Arkansas Valley Conduit: Kickoff celebration recap

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“This is our future,” Southeastern Colorado Conservancy District President Bill Long said Friday at a celebration marking the beginning of the conduit’s construction. “Sometimes I worry that we don’t think about the future the way they did in 1962 or 1942.”[...]

Members of Colorado’s congressional delegation evoked the words of President John F. Kennedy and the continued support of valley leaders such as Pueblo Chieftain Publisher Bob Rawlings, Long and others in moving the project toward reality. “I think Jack Kennedy would be enormously proud of the Southeastern district and Southern Colorado for hanging in there all these years,” Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., said. “This is a touchstone for what we should be doing when our politics becomes crazier and crazier.” Bennet quoted Kennedy’s speech in Pueblo in 1962 that praised the public benefits of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project as he signed it into law. The conduit was a crucial part of that project, and would benefit those with the poorest quality drinking water, the Lower Arkansas Valley. It was ballyhooed as a primary benefit when golden frying pans were sold to raise money to support the project. Enthusiasm grew in the 1960s – Lamar joined the Southeastern district in 1968 to partake of the conduit – and continued well into the 1970s…

It wasn’t until this year, when a concept that would use excess-capacity revenues from the Fry-Ark Project to repay federal costs of the conduit and other unfunded portions of the project, that the project took off…

“You’ve seen what happens when water moves away from communities,” Rep. Salazar said. “What we are here today to assure is that every community in the Arkansas Valley gets good, clean drinking water.”[...]

Both Bennet and Salazar mentioned [Bob] Rawlings’ role in promoting the conduit for decades, but Rawlings went even further in history to praise the efforts of others in the history of the Fry-Ark Project. “I think this is a wonderful day,” The Chieftain publisher said. “It’s been a long time coming. The efforts of Frank Hoag, Damian Ducy, Charles Beise, Charles Boustead and many others are looking down on us and grateful that this finally is getting done.”

More Arkansas Valley Conduit coverage here and here.

West slope to east slope water transfers, IBCC/roundtables and State Rep. Sal Pace’s proposed mitigation legislation debated

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“We already have a bureaucratic effort to achieve the same goal,” said Harold Miskel, vice-president of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District. “I worry about legislation like this, given the sensitivities between the Eastern and Western slopes, that it may exacerbate that other effort. It’s an additional lever and a threat.” Miskel was reacting to a proposal by state Rep. Sal Pace, D-Pueblo, which he said will encourage collaboration to mitigate the impact of moving water from rural areas to cities, when water is transferred between state water divisions.

Pace has been promoting a concept to allow conservancy districts to negotiate mitigation in lieu of stricter court provisions. Pace plans to pattern the new provisions after the 1937 Conservancy District Act, which allows judges to consider court mitigation. Miskel said the solution to project urban shortfalls of water supplies could involve more transfers of water from the Western Slope, an issue that is already being addressed by the Interbasin Compact Committee and the Colorado Water Conservation Board…

“The IBCC never was given statutory authority,” Pace said in response to Miskel’s comments. “There’s a need for state legislation that provides for voluntary agreement. . . . If we’re going to have third-party mitigation, wouldn’t you like to be at the table?” Pace added that at least one legislator, whom he did not name, is looking at a proposal to disband the IBCC…

“I would not contest that the IBCC moves at glacial speed,” Miskel said. “But this effort was to encourage the Arkansas basin and the South Platte basin to talk to the Western Slope.”

Pace said his proposal would not harm that effort. “What I envision this bill doing is to encourage collaboration, to encourage outside applicants to work with local districts,” Pace said. “I’m not trying to do an anti-metro bill. Pace has not drafted a bill yet, and instead has chosen to talk with water boards all over the state – he also traveled to Salida Thursday afternoon to talk with the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District – to gain input. A draft version of the bill will be distributed through Colorado Water Congress. The biggest problem Pace is facing is how to deal with leases, saying cities and water sellers could avoid the community impact question with long-term agreements rather than outright sales. “I do not want to discourage fallowing programs,” Pace said. Pace added his bill would not stop water transfers or spell out what types of mitigation could be negotiated. “Transfers are not shut down and water sales cannot be stopped by conservancy districts (under the concept), Pace said.

More transmountain/transbasin diversions coverage here.

More on last week’s Colorado Supreme Court ruling on Dry Gulch Reservoir planning horizon

From the Summit Daily News (Bob Berwyn):

According to Drew Peternell, of Colorado Trout Unlimited’s Western Water Project, the Supreme Court laid out a new test for public utilities. In the Pagosa Springs case, the court ruled that the city’s claim for water based on a 100-year planning horizon was not reasonable. “They have to show that claim for water is based on realistic projections for population growth. They can’t just pull numbers out the air,” Peternell said.

Undeveloped (conditional is the legal term) water rights are subject to periodic hearings in water court. Every six years, the water providers have to show their claim on the water is still valid. When the time for those hearings comes, they will be held to the new standards spelled out by the court, Peternell said.

Denver Water, the biggest player in Summit County, joined in the court case on the side of Pagosa Springs, along with other water providers from around the state. “We wanted the court to maintain a degree of deference to governmental entities that have to plan for future growth,” said Denver Water attorney Casey Funk. Funk said the Supreme Court decision established some new factors that water courts have to consider before awarding water rights, but that water providers still do have some flexibility in planning for future needs. Essentially, the ruling partly clarified some of the conflicts between the “great and growing cities” doctrine, which provides flexibility to plan for future water needs, and the anti-speculation doctrine, which limits pie-in-the-sky water claims.

More water law coverage here.

More Dry Gulch Reservoir coverage here and here.

Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District hatches plan to accelerate the Arkansas Valley Conduit

Hoping to alleviate building delays due to the vagaries of federal funding the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District is shortening the timeline for the environmental (NEPA) reports. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Thursday approved a plan to wrap up major parts of an Environmental Protection Agency grant by next March, allowing the Bureau of Reclamation to begin work on an environmental impact statement by April. “The NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) piece of this needs to get started,” said Phil Reynolds, project manager. In order to do that, an EPA grant that was going to take 27 months to complete will be pushed ahead of schedule. The work also includes identifying the route of the pipeline and looking at rights of way. The parts affecting the EIS, however, need to be completed so Reclamation can begin work.

At a meeting this week with the Bureau of Reclamation officials in Billings, Mont., the district received assurances that the $5 million appropriated by Congress for 2010 will be spent in this fiscal year, Executive Director Jim Broderick told the board. “Between now and March 31, we will enter into a third-party agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation,” Broderick said. “If we had not done that, the intent was to spend $2 million this year, and encumber $3 million for the following year.” That would make it difficult for the district to ask for more money in the following year, Broderick said.

Meanwhile, here’s the SECWCD budget news, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

“We are not looking at a huge shortfall,” said Kathie Fanning, chief financial officer. “So many things are coming to fruition.” Most of the district’s revenues – $12 million – go toward repayment of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, including $5.3 million for the Fountain Valley Conduit. The district began repaying $132 million on the Fry-Ark Project in 1982, and still owes $68 million on the 50-year loan. This year’s payments toward the project are about 6.5 million. Other payments toward operation of the winter water program, operation and maintenance. The largest expenses in the operating fund go toward employees, $1 million, and legal work, $515,000. Both figures are essentially unchanged from 2009. The district also has budgeted nearly $3 million for its enterprise fund, which includes an accelerated payment schedule for an Environmental Protection Agency grant for the Arkansas Valley Conduit. The budget includes property tax collections of 0.944 mills for parts of nine counties. El Paso County contributes 72 percent, while Pueblo County contributes almost 16 percent. Counties west of Pueblo contribute almost 9 percent, while those east of Pueblo make up the remainder.

More Arkansas Valley Conduit coverage here and here.

Fruita: Construction begins on new wastewater treatment plant

From the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Le Roy Standish):

Construction of a $22.8 million wastewater treatment plant began Thursday in Fruita. The plant is being built at 15 Road near the Colorado River by Garney Construction of Littleton…

The new plant will have the ability to treat 2.33 million gallons of waste daily. Huston said the city anticipates the facility will have 20 years of operation and the ability to handle Fruita’s projected growth rate of 2.5 percent. But the main reason for the new plant is federal clean-water standards, Huston said. “The environmental laws have changed, and they will require us to meet greater nutrient removal standards by 2013,” Huston said.

More wastewater coverage here.

Republican River Water Conservation District meeting November 18-19

From The Holyoke Enterprise:

The Board of Directors of the Republican River Water Conservation District will be holding a special meeting in Greeley on Nov. 18-19. Times are 1-5 p.m. on Nov. 18 and 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Nov. 19. The agenda includes a report from the District’s General Manager; reports from Colorado Rural Development, Farm Service Agency, and Natural Resource Conservation Service; updates on the CREP and AWEP programs; reports from the District’s lobbyists on legislative issues; presentation by the District’s engineer on the status of the Compact Compliance Pipeline project; report from Mike Sullivan, Assistant State Engineer, on the status of RRCA pipeline approval; report from the District’s legal counsel; and District staff performance review; presentation by the Colorado Division of Local Affairs, and Board discussion and action items, including whether to proceed with construction of the Compact Compliance Pipeline in 2010. Public comment will be held at 4:45 p.m. on Nov. 18. The RRWCD Board of Directors will hold an executive session to discuss personnel issues and water supply agreements, determine positions and instruct negotiators, and receive legal advice on legal questions related to such agreements, compact compliance, the Compact compliance pipeline. The meeting will take place at the Greeley Guest House.

For further information concerning the details of this meeting, contact Stan Murphy, General Manager Republican River Water Conservation District at 970-332-3552.

More Republican River Basin coverage here and here.

Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District to host celebration for $5 million in funding for the Arkansas Valley Conduit Friday November 13

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

A dedication for the Arkansas Valley Conduit will be at 11 a.m. Friday at the base of the Pueblo Dam. The $300 million conduit received $5 million in funding from Congress in October as part of an energy and water appropriations bill signed by President Barack Obama last week. U.S. Reps. John Salazar and Betsy Markey and U.S. Sens. Michael Bennet and Mark Udall, all Colorado Democrats, have been asked to speak at the event. The public is invited to attend, and may enter through the south entrance to Lake Pueblo State Park, and follow signs indicating where the ceremony will be.

More Arkansas Valley Conduit coverage here and here.

Reclamation’s summer releases into Fryingpan River catching flack from anglers

From The Aspen Times (Scott Condon):

The Basalt town government, Ruedi Water and Power Authority, and fishing guides want a detailed review and explanation of the reclamation bureau’s releases from Ruedi Reservoir. The releases created water levels that were too high for fishing in the gold-medal trout habitat of the Fryingpan River from late July to early September. The water level in Ruedi dropped too low to allow use of the Aspen Yacht Club docks on Labor Day weekend. “In short, the six weeks between approximately July 26 and Sept. 6 was a disaster for water-related recreation in the Fryingpan Valley,” says a letter from Basalt and the Ruedi Water and Power Authority. The latter entity operates a small hyrdo-electric project at the reservoir and closely monitors Ruedi water issues for local governments. The letter was released to the public at a Basalt Town Council meeting Tuesday night. The Bureau of Reclamation office in Loveland, which manages Ruedi releases, was closed for Veterans Day so no immediate reaction was available.

Mark Fuller, director of the Ruedi Water and Power Authority, said the releases were handled differently this year than over the last decade or so. The flow in the Fryingpan River is generally maintained at 250 cubic feet per second during summer months. It has rarely exceeded 300 cfs during summers and if it did, it was only for a day or two, he said. This year the flow in the Fryingpan topped 250 cfs the week of July 29 and kept climbing. It topped 400 cfs by Aug. 12 and 500 cfs by Aug. 19. Flows didn’t drop below 250 cfs until the week of Sept. 9…

[Bruce Gabow] quizzed reclamation officials about the flow and was told a “perfect storm” of circumstances affected the releases. Ruedi is one of a handful of reservoirs used to meet the demands of downstream users who purchase water. A variety of factors affected releases this summer when there were “calls” for water. There was a brief shutdown of the Shoshone Power Plant on the Colorado River, which affected water required from Ruedi; there was a delay in declaring a surplus of water from Green Mountain Reservoir, requiring more water releases from Ruedi while Green Mountain couldn’t answer the calls; and there was the usual contribution by Ruedi to a program to benefit endangered fish species on the Colorado River east of Grand Junction. The reaction of the federal agency to concerns in the Fryingpan Valley have been frustrating Gabow for years. Officials hold the necessary public hearings to collect input and they act concerned about the points raised by local residents, Gabow said, but they don’t alter their operations. “They do whatever they want,” he said. “They’re not really accountable to anyone here. They’re the government.”

More Fryingpan River watershed coverage here.

Fountain Creek: Five finalists remain for executive director of the Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The interviews will be at the board’s next meeting, 1 p.m. Dec. 4 at Fountain City Hall. The finalists chosen are:

Gary Barber, a Colorado Springs water rights and real estate broker. Barber also is the manager of the El Paso County Water Authority and chairman of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable. He helped lawmakers write the legislation that created the Fountain Creek District.

Former Pueblo County Administrator Mark Carmel. In his more than 30-year career with Pueblo County, Carmel served as the county engineer and public works director as well.

Pueblo businessman Kevin McCarthy, whose letter explained that after working with some of those involved in projects on Fountain Creek, he is interested in becoming the “point person” for projects. He is a member of the Pueblo Board of Water Works.

Pueblo Stormwater Director Dennis Maroney, who will be retiring in January. Maroney is familiar with Fountain Creek issues after eight years working with the Corps of Engineers watershed study. He is on the Fountain Creek district’s technical advisory committee. Maroney has worked for the city since 1982.

James Munch, former head of planning for the city of Pueblo. After almost 30 years with the city, Munch became director of development for the Pueblo Springs Ranch development north of Pueblo in 2007. He is now a consultant…

The board is required to give the public at least two weeks to comment on finalists, and the Dec. 4 interviews will be conducted in public session, explained Pueblo County Attorney Dan Kogovsek.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

S. 787: Clean Water Restoration Act

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“What we’ve offered is a compromise position on legislation governing the jurisdictional waters of the United States. The question is: What type of projects need a 404 permit?” Aurora Water Director Mark Pifher told the Arkansas Basin Roundtable on Wednesday. Pifher has worked for the Colorado Water Congress and the Western Urban Water Coalition on proposed legislation by Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisc., and Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., which attempts to restore Clean Water Act guidelines to policies that were in place prior to a pair of United States Supreme Court decisions. The controversy centers on the definition of “navigable waters” and which federal laws need to be considered in issuing permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

The Supreme Court cases are Rapanos v. the United States, decided in 2006, which involved filling in wetlands near ditches in Wisconsin; and the 2001 decision in the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which centered on the city’s plans to create landfills on old gravel pits the government deemed wetlands. The effect of both decisions was to muddy the distinction of whether water projects in areas marginally connected to a watershed required a 404 permit. “After the decisions, Congress said, ‘We’re going to fix it,’ ” Pifher said.

The first attempt at fixing it caused an uproar because of a lengthy series of findings that some felt expanded the Clean Water Act into land use authority, international treaties and other areas of federal jurisdiction. Others objected to the removal of “navigable waters” from the language of the law, saying it broadened the federal authority…

“The Western Urban Water Coalition drafted a compromise that leaves in navigable waters, but defines what they are,” Pifher said. It also included exemptions for both municipal and agricultural systems in the West, and protects administration of water rights according to state laws.

More S. 787 coverage here.

EPA Study Reveals Widespread Contamination of Fish in U.S. Lakes and Reservoirs

As a nation we’re rapidly polluting our sources of fresh water. Here’s a release from the EPA:

A new EPA study shows concentrations of toxic chemicals in fish tissue from lakes and reservoirs in nearly all 50 U.S. states. For the first time, EPA is able to estimate the percentage of lakes and reservoirs nationwide that have fish containing potentially harmful levels of chemicals such as mercury and PCBs.

“These results reinforce Administrator Jackson’s strong call for revitalized protection of our nation’s waterways and long-overdue action to protect the American people,” said Peter S. Silva, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Water. “EPA is aggressively tackling the issues the report highlights. Before the results were even finalized, the agency initiated efforts to further reduce toxic mercury pollution and strengthen enforcement of the Clean Water Act – all part of a renewed effort to protect the nation’s health and environment.”

The data showed mercury concentrations in game fish exceeding EPA’s recommended levels at 49 percent of lakes and reservoirs nationwide, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in game fish at levels of potential concern at 17 percent of lakes and reservoirs. These findings are based on a comprehensive national study using more data on levels of contamination in fish tissue than any previous study.

Burning fossil fuels, primarily coal, accounts for nearly half of mercury air emissions caused by human activity in the U.S., and those emissions are a significant contributor to mercury in water bodies. From 1990 through 2005, emissions of mercury into the air decreased by 58 percent. EPA is committed to developing a new rule to substantially reduce mercury emissions from power plants, and the Obama Administration is actively supporting a new international agreement that will reduce mercury emissions worldwide.

The study also confirms the widespread occurrence of PCBs and dioxins in fish, illustrating the need for federal, state and local government to continue efforts to reduce the presence of these harmful chemicals in our lakes and reservoirs and ensure that fish advisory information is readily available.

It is important that women of child-bearing age and children continue to follow the advice of EPA and the Food and Drug Administration on fish consumption as it relates to mercury. This study is also a strong message to state and local governments to redouble their efforts in looking for opportunities to reduce mercury discharges, as well as developing fish advisories, especially to reach those in sensitive and vulnerable populations.

Results from the four-year National Study of Chemical Residues in Lake Fish Tissue show that mercury and PCBs are widely distributed in U.S. lakes and reservoirs. Mercury and PCBs were detected in all of the fish samples collected from the nationally representative sample of 500 lakes and reservoirs in the study. Because these findings apply to fish caught in lakes and reservoirs, it is particularly important for recreational and subsistence fishers to follow their state and local fish advisories.

EPA is conducting other statistically based national aquatic surveys that include assessment of fish contamination, such as the National Rivers and Streams Assessment and the National Coastal Assessment. Sampling for the National Rivers and Streams Assessment is underway, and results from this two-year study are expected to be available in 2011. Collection of fish samples for the National Coastal Assessment will begin in 2010.

More information: http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/fishstudy

More information on local fish advisories: http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/fish/states.htm

More water pollution coverage here.

Veterans Day

Take the time today to thank a veteran for their service.

Coyote Gulch outage

I’m heading down the two-lane blacktop with Mrs. Gulch for a little business and a little R&R. Posting may be intermittent until next Monday.

2009 Ag Water Summit

From The Fence Post:

The 2009 Ag Water Summit will be Dec. 1 at the Jefferson County Fairgounds, 15200 W. 6th Ave., Golden. The summit will be presented by the Colorado Ag Water Alliance, Colorado Ag Council and the Jefferson County office of Colorado State University Extension. It will begin the evening before with a network reception at the Marriott Denver West where Gov. Bill Ritter has been invited to speak. The summit will feature a keynote by Pat O’Toole, president of the Family Farm Alliance and will include legislative and budget issues, optimizing irrigation water, “new water” needs, alternatives to ag transfers and alternatives to “buy and dry.”

Registration deadline is Nov. 20; cost is $50 for ag producers, $75 for nonproducers. For registration and other information, call Crystal Korrey (303) 749-7502 or e-mail ckorrey@colofb.com.

More Colorado water coverage here.

Old Dillon Reservoir expansion update

From the Summit Daily News (Bob Berwyn):

Completion of the environmental analysis is a huge step forward for the $6.4 million project. The agency will take public comment on the environmental analysis for 30 days. Local officials hope to begin construction next summer. Dillon, Silverthorne and Summit County will share the cost of the project, which, first and foremost, would help bolster Dillon’s water supplies. The town relies mainly on surface water from Straight Creek, a source that’s susceptible to pollution. The town also felt a pinch during the 2002 drought, when Straight Creek flows dropped to record low levels.

The proposed project includes seven elements:

— enlarging the existing reservoir from 62 acre-feet to 288 acre-feet (an acre-foot is 326,000 gallons, so the capacity would go from a little over 2 million gallons to about 10.5 million gallons);

— restoring the outlet from ODR to the south to the Blue River (now Dillon Reservoir);

— reconstructing the head gate on Salt Lick Gulch and piping the entire length of the Dillon Ditch to serve the enlarged reservoir and improving the siphon under I-70;

— rehabilitating the outlet to Salt Lick Gulch;

— temporary road access improvements;

— burying existing overhead utility lines around Old Dillon Reservor; and

— wetland creation.

About 20 acres of wetlands would be affected by the reservoir enlargement, but the impacts would be addressed by adding new wetland on the southwest shorelines of the reservoir. In the long run, there would no net impact to recreational uses in the area, according to Paul Semmer, land specialist with the Dillon Ranger District. The enlargement of the reservoir would actually decrease total diversions from the Salt Lick Gulch drainage from 573 acre feet to 450 acre feet. The reservoir and dams would permanently impact 10.1 acres of forest and meadow habitat in the project area, according to the draft study.

More Old Dillon Reservoir coverage here.

Custer County looking closely at Upper Ark’s augmentation plan

From the Wet Mountain Tribune (Nora Drenner):

On Tuesday, Aug. 11, county commissioners Lynn Attebery, Jim Austin and Carole Custer [hired] the law firm Duncan, Ostrander and Dingess of Denver to represent the county in its objection of the proposed water augmentation plan for Custer County submitted to water court by the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District in late June. Commissioner Austin will serve as contact person with the law firm. Commissioner Attebery also wanted to serve as contact person, however, commissioner Austin and Custer voted in favor of Austin. Also, attorney fees will be split with the city of Aurora as they have also retained the same law firm to handle the same matter. Austin noted Aurora is also objecting to the proposed water augmentation plan.

More Custer County coverage here.

Colorado Springs City Council moving to dissolve stormwater enterprise fund

After last week’s election Colorado Springs Mayor Rivera claimed that Issue 300 would have no effect on the city’s stormwater enterprise fund. This week he’s saying that the people have spoken and that controlling stormwater runoff should be borne by the city’s general fund. Here’s a report from Daniel Chaćon writing for The Colorado Springs Gazette. From the article:

“I’m convinced that when people were voting on it, their primary vote was to eliminate or phase out the Stormwater Enterprise,” said Mayor Lionel Rivera, who previously maintained that Issue 300 would not affect the Stormwater Enterprise. The council’s about-face followed last week’s crushing defeat on Election Day, when voters slammed the door on a proposed property tax increase while approving a measure anti-tax crusader Douglas Bruce succeeded in placing on the ballot that phases out payments to the city from city-owned enterprises. Although some city officials had questioned whether Bruce’s measure affected fees collected from residents for the Stormwater Enterprise’s drainage projects, the council Monday told the city manager to prepare a recommendation on how to do away with the enterprise and associated fee with critical projects still in the pipeline.

More stormwater coverage here.

Fort Morgan: Emergency teams train to respond to chlorine leak

From The Fort Morgan Times (Dan Barker):

This was not a real leak, but a training exercise meant to prepare those at the water plant and emergency responders in case there is ever a leak of the deadly gas, and a chance to see how well everyone had prepared for it. Tanks of liquid and gaseous chlorine are stored in an air-tight bay at the plant, used to make sure bacteria are killed before water goes to users in Fort Morgan, said employee Matt Padgett.

More water treatment coverage here.

Energy policy — oil and gas: Garfield County Commissioners vote to oppose S. 1215, the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act

From the Grand Junction Sentinel (Dennis Webb):

Garfield County commissioners voted 2–1 Monday in opposition to legislation proposed by U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Denver. The bill would subject fracturing to the federal Safe Drinking Water Act and require disclosure of chemicals used in the process. The vote disappointed several county residents who attended Monday’s commissioner meeting and fear fracturing could contaminate drinking water. But Commissioners Mike Samson and John Martin said the oil and gas industry is better off being regulated at the state level…

But fellow Commissioner Tresi Houpt, who also sits on the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, questioned the contention that the bill would drive up costs. She added, “Why are we talking about costs? Why aren’t we talking about safety and health and welfare?”[...]

The Colorado Oil & Gas Association said in a news release that Garfield County joins Delta, Mesa, Moffat, Morgan, Rio Blanco, Washington, Weld and Yuma counties in opposing DeGette’s bill. The nine counties represent nearly 44 percent of the state’s gas production. By contrast, the two counties that have supported the legislation, Pitkin and San Miguel, are responsible for less than 1 percent of statewide production, the association says. Industry officials worry that the federal regulation could result in fees of up to $100,000 per well and in lengthy permitting delays that would harm domestic production…

The industry says there’s never been a documented case of fracturing contaminating groundwater. Rifle-area resident Jim Golden said he’s tired of hearing the argument that contamination is just anecdotal, and said Garfield commissioners have heard from plenty of people who are suffering as a result of drilling. “It’s absolutely horrible to have to stand up to our own local government to fight for your health and safety,” he told the commissioners…

[Commissioners Mike Samson and John Martin], both Republicans, won elections last November after benefiting from independent campaign expenditures from energy-related interests. For Samson, a newcomer to office, Monday was perhaps his most significant energy-related vote to date. All three commissioners said they heard from numerous constituents regarding the fracturing legislation, and county staff members told commissioners they received thousands of comments.

More coverage from the Glenwood Springs Post Independent (John Colson) via The Aspen Times. From the article:

Despite evidence of significant sentiment to the contrary among the electorate, two Garfield County commissioners voted this week to oppose federal legislation which would put the oil and gas industry partly under the control of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Commissioner Trési Houpt, the lone Democrat on the county board, said she supported what is known as the FRAC (for Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals) Act, introduced in both houses of Congress last summer. But Republican Commissioners John Martin and Mike Samson cast the deciding votes for a resolution that endorses a continued exemption for the gas drilling industry from the U.S. Safe Drinking Water Act, which is administered by the EPA…

Residents in Colorado and other states, living near the drilling operations, have reported getting sick themselves, watching livestock die and experiencing everything from exploding domestic water wells to finding foul-smelling slicks covering nearby waterways — all of which they believe are related to the drilling activities and the chemicals used in the frac’ing process. The energy companies, however, argue that there have never been “documented” cases of groundwater contaminated by drilling rigs, and that the FRAC Act would cause regulatory delays and increased costs for their activities.

In a wide-ranging discussion before the vote, Martin and Samson framed their decision in terms of upholding states rights against unwanted federal interference, arguing that the state could regulate the industry better. At one point Martin said that the state’s right to regulate the state’s waters goes all the way back to an 18th century “navigable waters” law passed by an early Congress. “Do you want to have the federal government come in and tell you what’s going to happen?” he asked the crowd of 25 or so at the meeting, or should it be left to what he called “the local voice”? Samson, who represents voters on the western end of the county, submitted a resolution that essentially mimicked a resolution adopted on Sept. 11, 2009, by Club 20, a Western Slope business organization. The organization lists a number of well-known energy companies as its sponsors, and nine of its 22 member counties have come out against the FRAC Act…

Paul Light of the [Grand Valley Citizens Alliance], pointing to a recent poll indicating that a majority of the region’s voters favor increased regulation of the industry, added that “the real battle is [not between federal and state regulators, but] between the industry and the people trying to drink the water.”

More oil and gas coverage here and here.

Parker: Rueter-Hess Reservoir update

So far Parker and its partners in Rueter-Hess Reservoir — currently under construction southwest of the city — do not have enough surface water to fill the 77,000 acre-foot reservoir. Here’s a report from Bruce Finley writing for The Denver Post. From the article:

The prospect of what critics call an empty bathtub is generating anxiety around Colorado as water managers clash over the last unclaimed mountain river flows. Most water to fill the Rueter-Hess reservoir “will have to be imported,” said Frank Jaeger, manager of the Parker Water and Sanitation District, who for 25 years has led the effort to supply 450,000 suburban residents. Importing water would require multibillion-dollar pumping and piping from rivers running down the western side of the Continental Divide, such as the Colorado, back across mountains to Front Range residents, Jaeger said. Though huge, the costs likely would be less than for alternatives such as trapping and treating contaminated water from the South Platte or Arkansas rivers, he said. The option Jaeger and a Colorado-Wyoming coalition of municipal suppliers favor — one of four being considered by state natural resources officials — would divert water from the Flaming Gorge Reservoir in western Wyoming along Interstate 80 to Colorado…

Yet Colorado Western Slope leaders see the $230 million Rueter-Hess reservoir as folly — and bristle at talk of diverting more water across the mountains to fill it. The reservoir “is 20 times more expensive, and 10 times as big as they need. It’s going to be a little bit of water in a big bathtub,” said Eric Kuhn, manager of the Colorado River Water Conservation District, based in Glenwood Springs. The financing, based on tap fees from anticipated housing construction, “is the water equivalent of a Ponzi scheme,” Kuhn said…”There’s a very good chance that, in the long run, there’s not going to be any more water available on the Western Slope. And, if they’re having trouble now paying for Rueter-Hess, how are they going to pay for moving water from the Western Slope? That’s why I say this is a fairy tale,” Kuhn said…

This month, more construction vehicles are rolling into action to build up the 7,700-foot-wide Frank Jaeger Dam at the reservoir. Critics “can make their claims,” but the reservoir will be crucial to sustain population growth, Jaeger said. Paying off the debt for the construction now underway all depends on tax revenues from future growth, he said. “To say, ‘We’ll just shut off growth’ will only exacerbate problems,” he said. “If you don’t pay off debt, what do you do? What does that do to the economy of the whole state? We need steady, controlled growth. All our needs for a reasonable lifestyle are tied into this.”

More Rueter-Hess coverage here and here.

Town of Fraser to absorb newly dissolved Fraser Sanitation District operations

From…[T]he Sky-Hi Daily News (Reid Armstrong):

the Town of Fraser has a little less than eight weeks to accomplish a laundry list of items required to absorb the district. Failing to meet this deadline could cost the town $100,000 said town manager Jeff Durbin…

Whereas the district’s employees are currently responsible for both the wastewater collections system and operations at the plant, all three employees will now be exclusively in charge of plant management and operations, Durbin said. The towns’ department of public works will dedicate an existing employee to deal with the wastewater collections system.

More infrastructure coverage here.

Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District to host celebration for $5 million in funding for the Arkansas Valley Conduit Friday November 13

From the La Junta Tribune-Democrat:

It will be on the south bank of the Arkansas River below Pueblo Dam. People are asked to arrive by 10:45 a.m. by traveling west on Colorado Highway 96, turning right on Juniper Road and following directions to the park and event site. The public is invited to participate in the event.

More Arkansas Valley Conduit coverage here and here.

America’s most toxic cities

Many Coyote Gulch readers live in the Denver metro area. You’ll be happy to know that according to Forbes you live in the 27th most contaminated area in the U.S. — amongst the 40 largest metropolitan areas — based on poor air quality, lack of clean water and a high rate of environmental hazards. Here’s the report from Francesca Levy writing for Forbes. From the article:

To determine which cities are most toxic, Forbes looked at the country’s 40 largest metropolitan statistical areas–geographic entities that the U.S. Office of Management and Budget defines and uses in collecting statistics–based on data provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. We counted the number of facilities that reported releasing toxins into the environment, the total pounds of certain toxic chemicals released into the air, water and earth, the days per year that air pollution was above healthy levels, and the number of times the EPA has responded to reports of a potentially hazardous environmental incident or site in each metro area’s principal city. The reports vary in seriousness, and not all require clean-up action from the EPA.

More water pollution coverage here.

CWCB: Live Water Supply Briefing — 2009 Water Year Review and 2010 Look Ahead, November 10

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Ben Wade):

In lieu of a Water Availability Task Force meeting this month CWCB will be partnering with The Colorado Basin River Forecast Center (CBRFC) for a Live Water Supply Briefing: 2009 Water Year Review and 2010 Look Ahead. Following the basin wide discussion there will be a Colorado specific presentation which will examine the current situation in Western Colorado, soil moisture conditions and a seasonal outlook. The entire webinar will last about two hours.

This first hour will take a basin wide look and will have two foci: (1) a review of the 2009 water year and an evaluation of the 2009 water supply forecasts and (2) a look ahead to 2010 including plans for future webinars and forecast services. The second hour, immediately following, will be led by Colorado Climate Center and the National Integrated Drought Information Service (NIDIS) and will focus on Western Colorado conditions as well as the NIDIS Upper Colorado River pilot project underway.

The briefing is composed of two parts, a telephone conference call and a web-based presentation. The conference call can be accessed by dialing 1-877-929-0660 a few minutes prior to the start of the call and entering the access code of 1706374. To view the web-based presentation, you will need to sign up prior to the briefing by clicking on REGISTER to sign up. A confirmation email will be sent to you and you can follow instructions from there to join the webinar.

For those unable to view the web-based presentation, you can follow the presentation by clicking web links that will be posted on the CBRFC site prior to the call.

Please contact Ben Wade atBen.Wade@state.co.usor 303-866-3441 ext. 3238 with any questions.

Here’s the link to the Interbasin Compact Committee Annual Report (pdf) published October 30. Here’s the link to the Water Supply Reserve Account Annual Report (pdf) also published on October 30.

More CWCB coverage here.

Energy policy — geothermal: U.S. Bureau of Land Management to lease 799.2 acres near Mt. Princeton hot springs for geothermal exploration on November 12

Update: From the Associated Press via The Aspen Times:

The Bureau of Land Management had planned to offer 800 acres of public property for geothermal during its auction this month, but will postpone action on the proposed lease until its February auction. Federal officials want more time to study the potential effects of geothermal development on water and property rights.

From The Chaffee County Times (Danny Bay):

According to the SRHA, anyone has the right to enter these federally owned sub-surface lands, prospect, and file a mining claim and plan of operation. Since the geothermal resource sits underground, it is sub-surface land. This is the basis for the sale on Nov. 12, the first geothermal lease to be auctioned by the BLM in the state of Colorado. It is open to anyone who chooses to register. Henderson said that the new owner of the federal lease will only have up to one year to create what will lead to the development of the resource. “They can’t sit on it indefinitely,” Henderson said.

But what [Buena Vista resident Steve] Glover said horrifies him is that if a developer does begin commercial production of electricity, the lease becomes open permanently. “They can ramp it up from a small project and no one could do a blessed thing about it,” he said, adding that it has the potential to expand vastly and turn one of the most aesthetically beautiful parts of Colorado into a semi-permanent industrial area…

Bill Bennett, energy use adviser for Sangre De Cristo Electric Association, said he thinks a plant could be hidden very well by building it inside, like something similar to a greenhouse or by putting bunkers around it to shield the noise. “Geothermal can run 24 hours with no down capacity. A 10-megawatt plant could supply 84 percent of all the electricity we supply all year. There are people who understand that it has no consumption, no combustion and no pollution, but they just don’t want to look at it,” Bennett said.

In response to this, Glover referenced a Salt Lake Tribune article about a 10-megawatt geothermal plant in Utah that, after six months of generating power, produces only one megawatt of net energy and buys almost as much electricity to keep the plant running as the plant produces. “There seems to be a real rush to do this. There’s a lot of ego involved in being the first to do it and I understand this. But it could come at a great cost and it should be carefully considered,” Glover said. “It would be a shame to so easily allow this to go forward.”

More geothermal coverage here and here.