July 8, 2015
Mr. John Currier
Colorado River Water Conservation District
P.O. Box 1120
Glenwood Springs, CO. 81602

Mr. Gerry Knapp
Aurora Water
Arkansas Valley Range Project
17850 Road JJ
Rocky Ford, CO 81067

Mr. Pat Wells
Water Supply Department
Colorado Springs Utilities
111 S. Cascade Ave.
Colorado Springs, CO 80903

Mr. Bryce Romig
Climax Molybdenum Company
Henderson Operations
P.O. Box 68
Empire, CO 80439

Mr. Todd Fessenden
Eagle Park Reservoir Company
846 Forest Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE:

Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2 Draft

Dear ERMOU Partners,
The Eagle River MOU (ERMOU) technical advisors are pleased to provide the following scope of services for Phase
2 of the ERMOU Project Alternatives Study. This phase will provide feasibility-level evaluations of ERMOU project
alternatives identified for investigation in Phase 1 of the Study (ERMOU Project Alternatives Screening).

BACKGROUND
A copy of the ERMOU is presented in Attachment 1. The primary objectives of the ERMOU are:
A. West Slope Water Users: Develop a Firm Dry Year Yield of 10,000 Acre Feet per Year
Virtually all of the consumptive portion of this supply is required at or downstream of the Eagle River
at Dowds Junction, although some West Slope water is needed upstream of this location.
B. Aurora and Colorado Springs: Develop an Average Yield of 20,000 Acre Feet per Year
It may be preferable to deliver East Slope water supplies to the existing Homestake Reservoir,
however alternate delivery locations to the Arkansas or Platte River watersheds may also be suitable.
C. Climax: Develop Additional Water Storage with a Capacity of 3,000 acre feet
Reservoir storage must be in a location in proximity to the Climax Mine site, in order that existing
water supplies of Climax may be stored in the facility.
ERMOU Partners held a planning workshop on December 8, 2014 where ERMOU Partner goals and objectives
were reviewed and potential ERMOU development alternatives were discussed. During the workshop, technical
advisors to ERMOU Partners were directed to review past investigations associated with ERMOU alternatives, and
to develop a cooperative work plan to update the past investigations as appropriate. ERMOU technical advisors
include Wilson Water Group (WWG), RJH Consultants (RJH), Helton & Williamsen, PC (H&W), Leonard Rice
Engineers (LRE), and W.W. Wheeler and Associates (WWW).

1

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
ERMOU technical advisors participated in a planning workshop on December 23, 2014 and developed a final draft
work plan dated April 27, 2015. Technical advisors for the following entities participated in the workshop (Cities
of Aurora and Colorado Springs, Climax Molybdenum Company, Colorado River Water Conservation District, Eagle
Park Reservoir Company, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority, and
Vail Associates). The final draft ERMOU work plan was subsequently distributed to the ERMOU Partners and was
received with much support.
The ERMOU Partners directed the ERMOU technical advisors to implement an initial screening of all proposed
ERMOU project alternatives (Phase 1 Study) and identify specific ERMOU project elements for feasibility-level
evaluation in a second phase of the Study, including scopes, schedules, and budgets to complete Phase 2. The
ERMOU technical advisors completed Phase 1 activities through compilation of supporting information (ERMOU
Library), facilitation of a screening workshop on May 27, 2015, and documentation of a summary screening report
(Attachment 2). The attached Phase 1 report summarizes screening methods, rationale for continued evaluations
of specific project alternatives, and two levels of recommended activities for Phase 2 of the Study:
Tier 1 – Potential ERMOU Project Alternatives Requiring Feasibility-Level Study
Tier 2 – Potential ERMOU Project Alternatives Requiring Preliminary-Level Review
This scope of services includes an approach, budget, and schedule to complete Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations.

APPROACH
The following four work tasks are proposed for Phase 2 of the Study.

Task 1 – Tier 1 Evaluations
Tier 1 evaluations will be completed for three ERMOU project alternatives that have been identified in Phase 1 of
the Study as requiring additional feasibility-level study (Eagle Park Reservoir, Whitney Creek Reservoir, and Bolts
Lake). These three alternatives are considered key facilities with good potential to contribute to ERMOU water
yield objectives and that require refined information and decision processes for feasibility-level evaluation. Tier 1
evaluations will be completed through combined efforts by WWG, H&W, and WWW (water supply); LRE
(environmental); and RJH (engineering).
WWG, H&W, and WWW will provide engineering services in connection with the hydrological investigations in
the upper Eagle River basin for selected Tier 1 ERMOU Project Alternatives related to water supply, demands, and
project yields for each project and for combinations of projects. A primary objective of the water supply evaluation
is to develop sizing and capacity information for reservoirs, pipelines, and pump stations associated with the
Project Alternatives. Information will be shared and work coordinated between the firms and the ERMOU Partners
including review of water supply models and review of operating assumptions, model data, and model operation.
It is anticipated that the water supply model(s) will be available for use by all ERMOU Partners for future water
supply planning efforts; however, it is also anticipated that the model(s) will be proprietary to ERMOU partners
and will not be available or distributed for general public use.
LRE will conduct investigations for selected Tier 1 ERMOU Project Alternatives to determine the environmental
permitting and approval requirements of federal, state and local agencies for each alternative. Federal, state, and
environmental permitting and approval requirements will be similar for each of the ERMOU Project Alternatives,
but the environmental issues of concern that must be addressed in the approval processes could differ
substantially between different project locations. LRE will identify environmental issues that could potentially
make the permitting processes more difficult and identify potential mitigation requirements and opportunities
for each Project Alternative. LRE will coordinate with RJH to assure that identification of approval requirements is

2

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
based upon reasonably complete information about the configuration of storage and collection facilities, such as
diversion, conveyance, pumping, and storage facilities. LRE will assist RJH with identifying possible modifications
to the configuration of storage and collection facilities that could potentially mitigate environmental concerns.
RJH will provide engineering investigations for the selected Tier 1 ERMOU Project Alternatives related to storage
and collection options including identify diversion and conveyance needs and capacities, identify and/or update
cost estimates for storage facilities including pumps and pipelines, and identify geotechnical feasibility issues, and
develop construction cost estimates.
1.1

Eagle Park Reservoir

1.1.1 Water Supply
H&W will complete the following activities to support Eagle Park Reservoir evaluations.
1. Update and extend stream flow record – Assemble existing daily compiled stream flow, diversion, and storage
records for the upper Eagle River basin and check the records for accuracy and completeness. This will include
USGS stream flow records, transmountain diversion records, Climax records, and Eagle Park and Homestake
Reservoirs operation records. Quantify gravity inflows to Eagle Park Reservoir for the study period.
2. Develop West Slope Water Demands – Evaluate west slope water demands seasonally, including components
of augmentation, water supply, water quality, and stream enhancement. Water demands for water quality
and stream enhancement uses will be developed cooperatively with LRE. Previous studies categorized the
demand for average, dry, and wet year conditions with deliveries during the winter months.
3. Develop reservoir yield – Review procedures and logic used by WWG in the reservoir operation model to
estimate yields.
4. Prepare Report – Prepare a technical memorandum briefly summarizing background and key issues, and
documenting development of daily gravity inflow available at Eagle Park Reservoir.
WWW will complete the following activities to support Eagle Park Reservoir evaluations.
1. Enlargement Constraints – Provide engineering data concerning the maximum water surface elevation and
other design constraints for enlargement of Eagle Park Reservoir. Identify potential conflicts and mitigation
options related to impacts to the existing Robinson Reservoir and other Climax facilities if Eagle Park Reservoir
is enlarged.
2. Hydrology – Provide existing data related to estimated inflows to Eagle Park Reservoir within its drainage
basin.
3. Operations – Provide Climax’s potential water demands, conceptual input and comment to other consultants
related to the operation study and yield analysis of Eagle Park Reservoir.
WWG will complete the following activities to support Eagle Park Reservoir evaluations.
1. Review available reports related to reservoir expansion including, but not limited to, previous work completed
by W. W. Wheeler and Associates, Helton and Williamsen, and Black and Veatch.
2. Evaluate available water supply for various collection system alternatives including (1) existing gravity water
supplies, (2) gravity connector ditch to the Columbine Ditch, (3) a new or enlarged pumping station from

3

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
appropriate sites on the East Fork of the Eagle River downstream of the reservoir, and (4) a new pump station
at downstream locations in the vicinity of Camp Hale.
3. Assess reservoir operation and yield for West Slope (firm yield) and East Slope (average yield) purposes.
4. Assess two reservoir alternatives (enlargements to approximately 6,000 acre-feet 9,000 acre-feet).
5. Evaluate potential yield impacts to downstream and/or upstream facilities/components.
6. Prepare a technical memorandum briefly summarizing background and key issues, discussion on assessment
methodology (if applicable) and other applicable studies, conclusions on preliminary feasibility as an ERMOU
project element, and recommendations on further investigations and to include project elements within a
portfolio of combined project elements.
Water supply opportunities associated with Eagle Park Reservoir will be evaluated with a previously developed
basin-wide spreadsheet model. This model assesses water supply and reservoir operation on a daily basis for the
historical period of 1947 through 2003. The model will be updated to evaluate the time period through 2014, and
will be reconfigured as needed to evaluate an East Fork Eagle River pump station as an alternate source of water
supply for Eagle Park Reservoir. WWG anticipates the following primary work tasks.
7. Review daily gravity inflow estimates to Eagle Park Reservoir based on actual measured historical operation
of Eagle Park Reservoir. Reservoir inflow will be correlated with the measured discharge of the East Fork of
the Eagle River and the Eagle River near Red Cliff, in order to extend the period of record. Daily gravity inflow
will be calculated for the 1947 through 2013 period.
8. Daily divertible flow estimates will be developed for the Columbine Ditch. The estimates will be based upon
historical diversions, and upon estimates of available flow to the Columbine Ditch during periods that the
ditch did not historically divert water.
9. Update model to allow consideration of gravity inflow to Eagle Park Reservoir from Columbine Ditch.
10. Review estimates of native stream flow of the East Fork of the Eagle River considering USGS stream flow
records, historical Columbine Ditch diversions, and historical diversion by Eagle Park Reservoir.
11. Update model to simulate and operate Columbine Ditch.
12. Update model to include pump station alternatives in the vicinity of Camp Hale
1.1.2 Environment
LRE will complete the following activities to support Eagle Park Reservoir evaluations.
1. Compile and review previous studies and information – LRE is generally familiar with the location of the Project
Alternative. Documents identified in the ERMOU Bibliography of Reports will be utilized and referenced to
document land management/ownership, project components and configuration, and the environmental
setting. In addition, LRE will review other pertinent and relevant documents, such as the White River National
Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, to identify current land management guidelines and objectives.
This information will be used to develop general descriptions of the existing environment and land use
conditions in the areas that will be impacted by development of the Project Alternative.

4

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
2. Identify and evaluate permitting requirements – LRE will identify the land use and environmental permitting
requirements associated with the Project Alternative based upon their knowledge of federal, state and local
permitting requirements associated with similar projects that have been completed in the Upper Colorado
River Basin. This task will include preparation of brief descriptions of each of the permitting requirements and
the investigations and documentation (e.g., an Environmental Impact Statement) needed to satisfy the
permitting requirements. This task will also include development of preliminary timelines for the permitting
processes associated with the Project Alternative including completion of field studies, NEPA documentation,
and the agency and public review processes.
3. Assess permitting issues – Environmental issues and concerns associated with the Project Alternative will be
identified and evaluated to assess the potential permitting risks. In addition, this task will include an evaluation
of the mitigation requirements (e.g., estimated acres of wetlands mitigation) for the Project Alternative. It is
important to note that the purpose and need for the Project Alternative will most likely include an
environmental component, such as instream flow enhancement, that will be important to consider in the
context of mitigation.
4. Prepare report – LRE will document the results of the investigations completed in tasks 1, 2, and 3 above in a
technical memorandum summarizing existing environmental conditions, permitting requirements, mitigation
requirements, and potential permitting risk factors.
5. Consult and coordinate with the ERMOU study team – LRE will work closely with other members of the study
team to assure the consistency of assumptions and approach to the investigations described in this SOW. This
task includes meetings and other communications with the project team to coordinate our efforts and review
of draft documents prepared by other consultants. In addition, this task includes consultation, review, and
information sharing with H&W and WWG for the development of the hydrology needed for the Project
Alternative.
1.1.3 Engineering
Background – Eagle Park Reservoir is located just north of the Continental Divide between the East Fork Eagle
River and Robinson Lake. The existing dam is approximately 135-feet-high and has a storage capacity of about
3,300 acre-feet. Eagle Park Reservoir is currently filled from surface water interceptor ditches along various
locations of the Climax mine site. We understand that these interceptor ditches would not provide a sufficient
supply to fill an expanded reservoir.
If this site is used in the future by the ERMOU partners, Eagle Park Reservoir would be enlarged to provide
additional water storage (potentially up to about 8,000 to 9,000 acre-feet) and would be filled by diversions from
the Eagle River near Camp Hale (i.e. Resolution Creek) or the East Fork Eagle River near Cataract Creek. Diversions
from East Fork Eagle River could also occur through an existing pump station that may need to be modified for
increased flows. Water from Eagle Park Reservoir could be conveyed to Freemont Pass by a pipeline and pump
stations for eastern slope usage.
Black and Veatch developed the Camp Hale to Eagle Park Reservoir Water Delivery System Report (2009). This
report presents a conceptual design and evaluation of a enlarging the reservoir to 6,500 acre-feet and a pipeline
and pump system to convey flows from Camp Hale to Eagle Park Reservoir for a flow rate of either 40 cfs and 150
cfs. The level of effort for the report is generally similar to about a 30-percent design for the pipeline and pump
stations and includes electrical and geotechnical evaluations. RJH will identify any possible technical issues with
pump station and pipeline design concepts and update the cost opinion to 2015 dollars based on construction
cost index data.

5

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
Evaluations for the dam enlargement are described minimally in the Black and Veatch report and the report does
not include a description of concepts or sizes for the embankment modifications, spillway or outlet works. It
would be difficult for RJH to confirm the suitability of concepts and costs for the dam enlargement presented in
this report without performing independent engineering analyses. RJH will utilize information from this report
where possible to assist with our evaluations. RJH has included evaluations for one dam enlargement scenario
that maximizes the enlargement without impacting existing facilities at Robinson Lake in this scope of work.
Engineering evaluations and cost opinions for diversion facilities from the East Fork Eagle River near Cataract Creek
and from the East Fork Eagle River through the existing pump station have not been performed and are included
in this scope of work.
Engineering evaluations and cost opinions for conveyance facilities from the Eagle Park Reservoir for East Slope
supply have not been performed and are included in this scope of work.
Approach – RJH will complete the following activities.
1. Collect and review available data including available county and USGS topographic mapping data, aerial
photographs, existing engineering reports and evaluations, GIS information, regional geologic maps, and any
other available project documentation.
2. Review existing engineering reports and identify technical issues that could impact the cost opinions and may
need to be addressed in subsequent phases of design.
3. Perform a site reconnaissance to observe the existing dam. Perform a geologic site visit to a) confirm
published mapping is appropriate, b) evaluate surficial and bedrock geology and identify possible geologic
hazards that could present a possible “fatal flaw” with enlarging the dam, and c) identify potential borrow
areas to obtain materials for use in enlargement of the dam.
4. Develop elevation-capacity information and identify the maximum water surface elevation based on avoiding
impacts to existing facilities at Robinson Lake.
5. Develop embankment geometries and concepts based on engineering judgment and experience. Develop an
embankment layout and footprint to identify potential conflicts.
6. Identify required modifications to the existing seepage collection system.
7. Delineate the drainage basin and perform simplified hydrologic analyses to develop an estimate of the inflow
design flood (IDF) hydrograph for spillway sizing.
8. Perform simplified reservoir routing analyses and hydraulic analyses to support selection of a spillway type
and configuration, requirements for freeboard, and feasibility-level design of the spillway.
9. Perform simplified hydraulic analyses to select the size and configuration of the outlet works system to meet
operational, size, and SEO release requirements.
10. Evaluate the feasibility of increasing diversions from the existing 6 cfs pump station at East Fork Eagle River
and identify required modifications to the existing pump station and pipeline. Develop a schematic hydraulic
profile of the conveyance.

6

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
11. Perform simplified hydraulic analyses to select the location and required sizes for the diversion structure,
pump stations, and pipeline to convey flows from the East Fork Eagle River near Cataract Creek. Based on the
selected facilities, develop a schematic hydraulic profile for the diversion pipeline. Facilities will be selected
to provide a design similar to the concept presented in the 2009 Black and Veatch report to provide a
consistent cost comparison. Significant components from the Black and Veatch report will be utilized where
possible and may include pipeline alignment, pump station layout, bid schedule items, etc.
12. Identify a feasibility-level alignment for the diversion pipeline from the Eagle Park Reservoir to Freemont Pass.
13. Perform hydraulic analyses to select the location and required sizes for the diversion structure, pump stations,
and pipeline to convey flows from Eagle Park Reservoir to Freemont Pass. Based on the selected facilities,
develop a schematic hydraulic profile for the diversion pipeline.
14. Develop feasibility-level layouts of the components described above. Prepare conceptual-level plans and
sections to illustrate Project components in an 11-inch by 17-inch format. Figures will include a plan and
typical section of the dam and plans and profiles of conveyance facilities.
15. Estimate quantities of primary materials required to construct the Project components based on the
feasibility-level layouts.
16. Develop unit price and lump sum costs for key work items
17. Update cost opinions to 2015 dollars for diversion facilities (i.e. pump stations and pipelines) from the Eagle
River near Camp Hale as presented in the Camp Hale to Eagle Park Reservoir Water Delivery System Report by
Black and Veatch (2009) based on construction cost index data.
18. Develop a feasibility-level Opinion of Probable Construction Cost.
19. Prepare and submit a draft Technical Memorandum for the site that presents a summary of the data collected,
design concepts, concept drawings, and cost opinions from the feasibility-level evaluations.
20. Prepare and submit a final Technical Memorandum for the site based on comments provided by Wilson Water
and the other ERMOU technical advisory members.
1.2 Whitney Creek Reservoir
1.2.1 Water Supply
H&W water supply evaluations identified for Eagle Park Reservoir will support Whitney Creek Reservoir
evaluations.
WWG will complete the following activities to support Whitney Creek Reservoir evaluations.
1. Assess reservoir operation and yield for West Slope (firm yield) and East Slope (average yield) purposes.
2. Assess alternate reservoir capacities as identified in engineering evaluations associated with the study.
3. Evaluate potential yield impacts to downstream and/or upstream facilities/components, and provide
qualitative cost impacts to downstream and upstream components to mitigate impacted yield.

7

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
4. Prepare a technical memorandum briefly summarizing background and key issues, discussion on assessment
methodology (if applicable) and other applicable studies, conclusions on preliminary feasibility as an ERMOU
project element, and recommendations on further investigations and to include project elements within a
portfolio of combined project elements.
Water availability associated with a Whitney Creek Reservoir alternative will also be evaluated with the previously
developed basin-wide spreadsheet model. Whitney Creek will divert water from the Eagle River at Camp Hale,
and from Homestake Creek. Water diverted or stored in the reservoir will either be pumped to Homestake
Reservoir, or released to Homestake Creek for West Slope uses. WWG anticipates the following primary work
tasks.
5. Develop native flow estimates for Homestake Creek through 2014. The native flow estimates will be calculated
based upon the gaged flow of Homestake Creek, daily changes in storage of Homestake Reservoir, and daily
deliveries through the Homestake Tunnel.
6. The model will be updated to evaluate the time period through 2014, and will be reconfigured as needed to
consider the influence of the operation of Eagle Park Reservoir, and potential changes in the historical
operation of the Columbine Ditch.
1.2.2 Environment
LRE will complete the same level of environmental evaluations (including the same level of reporting and team
coordination) identified for Eagle Park Reservoir to support Whitney Creek Reservoir evaluations. This task
includes a site visit to the proposed location of the Whitney Creek Reservoir.
1.2.3 Engineering
Background – The Whitney Creek Reservoir site is located along Homestake Creek about 5 miles downstream of
Homestake Reservoir. If this site is used in the future by the ERMOU partners, the project would involve
constructing a new dam and ancillary facilities. The reservoir would primarily be filled by diversions from the Eagle
River near Camp Hale. Flows would be conveyed from the Eagle River to the reservoir through a gravity pipeline
or tunnel. A pump station and pipeline will also be installed to convey flows from Whitney Creek Reservoir to
Homestake Reservoir for subsequent diversion over the Continental Divide to conveyance systems operated by
individual ERMOU partners.
In 2014, RJH and Wilson Water performed a screening evaluation of potential Whitney Creek reservoir sites for
reservoirs between 3,600 to 10,400 ac-ft. Based on this screening level evaluation, two sites were identified as
feasible and geophysical surveys were performed to evaluate subsurface conditions. Based on this data, a
preferred site could not be identified. The screening-level report by RJH and Wilson did not include the
development of concepts and configurations for the embankment, spillway, and outlet works and did not include
cost opinions. These evaluations are included in the scope of work presented herein. RJH will perform evaluations
for two reservoir alternatives: one that maximizes reservoir storage without inundating the Wilderness Area and
one that maximizes reservoir storage without requiring construction in the Wilderness Area.
Black and Veatch developed the Draft Eagle River Drainage Basin Report (2009). This report presents a screeninglevel evaluation and cost opinions for hydraulic facilities to convey flows from the Eagle River near Camp Hale to
Whitney Creek Reservoir and from Whitney Creek Reservoir to Homestake Reservoir. Evaluations are described
minimally in the Black and Veatch report and the report does not provide a description of the pipeline and pump
station concepts other than pipe size, and the cost estimate does not include a breakdown of primary quantities
or unit costs. It would be difficult for RJH to confirm the suitability of concepts and costs presented in this report

8

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
without performing independent engineering analyses. However, we understand that the ERMOU partners would
like RJH to utilize information from this report and update costs to 2015 dollars. RJH will perform high-level checks
to confirm the reasonableness of basic components (i.e. pipe size, total pumping head, etc.) and update the overall
cost to 2015 dollars based on construction cost index data.
Approach – RJH will complete the following activities.
1. Collect and review available data including available county and USGS topographic mapping data, aerial
photographs, existing engineering reports and evaluations, GIS information, regional geologic maps, and any
other available project documentation.
2. Review existing engineering reports and identify technical issues that could impact the cost opinions and may
need to be addressed in subsequent phases of design.
3. Update the previous elevation-capacity information and select the required dam height and normal pool
elevation for each alternative.
4. Develop a graphical relationship between reservoir storage and Wilderness Area inundated area.
5. Develop embankment geometries and concepts based on engineering judgment and experience for each
alternative. Develop an embankment layout and footprint to identify potential conflicts. Identify a reasonable
concept for foundation treatments.
6. Perform simplified reservoir routing analyses and hydraulic analyses to support selection of a spillway type
and configuration, requirements for freeboard, and feasibility-level design of the spillway for each alternative.
7. Perform simplified hydraulic analyses to select the size and configuration of the outlet works system to meet
operational, size, and SEO release requirements for each alternative.
8. Develop feasibility-level layouts of the components described above. Prepare conceptual-level plans and
sections to illustrate Project components in an 11-inch by 17-inch format. Figures will include a plan and
typical section of the dam and plans and profiles of conveyance facilities.
9. Estimate quantities of primary materials required to construct the Project components based on the
feasibility-level layouts.
10. Identify a feasibility-level alignment for the tunnel from the Eagle River to the reservoir.
11. Develop unit price and lump sum costs for key work items and cost opinions for the two dam alternatives.
12. Perform a high-level engineering review to confirm sizes and identify possible technical issues for the pipeline
and pump station as presented in the Black and Veatch Report.
13. Update cost opinions to 2015 dollars for diversion facilities (i.e. pump stations and pipelines) from the from
the Eagle River near Camp Hale to Whitney Creek Reservoir and from Whitney Creek Reservoir to Homestake
Reservoir as presented in the Draft Eagle River Drainage Basin Report by Black and Veatch (2009) based on
construction cost index data.
14. Develop a feasibility-level Opinion of Probable Construction Cost.

9

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
15. Develop a simplified cost opinion to convey flows from the Eagle River at Camp Hale to Whitney Creek
Reservoir through a tunnel. The cost opinion will be based on our engineering experience and generalized
tunneling cost curves.
16. Prepare and submit a draft Technical Memorandum for the site that presents a summary of the data collected,
design concepts, concept drawings, and cost opinions from the feasibility-level evaluations.
17. Prepare and submit a final Technical Memorandum for the site based on comments provided by Wilson Water
and the other ERMOU technical advisory members.
1.3 Bolts Lake
1.3.1 Water Supply
H&W water supply evaluations identified for Eagle Park Reservoir will support Bolts Lake Reservoir evaluations.
WWG will complete the following activities to support Bolts Lake evaluations.
1. Assess Eagle River diversion options.
2. Assess reservoir operation and yield for West Slope (firm yield) purposes.
3. Prepare a technical memorandum briefly summarizing background and key issues, discussion on assessment
methodology (if applicable) and other applicable studies, conclusions on preliminary feasibility as an ERMOU
project element, and recommendations on further investigations and to include project elements within a
portfolio of combined project elements.
A simple spreadsheet model will be developed to evaluate the operation of Bolts Lake enlargement. Because of
the relatively small yield of Bolts Lake, it is not anticipated that this model will be integrated into the basin-wide
operational model described above.
1.3.2 Environment
LRE will complete the same level of environmental evaluations (including the same level of reporting and team
coordination) identified for Eagle Park Reservoir to support Bolts Lake Reservoir evaluations.
1.3.3 Engineering
Background – Bolts Lake is an existing 10 to 15 foot high dam located about 3 miles southeast of Minturn, CO.
The dam was originally constructed in the 1880’s and we understand that the reservoir was in use throughout
subsequent periods of mining and reclamation. In the 1990’s, the SEO required lowering of the reservoir because
of dam safety concerns. This was accomplished by constructing a trench spillway in native ground adjacent to the
dam. We understand that Bolts Lake was previously filled by a diversion from Cross Creek but this diversion was
abandoned about 5 years ago.
If this site is used in the future by the ERMOU partners, Bolts Lake would be enlarged to provide additional water
storage and would be filled by a diversion from the Eagle River. This would be accomplished by constructing a
diversion structure on the Eagle River, pump station, and diversion pipeline.

10

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
Applegate Group developed the Diversion Structure Engineering Review – Battle Mountain Project (2010) that
presented a conceptual-level evaluation and cost opinion for diversion facilities from the Eagle River to Bolts Lake.
The Eagle River diversion facilities were evaluated for a peak flow of 50 cfs. Evaluations are described minimally
in the report. It would be difficult for RJH to confirm the suitability of concepts and costs presented in this report
without performing independent engineering analyses. However, we understand that the ERMOU partners would
like RJH to utilize information from this report and update costs to 2015 dollars. RJH will perform high-level checks
to confirm the reasonableness of basic components (i.e. pipe size, total pumping head, pipe length, etc.) and
update the overall cost to 2015 dollars based on construction cost index data.
8140 Partners LLC prepared 30-percent level design drawings (2012) for the reservoir lining system. The reservoir
lining drawings do not include other necessary components such as an outlet works, upstream slope protection,
filters, etc. and a cost opinion was not prepared for this design. In addition, RJH has identified some initial
technical concerns with the design concept that should be more thoroughly investigated. However, as requested,
RJH will assume that the lining concept can be utilized without additional engineering evaluations. RJH will
prepare a cost estimate for the liner based on the 30-percent level design by 8140 Partners.
Costs and concepts for the outlet works, spillway, slope protection and other ancillary facilities are presented in
the Bolt Lake Engineering Review Report (2010) by Applegate Group. Evaluations are described minimally in the
report. It would be difficult for RJH to confirm the suitability of concepts and costs presented in this report without
performing independent engineering analyses. However, we understand that the ERMOU partners would like RJH
to utilize information from this report and update costs to 2015 dollars. RJH will perform high-level checks to
confirm the reasonableness of basic components and update the overall cost to 2015 dollars based on
construction cost index data.
Approach – RJH will complete the following activities.
1. Review existing engineering reports and identify technical issues that could impact the cost opinions and may
need to be addressed in subsequent phases of design.
2. Perform a high-level engineering review to confirm sizes and identify possible technical issues for the diversion
facilities presented in the Applegate Group report.
3. Perform a high-level engineering review to confirm sizes and identify possible technical issues for the dam
and appurtenant facilities presented in the Applegate Group report.
4. Estimate quantities of primary materials required to construct the liner based on the 30-percent design by
8140 Partners.
5. Develop unit price and lump sum costs for key work items for the liner.
6. Update cost opinions to 2015 dollars for diversion facilities (i.e. pump stations and pipelines) as presented in
the Diversion Structure Engineering Review – Battle Mountain Project (2010) by Applegate Group.
7. Update cost opinions to 2015 dollars for dam facilities (i.e. embankment, outlet works, slope protection, etc.)
not including the liner, as presented in the Bolt Lake Engineering Review Report (2010) by Applegate Group.
8. Develop a feasibility-level Opinion of Probable Construction Cost.
9. Prepare and submit a draft Technical Memorandum for the site that presents a summary of the data collected,
engineering reviews, and cost opinions from the feasibility-level evaluations.

11

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2

10. Prepare and submit a final Technical Memorandum for the site based on comments provided by Wilson Water
and the other ERMOU technical advisory members.

Task 2 – Tier 2 Evaluations
Tier 2 evaluations will be completed for four ERMOU project alternatives that have been identified in Phase 1 of
the Study as requiring additional preliminary-level review (Wolcott Reservoir, Piney River Reservoir, EagleArkansas Ditch, and Iron Mountain Reservoir). These four alternatives require compilation of more preliminary
information to assess their potential to contribute to ERMOU water yield objectives. Tier 2 evaluations will be
completed through combined efforts by WWG and H&W (water supply); LRE (environmental); and RJH
(engineering).
2.1 Wolcott Reservoir
2.1.1 Water Supply
H&W water supply evaluations identified for Eagle Park Reservoir will support Wolcott Reservoir evaluations.
WWG will complete the following activities to support Wolcott Reservoir evaluations.
1. Review, evaluate and update options to fill reservoir by gravity from Eagle River Pipeline.
2. Review, evaluate, and update delivery options from the reservoir to the Eagle River at Dowds Junction.
3. Assess reservoir operation and yield for West Slope (firm yield) purposes.
4. Prepare a technical memorandum briefly summarizing background and key issues, discussion on assessment
methodology (if applicable) and other applicable studies, conclusions on preliminary feasibility as an ERMOU
project element, and recommendations on further investigations and to include project elements within a
portfolio of combined project elements.
Water availability and operation of a Wolcott Reservoir will also be evaluated with the previously developed
spreadsheet model. Wolcott Reservoir will divert water from the Eagle River either via a pump station immediately
below the reservoir, or via a gravity pipeline that extends up valley to a site near Dowds Junction. Water diverted
and stored in the reservoir will be released to the Eagle River for West Slope uses. The following primary work
tasks are anticipated.
5. Develop native flow estimates for the Eagle River below Alkali Creek and for the Eagle River at Dowds Junction
for the period from 1947 through 2014.
6. The model will be updated to evaluate the time period through 2014, and will be reconfigured as needed to
consider the influence of the operation of Eagle Park Reservoir, Whitney Creek Reservoir, and potential
changes in the historical operation of the Columbine Ditch. The model will also be updated to evaluate the
effect of reservoir releases delivered to Dowds Junction.
2.1.2 Environmental
LRE will complete the same level of environmental evaluations (including the same level of reporting and team
coordination) identified for Eagle Park Reservoir to support Wolcott Reservoir evaluations.

12

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2

2.1.3 Engineering
Background – The Wolcott Reservoir site is located just north of Interstate-70 near Wolcott, Colorado. Several
potential reservoir sites have been previously evaluated by others along both Alkali Creek and Ute Creek with sizes
ranging from 50,000 to 350,000 ac-ft. Denver Water is the primary land owner for site along Alkali Creek and a
potential partnership with Denver Water to construct Wolcott Reservoir along Alkali Creek may be possible or
required. Relocation of Highway 131 may be required depending upon the size and configuration of the reservoir.
The Colorado River Water Conservation District (CRWCD) is the primary land owner for site along Ute Creek. The
location, size, and configuration of the reservoir may be limited in some cases by the existing landfill located in
the upper portion of the Ute Creek drainage basin.
The reservoir would be primarily filled by diversions from the Eagle River. This could be accomplished by a)
constructing a new pump station along the Eagle River near Wolcott or b) by constructing a pump station at Dowds
Junction, which is located near the confluence of the Eagle River and Gore Creek about 20 miles southeast of
Wolcott, with a bi-directional flow pipeline. The bi-directional flow pipeline would also allow gravity releases from
Wolcott Reservoir to Dowds Junction.
Western Engineers developed the Wolcott and Red Cliff Projects Eagle Valley Pipeline Report (1988) that
presented a conceptual-level evaluation and cost opinion for the pipeline and pump station from the proposed
Wolcott Reservoir to Dowds Junction. The level of effort for the pipeline is similar to a 30-percent design. RJH
will perform a high-level review to identify any technical issues with pump station and pipeline design concepts,
and update the cost opinion to 2015 dollars.
Grand River Consulting Corporation developed the Wolcott Reservoir Feasibility Assessment (2004) that
presented a screening-level evaluation five reservoir configurations at two sites on Alkali Creek with storage
capacities ranging from 50,000 acre-feet to 150,000 acre-feet and hydraulic facilities to convey fill the reservoir
from the Eagle River. The report does not include a description of concepts or sizes for the embankment
geometry, spillway or outlet works. It would be difficult for RJH to confirm the suitability of concepts and costs
presented in this report without performing independent engineering analyses. However, we understand that the
ERMOU partners would like RJH to utilize information from this report and update costs to 2015 dollars. RJH will
perform high-level checks to confirm the reasonableness of basic components and update the overall cost to 2015
dollars based on construction cost index data.
Approach – RJH will complete the following activities:
1. Collect and review available project documentation including available county and USGS topographic mapping
data, aerial photographs, existing engineering reports and evaluations, GIS information, regional geologic
maps, and any other available project documentation.
2. Identify a feasibility-level alignment for the diversion pipeline from the Eagle River near Wolcott to Wolcott
Reservoir.
3. Perform simplified hydraulic analyses to select the location and required sizes for the diversion structure,
pump stations, and pipeline to convey flows from the Eagle River near Wolcott to Wolcott Reservoir.
4. Develop a schematic plan figure showing the general location of facilities.
5. Estimate quantities of primary materials required to construct the Project components described above.

13

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2

6. Develop unit price and lump sum costs for key work items.
7. Perform a high-level engineering review to confirm sizes and identify possible technical issues for the diversion
facilities from Down Junction presented in the Western Engineers Report.
8. Perform a high-level engineering review to confirm sizes and identify possible technical issues for the dam
facilities as presented in the Grand River Consulting report.
9. Update cost opinions to 2015 dollars for diversion facilities to/from Down Junction as presented in the Wolcott
and Red Cliff Projects Eagle Valley Pipeline Report (1988) by Western Engineers using construction cost index
data.
10. Update cost opinions to 2015 dollars for dam facilities as presented in the Wolcott Reservoir Feasibility
Assessment (2004) by Grand River Consulting using construction cost index data.
11. Develop a feasibility-level Opinion of Probable Construction Cost.
12. Prepare and submit a draft Technical Memorandum for the site that presents a summary of the data collected,
design concepts, engineering reviews, and cost opinions from the feasibility-level evaluations.
13. Prepare and submit a final Technical Memorandum for the site based on comments provided by WWG and
the other ERMOU partners.
2.2 Piney River Reservoir
One of the identified Tier 2 projects is a reservoir on the Piney River near Piney Lake. It was identified by Denver
Water as part of their Eagle-Piney Project as a regulating reservoir for water pumped from Eagle-Colorado
Reservoir (aka Wolcott Reservoir). It also collected Piney River stream flows and water diverted from tributaries
of the Piney River. The Piney River is a tributary of the Colorado River.
1. LRE will conduct a preliminary review of readily available information on environmental issues associated with
Piney River Reservoir site proposed by Denver Water as part of the Eagle-Piney Project and prepare a technical
memorandum identifying potential permitting requirements and environmental issues that could affect
permitting feasibility.
2. H&W will review existing reports and stream flow records for the Piney River and its tributaries; identify
project components (pumps, pipelines, reservoir capacities) needed to make it usable for the ERMOU
participants; and prepare a technical memorandum presenting conclusions and recommendations concerning
preliminary feasibility as an ERMOU project.
2.3 Eagle-Arkansas Ditch
WWG will review existing information associated with Eagle Arkansas Ditch and prepare a technical memorandum
presenting conclusions and recommendations concerning preliminary feasibility as an ERMOU project.
2.4 Iron Mountain Reservoir
WWG will review existing information associated with Iron Mountain Reservoir and prepare a technical
memorandum presenting conclusions and recommendations concerning preliminary feasibility as an ERMOU
project.

14

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2

Task 3 – Reporting
3.1 Workshop – A one-day workshop will be held with the ERMOU Partners and the ERMOU technical advisors
to review results of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations. The workshop will be used to compare attributes of each
identified project alternative, to identify any new or modified alternatives for consideration, and to consider
combining alternatives into portfolios for future planning purposes. Results of the workshop will be documented
in a brief memorandum for inclusion to the draft report described below.
3.2 Draft Report – WWG will prepare a draft technical report summarizing: 1) results of the workshop described
above; 2) evaluation procedures and results associated with water supply, environmental, and engineering
considerations for ERMOU project alternatives; 3) and feasibility-level cost estimates for project alternatives
deemed feasible. The draft report will be presented in a manner that facilitates comparison of ERMOU project
alternatives to a level of detail that is consistent with information available and used for Phase 2 activities. The
draft report will identify any deficiencies in available information and recommended investigations that would be
necessary to address such deficiencies.
3.3 Peer Review – WWG will provide the draft technical report to the ERMOU Partners for review and comment.
For the purposes of multi-disciplinary peer review, the ERMOU technical advisors will review and comment on
select sections of the draft report for which they were not primary authors. WWG will compile the comments.
3.4 Final Report – WWG will finalize the draft technical report in response to peer review comments. The final
technical report will include a conceptual phased plan for any further required investigations as well as permitting
and construction of feasible project alternatives to develop the contemplated ERMOU yield.

Task 4 – Team Coordination and Project Management
Due to the number of participants in this project, a significant amount of effort is expected to effectively
coordinate project activities, task deliverables, and communications between the ERMOU Partners and the
technical advisors. Careful coordination will help avoid potential duplication of efforts on work tasks that are
related and overlapping and assure the consistency of assumptions. WWG will manage Phase 2 of the Study
through close coordination with the project team, participate in up to three onsite coordination meetings with
the ERMOU Partners, and prepare monthly progress reports with invoices throughout the duration of the project.

15

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2

BUDGET AND SCHEDULE
We propose to complete the above scope of services on a time and expenses basis for an estimated total cost of $316,000 and according to the estimated
schedule summarized by work task in Table 1 below. Fees will not exceed this amount without prior authorization from the ERMOU Partners.
Table 1. Estimated Budget and Schedule – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2
ERMOU CONSULTANT TEAM COST ESTIMATES
ERMOU PROJECT WORK TASKS

1.1 Eagle Park
Reservoir

1. Tier 1
Eval's

1.2 Whitney
Ck
Reservoir
1.3 Bolts
Lake

2.1 Wolcott
Reservoir
2. Tier 2
Eval's

3.
Report

Water Supply

WWG

H&W

WWW

$15,000

$12,000

$7,000

Environment

LRE

$9,400
$4,000
$13,100

Engineering
$2,500
$8,700

Engineering
$2,500
$7,600

Engineering
$4,000

$37,000

$13,900

$1,800

$15,500
$5,800

$2,000

$2,000

2.4 Iron Mountain Reservoir

$1,000

$1,000

3.1 Workshop

$4,500
$15,000

3.3 Peer Review

$1,500

3.4 Final Report

Mar

$50,000

2.3 Eagle-Arkansas Ditch

$1,500

Feb

$7,600
$15,500

3.2 Draft Report

Jan

$12,500

Environment

2.2 Piney River Reservoir

Dec

$8,700
$13,900

$5,000

Nov

$7,500

Environment
Water Supply

Oct

$13,100
$37,000

$5,000

Sep

$14,000

Environment
Water Supply

Aug

$9,400
$50,000

$10,000

ESTIMATED SCHEDULE

$29,000

Engineering
Water Supply

RJH

TOTAL
COST
ESTIMATES

$1,500

$1,500

$2,500

$11,500
$15,000

$1,500

$1,500

$1,500

$1,500

$7,500

$5,000

$5,000

4. Team Coordination and Project Mgmt.

$50,000

$50,000

TOTAL:

$114,000

$28,000

$10,000

$43,600

$120,400

$316,000

The cost and schedule estimates are based on current workload of the ERMOU technical advisors, current understanding of the Project, and the scope of
services described above. The budget for each task was developed based on estimating the level of effort and direct costs that are expected to be required
to perform the work, recognizing that the actual level of effort to complete a particular work task could be more or less than estimated.
16

 Scope of Services – Eagle River MOU Project Alternatives Study – Phase 2

Basis of Scope of Work and Fee Estimates for ‘Engineering’ Activities
1. Geotechnical investigations and laboratory testing will not be performed.
2. Topographic surveying will not be required. Engineering evaluations will be based on USGS 10-meter Digital
Elevation Mapping.
3. Environmental permitting evaluations will be performed by others.
4. Water rights and yield evaluations will be performed by others.
5. Concepts and layouts for facilities will be developed based on engineering judgment, general design criteria,
and previous experience on similar project. Feasibility-level layouts will illustrate key design features and be
suitable to support the development of an opinion of probable construction cost.
6. Reservoir capacities and flow rates for pipelines and pump stations will be provided by WWG unless stated
otherwise in the scope of work.
7. Coordination with the Colorado Office of the State Engineer (SEO) will not be required.
8. Costs for purchasing property, easements, rights-of-way, permitting, and legal costs will not be included in
the opinion of probable construction cost.

17