Allocation Policies, and Process-On November 29, 1979, the
members of the Board of Directors of the District unanimously
approved the
"Allocation Principles, Findings
Determinations, and Resolutions." That document set out the principles for allocation of
project water available to the District between the municipal and agricultural
water users and the use of project storage by the municipal water users, as well
as establishing the order of spill in Fry-Ark Project facilities. The District's
repayment contract with the United States also serves to govern the annual allocation of
project
water
as well as setting the rate for project water.
The District also promulgated a " Water Allocation Policy" last amended April 2006. Each year the District's Allocation Committee directs the preparation of specific forms, letters, other documents, and establishes a timetable for the annual allocation process.
In March of each year appropriate letters and forms are mailed to eligible entities offering them the opportunity to apply for an allocation of project water. By May 1st of each year the US Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) notifies the District as to the amount of water available to the District that year. The Allocation Committee then meets to review the applications, and prepare recommendations concerning the applications received as related to the amount of water available. All recommendations of the Allocation Committee must be approved by the District's board of directors. Recommendations from the Allocation Committee are considered at the next meeting of the board of directors of the District, and appropriate allocations are made. Applicants are afforded the opportunity to appear before the board to request consideration to adjustments. The Allocation Committee also may meet at times to discuss possible changes to the Water Allocation Policy, and any changes in the process which is followed.
As directed by the District's policies, project water for use by irrigation ditches is allocated based upon an acre-foot per irrigated acre basis. Therefore, when demand exceeds supply each ditch receives a proportionate share of available project water. This allocation is made only after the municipal requests are met up to 51% of the annual project yield.
While the District allocates project water, Reclamation is responsible for the accounting of the delivery of project water. The District provides Reclamation and the State Division 2 Engineer's Office with the listing of the annual allocation of project water. Deliveries are then coordinated by Reclamation in communication with the Division No. 2 Engineer's Office as requests are made by ditch companies and municipalities.
The price for Fry-Ark Project water is determined by the Bureau of Reclamation as directed by Reclamation policy and the project repayment contract. Rates are subject to adjustment depending upon the Ability to Pay Study and Repayment Analysis, which are conducted by Reclamation every four years. These studies first determine the irrigators ability to pay for project water by assessing the economic condition of the average farm operation within the District. Next, Reclamation, in consultation with the District, projects the repayment status of the project given projected revenues and expenses.
Use and Reuse of
Project Water--
Pursuant to its repayment contract with the United States, the District retains dominion and control over Fryingpan-Arkansas Project water return flows. The District has made return flows from the use of project water available for use by eligible entities within the District boundaries, primarily for augmentation purposes, since the first deliveries of project water occurred. The District, by resolution, created the Southeastern Colorado Water Activity Enterprise to administer the sale of project water return flows. On February 15, 1996 the Enterprise approved a policy. This policy has been amended and the current version is as of
April 15, 2004 (Policy
Concerning the Sale of Return Flows from Fryingpan-Arkansas Project Water).
Winter Water Storage
Program--
During the early planning
stages of the Fry-Ark Project, individuals and entities envisioned what has become known
as the Winter Water Storage Program
(WWSP). Prior to construction of Pueblo Dam,
the various irrigation entities would divert the flow of the Arkansas River when
in priority outside of the normal irrigation season to maintain soil moisture
levels in the fields where crops would be grown during the following
season. Problems associated with winter operation of canal and lateral
systems, labor, and related items were frequently experienced.
As a result, the concept of a WWSP evolved with the objective of storing waters that otherwise would have been diverted to the fields downstream of Pueblo Reservoir, if the reservoirs of those entities whose diversions to storage were located upstream of John Martin Reservoir. These stored waters would then be released during the following irrigation season. In 1974, the District, with the cooperation of various entities in the basin, promoted and operated voluntary WWSP each year from 1975-76 through 1986-87, except 1977-78. With the experience and data gained each year, refinements and adjustments were made to the program with the goal of arriving at an equitable means of apportioning the stored water among the program participants and avoiding injury to nonparticipants.
Following intensive negotiations, an interlocutory decree, approved to form by all the applicants and entered by consent, was approved by the Water Court Judge for Water Division No. 2 on November 10, 1987. The Water Court Judge entered an order making the interlocutory decree final on November 10, 1990.
Financial Obligations
--
The District and the
United States Bureau of Reclamation (hereafter referred to as Reclamation) have a
contractual relationship regarding repayment of the financing of the
construction of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project and its ongoing operations and
maintenance.
Beginning with the completion of the first portion of the project in 1971, annual payments have been provided to Reclamation. With the completion of the last portion of the Fry-Ark Project in 1985, the final repayment contract was signed and we have a schedule for the outgoing payment of the final costs of the Irrigation and Municipal & Industrial portion. The District is responsible for 54.17% of the whole Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. The remaining portion of the cost is allocated and charged to power, fish & wildlife, flood protection and recreation components.
The initial repayment obligation of the District was set at $132,237,478. This was split between the irrigation component and the Municipal & Industrial component.
Revenues to meet these annual payments are provided to the District via an ad valorem mill levy applied against property within the nine counties that the District operates in, and fees charged for the annual sale and storage of water. Reclamation receives approximately 95% of the total property taxes collected by the District, and 100% of the revenues generated from the annual water sales and storage fees. These revenues are first applied against the current years Operations & Maintenance (O&M) costs. Any remaining money is then applied against the outstanding debt obligation. Since the Municipal & Irrigation (M&I) component is charged 3.046% interest, the revenues are then applied against this balance first. The M&I component is scheduled to be paid off in 2012 and the irrigation component is scheduled to be paid off in 2030.
During the year 2001, payments to Reclamation totaled $5,328,947. This total was comprised of property taxes $3,943.061; Winter water storage charges $125,629; Project water allocations $408,805; and other payments $849,451.
The Fountain Valley Authority (FVA) is a separate entity responsible for a pipeline constructed to deliver water to Colorado Springs and its surrounding metro area.
| August 16, 1962 | Project Authorized under Public Law 87-590 |
| August 1964 | Construction began on Ruedi Dam |
| November 2, 1965 | Started excavating Charles H. Boustead Tunnel |
| December 1965 | Construction began on Sugar Loaf Dam |
| April 15, 1968 | Breached old Sugar Loaf Dam |
| May 1968 | Began storing water in Ruedi Reservoir |
| June 15, 1969 | Charles H. Boustead Tunnel "holed through" |
| July 1970 | Construction started on Pueblo Dam - first contract |
| May 16, 1972 | Initial Project diversion (Chapman, South Fork, and Fryingpan) |
| June 7, 1972 | Initial diversion from Sawyer Creek |
| July 1972 | Construction began on Pueblo Dam - second contract |
| January 9, 1974 | Began storing water in Pueblo Reservoir |
| May 6, 1974 | Initial diversion from Lily Pad |
| May 4, 1976 | Initial diversion from Ivanhoe Creek |
| May 1977 | First replacement water released from Ruedi Reservoir |
| June 1977 | First sale of water from Ruedi Reservoir |
| November 22, 1977 | Adopted the recommended bypass flow of 15 ft/s or natural inflow, whichever is less on Lake Creek below Twin Lakes Dam |
| June 1, 1979 | Initial diversion from Middle Cunningham Creek |
| June 4, 1979 | Initial diversion from Mormon Creek |
| June 14, 1979 | Initial diversion from North Cunningham Creek |
| May 8, 1980 | Initial diversion from Hunter, Midway and No Name Creek Diversions |
| June 4, 1980 | Initial diversion from North Fork and South Cunningham |
| December 8, 1980 | Federal Register notification of availability of water from Ruedi Reservoir |
| April 28, 1981 | Initial diversion from Carter |
| May 1, 1981 | Initial diversion form North Fork |
| May 6, 1981 | Initial diversion from Granite Creek |
| June 1, 1981 | Assume operation at Twin Lakes Dam |
| June 23, 1981 | Mt. Elbert Forebay filled |
| September 29, 1981 | Mt. Elbert Powerplant dedicated |
| October 1, 1981 | Mt. Elbert Unit #1 was made commercially available to Western Area Power Authority for their use |
| May 5, 1982 | Initial diversion from Halfmoon Creek |
| July 29, 1982 | Turquoise Lake filled for first time |
| September 14, 1983 | Initial diversion from south outlet works at Pueblo Dam for Pueblo West |
| August 9, 1984 | Mt. Elbert Unit #2 was made commercially available to Western Area Power Authority for their use |
| May 24, 1985 | Began storing water under Arkansas River Decree |
| July 1, 1985 | Initial diversion through Fountain Valley Conduit |
| August 1985 | Ruedi Hydroplant began operations |
| November 27, 1985 | Twin Lakes pipeline began operations |
| May 7, 1986 | Sugar Loaf Hydroplant began operations |
| June 1986 | Imports restricted due to high east slope storage |
| November 10, 1987 | Winter water storage decree approved and signed |
| November 17, 1989 | Completed the removal of dikes and constructed the bypass channel around the old outlet works in the old Twin Lakes dam |
| July 1990 | Initial release from Twin Lakes Reservoir for recreational benefits on the Arkansas River |
| August 14, 1990 | Initial release from Ruedi Reservoir for endangered fish (conservation flows pursuant to the biological opinion) in the Colorado's River's "15-mile reach" for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from water leased by the Colorado Water Conservation Board |
| September 28, 1990 | Dedication of Pueblo Fish Hatchery and the completion of construction of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project ceremony |
| November 1990 | Final winter storage decree signed by court |
| July 21, 1992 | Dedication of Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Water Treatment Plant |
| September 29, 1994 | Transfer of Phase II of the Pueblo Fish Hatchery at Pueblo Reservoir to Colorado Division of Wildlife |
| May 15, 1995 | Final transfer of recreational facilities at Pueblo to the Department of Parks and Outdoor Recreation |
| July 7, 1995 | Began storing water under Arkansas River Decree |
| July 18, 1995 | Began restricting imports due to high east slope storage |
| July 1997 | Reservoir level at Pueblo Reservoir restricted after a routine risk assessment of Pueblo Dam was completed and raised concern about the foundation below the spillway section of the dam |
| May 1999 | Reservoir restriction lifted |
| July 2000 | Risk Analysis Study of Pueblo Dam completed |
| July 11, 2000 | Long-term contract between United States government and the Pueblo Board of Water Works executed |
| September 11, 2001 | As a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, all Fryinpan-Arkansas Project facilities were closed to the public. The facilities remained closed until security measures to safeguard the federal investment were implemented. Reclamation has maintained a heightened level of security at Fry-Ark facilities since that time. |
| July 23, 2002 | Initial release of water through Pueblo Board of Water Works south outlet works joint-use manifold |
Click here to return to SECWCD home page.
or storage in Pueblo Reservoir.
The
distance from the confluence of Lake Creek and the Arkansas River to Pueblo Dam
is approximately 143 river miles.