Paradox Valley: Energy Fuels Corp. formally applies for uranium mill state permit

From the Cortez Journal (Joe Hanel):

The mill, proposed for the Paradox Valley west of Naturita, would be the first new uranium mill in the country in 25 years. It has caused heated debate in the Paradox Valley, in part because it could restart the uranium mining industry in Southwest Colorado. Montrose County commissioners approved zoning for the mill, known as the Piñon Ridge mill, in September…

This week’s application to the state triggers a 10- to 15-month process that will include two public hearings. State regulators will zero in on health effects of the mill in both the short- and long-term, said Steve Tarlton, radiation program manager for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. “Colorado has the most stakeholder-focused review process for uranium licensing in the United States,” Tarlton said. Tarlton’s office has 30 days to determine if the application is complete. Once it does, Energy Fuels has 75 days to hold two public hearings. Those hearings probably will happen in Montrose and the Nucla-Naturita area, said Energy Fuels spokesman Gary Steele. After the hearings, state law gives regulators nine to 12 months to approve or deny the permit. Energy Fuels CEO George Glasier said he is confident his application will pass muster with the state.

Travis Stills, a Durango lawyer who represents mill opponents, said Energy Fuels can expect plenty of opposition. “There will be considerable technical, grassroots and legal scrutiny of whatever it is they have proposed there,” Stills said. Stills filed the lawsuit in state court in Montrose against the county commissioners on behalf of Sheep Mountain Alliance. In the suit, mill opponents claim the county commissioners should not have approved the permit, because in the middle of the process, the company cut the amount of ore it intended to process in half and doubled the projected life of the mill to 40 years. The suit also claims that the mill should not have been approved in the Paradox Valley because it would carry much higher environmental risks than uranium mines, which are common the in the valley.

More coverage from the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Gary Harmon):

Once the radiation program determines the application is complete, Energy Fuels must conduct the first of two required public meetings within 45 days. It must conduct a second public meeting within 30 days of the first. Montrose County, meanwhile, has 90 days from the first public meeting to submit to the state its review of the environmental report included in the company’s application. The state Health Department can act on the application within 270 days of the county’s response or within 360 days of the second public meeting, if the county has no response. Energy Fuels’ application is available on the Web at www.cdphe.state.co.us/hm/ rad/rml/energyfuels/index.htm and at the Nucla Public Library, 544 Main St., and Montrose County Planning and Development, 317 S. Second St. Public comments will be accepted throughout the review process. People may comment about the application at public meetings, by e-mail to cdphe.hm energyfuels@state.co.us or by writing to Steve Tarlton or Warren Smith at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Radiation Program, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver 80246-1530.

More on nuclear energy and Colorado’s role in the industry, from Hope Nealson writing for the Cortez Journal. From the article:

In 2006, 6.5 billion people used 14 trillion watts, or terawatts, of energy, [nuclear expert and former senior manager for the U.S. Department of Energy Dave Nulton] said. It will take all types of energy, including solar, wind, hydro and coal power, to satisfy the projected increase of demand for normal growth to 45 terawatts by the year 2050. Nulton said to achieve that kind of power, 66 wind turbines would have to be built every day until 2050, or two nuclear reactors every three days. “These numbers are extreme and really unachievable,” he said. “If you could build 66 windmills per day or two nuclear reactors every three days, you still wouldn’t get there without the help of other energies like coal, solar, etc.” Furthermore, Nulton said with atmospheric levels of carbon jumping from 228 ppm (parts per million) before the industrial revolution to 386 ppm today, using cleaner sources of energy like nuclear will help the world avoid approaching “catastrophic climate change by 2050.”

Nulton said the Four Corners – and Cortez’ role in general – would be to provide the uranium needed for nuclear power. “This area served the uranium supply (for nuclear power in the U.S.) for a number of years – now we’re second,” he said. “If you look at the available uranium in this country, Wyoming has more and the Four Corners is second.” Nulton said worldwide, there is a lot more uranium in Canada and Australia. “If we want to be energy independent, we don’t have to rely on another country like we do for oil – we can produce it in our own country,” he said. With no harmful releases, essentially no carbon footprint, low operating costs and minimal land requirements, Nulton said nuclear power is also an option that helps dispose of nuclear weapons. Other countries already reprocess the old fuel in nuclear war heads.

China has the most reactors at 16. There are 440 operating reactors in 31 countries, satisfying approximately 15 percent of electrical needs. Thirteen countries have plans to build reactors and 50 are currently under construction, he said.

More nuclear coverage here and here.

Norwood: CWCB instream flow meeting recap

From The Norwood Post (Ellen Metrick):

Currently, the stream segments being considered for instream flow protection are Red Canyon Creek, North Fork Tabeguache Creek, San Miguel River, and Tabeguache Creek, as well as Alpine Gulch, Big Dominguez Creek, Blue Creek, Cebolla Creek, Cochetopa Creek, East Beaver Creek, Little Dominguez Creek, Spring Creek, and Willow Creek. “This segment of the San Miguel River has been identified as being an outstanding population of three fish that are species of concern,” said Mark Uppendahl of the State DOW office. According to the draft stakeholder recommendations (available online at www.cwcb.state.co.us, 2010 instream flow appropriations (proposed)), “The lower San Miguel River is known to provide habitat for globally imperiled riparian communities and other important riparian communities, because of the free-flowing hydrology of the river.” These communities include New Mexico Privet riparian shrubland and Skunkbrush riparian shrubland, Narrowleaf Cottonwood Communities and Fremont Cottonwood communities.

One thing that is certain, “A lot of water is lost in spring run-off,” said Goodtimes. “We need storage.” It is also true that in a dry year, there’s no water for anyone. Biologists say the fish can survive a year or two before they need water in order to repopulate and get strong again. Most of the flow in the San Miguel River (240,000 acre-feet per year, according to CWCB Web site) does come from snowmelt. Because of its relatively low, human population density and lack of large, water storage impoundments, the San Miguel Basin is considered to be one of the few ecologically and hydrologically intact river basins in Colorado. Goodtimes proposed to the Lone Cone and Gurley ditch users that they and the County band together. “Maybe we can get a grant from Southwest Water Commission to quantify and identify selected off-stem small sites for storage,” he said. “I wanna see if we can get our groups together and try and figure out a way to ask jointly.”[...]

CWCB had planned to file an application for these instream flows in January 2010, but Goodtimes said, “There was discussion about delaying that date of filing / appropriation to December 2010 to let people have a year to really look into it.” The streams mentioned in the proposed appropriations were presented by the recommending entities at the annual Instream Flow Workshop on Feb. 24, 2009.

More instream flow coverage here.

Rico: Dolores Water Conservancy District approves alluvial well for supplemental supply

From the Cortez Journal (Kimberly Benedict):

Rico proposed using alluvial wells north of town, which pump water from shallow aquifers, to supplement their current water supply. “We’ve been working on this for a couple of years now,” said Mike England, Rico town manager. “We struggle with the Silver Creek supply, especially after it rains.” “Rico’s primary point of water supply on Silver Creek faces turbidity and other issues,” said Mike Preston, DWCD manager. “They would like to drill a well up above Rico and be able to run the water down into town.”

England stressed Rico has tried to address their water concerns without new sources, but the 300 lots currently using water have put a strain on the town’s resources. “We have promoted the conservation of water,” England said. “We have raised prices for residential and commercial properties. We are near capacity and need to try to develop other water sources. This request is not for future development, just historic use.”[...]

The Colorado Water Conservation Board allows the Dolores Water Conservancy a 1 per cent, or 0.20 cubic feet per second, de minimis allowance of water usage in the instream flow segment between Rico and the confluence with Fill Gulch. De minimis allowance is the maximum amount of water usage allowed without substantial impact to instream flow. The proposed Rico project would require an allocation of 0.178 cfs. “What they are proposing is taking up a substantial part of the de minimis ,” Preston said.

Curtis walked the board through the existing water use on the section of river in question, noting there are 25 existing parcels, including reserved water usage rights for the Sundial development, that have prior claim. Ultimately, Curtis did not see a problem with the Rico request. “The way consumptive use is, we should be able to handle 300 residences,” he said. “Our conclusion was this isn’t a big use on the district and we don’t see a big impact.” The board’s approval of the request was subject to CWCB agreement that only 0.022 cfs be counted against the de minimis allowance downstream of Fill Gulch.

More Dolores River watershed coverage here and here.

Energy policy — nuclear: Sheep Mountain Alliance files lawsuit against Montrose County Commissioners over Piñon Ridge uranium mill special use permit

From The Telluride Watch (Karen James):

In a complaint filed in District Court last week local conservation group Sheep Mountain Alliance alleged that the Montrose County Commissioners violated county zoning rules and abused their discretion when in September they unanimously approved a special use permit allowing the construction and operation of a uranium mill on 880 acres in Paradox Valley zoned for agricultural use. “Our main point is the industrial use in an agricultural zone,” said plaintiff’s attorney Travis Stills of the Durango-based Energy Minerals Law Center describing the grounds for the lawsuit against Chairman David White, Vice Chairman Gary Ellis, and Commissioner Ron Henderson…

The suit also charged that Montrose County Planning and Development Director Steve White abused his discretion and acted beyond his authority when making decisions regarding the special use permit application filed in July 2008 by Energy Fuels Resources Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Toronto-based Energy Fuels Inc…

Finally the complaint alleges that a meeting took place in March 2008 between EFRC representatives, the BOCC, three Montrose County employees, a Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment employee, and one member of the public in violation of state open meetings laws. At that meeting transportation, water, use of uranium, jobs and salaries, and the contents of the special use permit application were discussed, according to the complaint. The Colorado Sunshine Law states that, “All meetings of a quorum or three or more members of any local public body, whichever is fewer, at which any public business is discussed or at which any formal action may be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times.” Although no minutes were taken nor a recording made, the BOCC made several decisions regarding the proposed mill at that meeting including one to seek a special use permit for the agricultural district as a means to approve the EFRC proposal, according to the complaint. “As best as we can tell the decisions were arrived at outside the public process,” said Stills, who wrote in the court filing that “These decisions predetermined the outcome of the challenged [special use permit] proceedings and constitute an abuse of discretion and actions in exceedance of authority.”

Meanwhile, nuclear power plant developer Alternate Energy Holdings is shopping a combination nuclear/solar plant to state lawmakers, according to The Durango Telegraph. From the article:

The company has spotlighted Colorado because of its commitment to clean energy and replacing aging coal plants. Alternate Energy Holdings CEO Don Gillispie told Colorado Energy News, said the company was encouraged by the support from businessmen, labor leaders, politicians and members of the state’s administration. “They clearly understand that nuclear plants not only create clean power necessary to help with environmental challenges, but low-cost, reliable energy to stabilize the electric grid while creating thousands of high-paying jobs,” he said.

More nuclear coverage here and here.

Energy policy — nuclear: Piñon Ridge mill clears county permit hurdle

From The Denver Post (Bruce Finley):

The proposed Piñon Ridge mill awaits approval by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. Montrose County commissioners, after 25 hours of hearings, last month issued a local permit. Federal environmental regulators will leave the decision to the state. Energy Fuels executives are preparing to submit a 12-volume application to state health regulators, triggering a technical review.

Here’s the post from October 4 announcing the county’s approval.

More nuclear coverage here and here.

Rico: Some town residents lament the prospect of renewed mining, some do not

From the Cortez Journal (Kimberly Benedict):

By far, the most pressing concern among the citizens of the town is that of water. At the hearing, part-time resident Steve Williams expressed a fear felt by all who live in Rico. “My big concern is the protection of the watershed,” he said. Rico currently procures its drinking water from Silver Creek, which runs through the proposed mine site. The Rico Municipal Water Supply Diversion Gallery is located approximately 1,000 feet upstream from the site. In 2008 the town created a watershed protection area to ease fears about contamination of the water supply. The mine site, however, is just beyond the reach of the protection area.

Mark Levin, president of Outlook Resources, the company interested in exploring the molybdenum deposit, understands the concerns of those who live in Rico but maintains they are unwarranted. “I’m an environmentalist,” said Levin, who holds a degree in ecological engineering from the Colorado School of Mines. “There would be no new environmental disturbance. All you would have is environmental betterment.” The idea of environmental betterment has been a theme in Rico over the past decade, but the execution has not always been as flawless as the concept…

Silver Creek is currently listed on the Colorado Department of Health and Environment’s Water Quality Control Division’s 303(D) List as an “impaired water.” An impaired water listing signifies a body of water does not attain water quality standards due to the presence of one or more pollutants, according to WQCD’s listing methodology for the 2010 listing cycle. Silver Creek’s listing is a result of zinc and cadmium levels in the water. However, that contamination is due to past mining activity, using practices that have changed drastically.

“The perception of it being just like it was 50 years ago, I think, is false,” said Mark Walker, project director with the Colorado Brownfields Foundation. “Regulations have become a lot more stringent” Walker worked for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and was involved in the ARCO VCUP project.

More coverage from the Cortez Journal (Kimberly Benedict):

The county currently is experiencing an unemployment rate of 13.2 percent, the highest in the state, and the economic promise of an undeveloped resource is enticing. Mark Levin, of Outlook Resources, firmly believes that molybdenum could be the answer to the economic woes of the area. “Three generations could make a living off of this project,” Levin said. “There is the possibility of the creation of 200-300 new jobs and a $15 to $20 million annual payroll.” Those are large numbers for a community whose economy is tied to historically shifting markets such as agriculture, construction and tourism.

The possibilities offered by molybdenum mining are immense. A closer examination of the economy surrounding the Henderson molybdenum mine in Clear Creek County, Colo., offers a look at the influx of capital a mine could provide. According to Diane Settle, Clear Creek county assessor, the net property tax revenue in 2009 was $16,565,902 – of which Henderson contributed $9,783,975. In other words, the Henderson molybdenum mining operations alone accounts for 59 per cent of the tax base in Clear Creek County. Assuming a molybdenum operation based in Dolores County would be similar in scope and size, the project could quadruple the county’s revenue, which stood at $3,337,575 for the 2008 tax year. “The impact (of a mine) would be immense,” said Mike Thompson, an economic geologist and co-owner of Grayling Environmental, based in Cortez. “It would by far be the largest contributor to Dolores County.”

More coverage from the Cortez Journal (Kristen Plank). From the article:

In the end, the weight of that monumental decision [to permit the new molybdenum mine] will ultimately rest with the county government, for which decisions are made by three commissioners who live near Dove Creek, the county seat. “This molybdenum deposit lies within Dolores County, so any legal issues would be with Dolores County,” said Mike England, town manager in Rico. “Our jurisdiction is at the town limits.”[...]

because Dolores County has a very lenient land use code – and absolutely no zoning – projects in the county are decided one at a time. “On some of the projects, it makes it a little harder, but it depends on the project,” Dolores County Commissioner Ernie Williams said about the county’s lack of zoning. Because of the situation, Outlook chose to submit an application to secure a “land development agreement.” Outlook’s owner, Mark Levin, hopes to be granted a “use by right” for the underground molybdenum. Though the first application was denied by commissioners because too much of it was left open-ended, Levin plans to reapply. In the meantime, Rico is working on designating a three-mile planning area to minimize impacts to the town, said town planner Jennifer Stark.

More Dolores River watershed coverage here.

Summit Ridge Water District to consolidate with Montezuma Water District?

From the Cortez Journal (Kimberly Benedict):

The Summit Ridge Water District board of directors will hold a public meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 20, to discuss a proposed consolidation with Montezuma Water Company. The possible consolidation comes at a point when the Summit board believes the two organizations have become redundant. “The board feels as though the district has outlived its usefulness,” said board member Mark Tuttle. “We’ve accomplished what was necessary in the beginning.” The water district, created about twenty years ago, currently serves 540 active taps and has roughly 630 members, according to Tuttle. The district’s original purpose was to provide water to the Summit Ridge area, a task larger companies did not find appealing.

More Montezuma County coverage here.

Montezuma County: Montezuma Valley Irrigation vs. Dolores Water Conservancy and Reclamation

From the Cortez Journal (Steve Grazier/Joe Hanel):

Montezuma Valley Irrigation Co. filed a lawsuit June 5 in U.S. District Court against the Dolores Water Conservancy District and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for allegedly not meeting water requirements agreed to in a 1977 pact via the Dolores Project…

MVI attorney Kelly McCabe said Monday discussions on a possible case settlement have been ongoing between himself and conservancy district attorney Barry Spear, of the Durango firm Maynes, Bradford, Shipps & Sheftel. “Our settlement conferences with the U.S. magistrate are continuing. We’re still working and expect to be through this month,” said McCabe, who noted that a status conference is set today in Durango’s U.S. District Court…

According to the MVI lawsuit, the irrigation company “has been improperly charged (or billed) and assessed ‘delivery’ of Dolores Project water in the amount of 29,658 acre-feet despite MVI’s direct-flow rights in the Dolores River have produced 100 percent of MVI’s demand. The District (also) unilaterally determined and assessed an 8,000 acre-foot deficit against MVI to commence the 2009 irrigation season.”[...]

MVI is requesting that the federal court declare a judgment that Dolores Project water deliveries to MVI shall not … be charged to the irrigation company until all irrigation requirements are met by the conservancy. In addition, MVI is asking for “other relief” that the court deems appropriate. MVI’s case was assigned to federal court because one of the defendants – the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation – is a federal agency…

MVI was formed in 1920. The water company began receiving irrigation water in 1986 via the Dolores Project, which is managed by the conservancy district and overseen by reclamation, along with other project users.

More Montezuma County coverage here.

Energy policy — nuclear: Montrose County approves Piñon Ridge Mill 3-0

From the Telluride Daily Planet (Matthew Beaudin):

The commissioners voted 3-0 to approve the Piñon Ridge Mill, put forth by Energy Fuels Inc. Now, Energy Fuels must collect approval from the Colorado Department of Health and the Environment — a process opponents pledge will be heavily contested. The approval the company collected in Montrose was laden with 19 conditions, meaning the company must address county concerns such how much ore it processes per day. Commissioners also made a condition allowing them to tack on even more conditions in the future, cracking a door for more review.

The 880-acre project site is on private land zoned for agricultural use, not for industrial operations like processing ore, thus meriting a special use permit from Montrose County. The mill has torn an otherwise quiet region in two. Supporters say the revival of the uranium industry can create much-needed jobs in an area short of them and that uranium is the area’s roots — ore pulled from the earth went toward the Manhattan Project and shot life into boom towns like Naturita and now-bust Uravan. Opponents, meanwhile, say that the industry is part of the past and sickened people and the land alike and claim its environmental effects will be too great — from affecting crops to impacting tourism.

More nuclear coverage here and here.

Dolores River: Tamarisk grants available

From the Targeted News Service:

The U.S. Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management has modified its announcement of a cooperative agreement opportunity to conduct habitat restoration by removing invasive weeds in Colorado’s Dolores River Watershed. The funding announcement was modified Sept. 14 to reflect a change in the category of funding activity, expected number of awards and the contact details. This funding is available under the American Recovery and Investment Act of 2009…

The funding opportunity number is RECOVERY-ACT-BLM-CO-RFA09-1471. It was posted Sept. 14 with an application closing date of Sept. 15.

More Dolores River coverage here and here.

Precipitation news: Telluride area is missing the monsoon season

From the Telluride Daily Planet (Katie Klingsporn):

This summer, though, there has been a noticeable absence of the afternoon storms. Monday — when people pulled out rain jackets and umbrellas to hide from the cold sheet of rain — was only the sixth day of rain in the month, according to a local weather reporter. And according to his tallies, the precipitation for the month is running nearly 2 inches behind average. “We’re way below average for the month,” said Thom Carnevale, who measures Telluride’s precipitation near San Juan Village. “This has been one of the driest Augusts we’ve had in the past several years.” As of Monday morning, Carnevale had recorded 91/100th of an inch of precipitation for the month, with rain falling on Aug. 5-6, 14, and 22-24. The average rainfall for June, he said, is 2.92 inches.

And this is only the second half of the story of strange summer weather. Chapter one happened in June, when what is typically one of the driest months of the year turned into one of the wetter ones. June — usually the month of sun-worshipping days — was cold and drippy this year. While the average precipitation in June is 1.22 inches, Carnevale said, this year June brought 2.59 inches — more than double the average…

For western Colorado, the southwest monsoon pattern generally begins around the second week of July, and can last into September. This year, though, Lawrence said that a consistent trough has hung over the east, while a ridge has sat over the west, “which has kept us high and dry and them wet and cold. It’s just kept us from getting a real monsoon season.”

USDA halts tamarisk leaf beetle releases in eight western states

From The Durango Telegraph:

A decades-old effort to bring a natural tamarisk predator into the region has started to yield strong results. Tamarisk stands along the Dolores, Colorado and San Juan rivers have taken hard hits in recent years thanks largely to the release of the beetles.

In 2004, beetles were transported to Moab and the Horsethief bench outside of Fruita. Not only have those local transplants thrived at the expense of tamarisk, they have started to spread through the region and chewed through many of the invasive trees in their wake. The beetles have spread up the Dolores drainage, along the Mancos River and could already be eating salt cedar in the Animas River drainage. The State of Colorado also recently got on the beetle bandwagon and sowed the bugs along the Arkansas River

However, U.S. Department of Agriculture officials recently revoked Colorado’s permits to move the beetles across state borders. The USDA also banned any release of the beetles in eight other Western states.

The orders were the result of a lawsuit filed by the Center for Biological Diversity and the Maricopa Audubon Society. The suit charged that the tamarisk leaf beetle is contributing to the decline of the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher.

Flycatchers nest in the invasive tamarisk because the species of native riparian trees in which they previously nested have been replaced by tamarisk and are no longer available. The Endangered Species Act requires that federal agencies not harm endangered species or their habitat and that they consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to formulate plans to avoid such harm.

Following the moratorium, the Center for Biological Diversity and Maricopa Audubon Society killed their legal challenge. “We are relieved that the program has decided to obey the law and will now consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service to prevent any further jeopardy to a federally protected species. Our case will now be dismissed,” said attorney Matt Kenna of the Durango-based Western Environmental Law Center.

More invasive species coverage here and here.

Montrose County: Piñon Ridge plant pollution control

Here’s a report about precautions at the proposed Piñon Ridge mill in Montrose County, from Joe Hanel writing for The Durango Herald. From the article:

In an application to Montrose County for a special use permit on the mill site, Energy Fuels briefly lists some of the steps it will take to control pollution.

The mill will have the best available technology to reduce air emissions, according to the application. Mill opponents worry about dust pollution from the strong winds common to the Paradox Valley.

But company officials say they will spray roads, stockpiles and tailings with water or chemical dust suppressants.

Five air monitors are collecting data to establish a baseline for air quality, and they will continue monitoring during mill operation.

Waste ponds will be lined to avoid groundwater pollution and designed to withstand a 1,000-year storm. The mill site will be designed to have no stormwater discharge, according to the county permit application.

More energy policy nuclear coverage here and here.

Energy policy — nuclear: Workers during the 1950s exposed to cancer-causing levels of radiation

From The Durango Herald (Jo Hanel):

Public Health Service official Duncan Holaday was in charge of the study, and he quickly found evidence that unventilated mines were exposing workers to cancer-causing levels of radiation. Vents would have helped lessen the danger. But the Public Health Service couldn’t get access to the mines without permission from mine owners. To get permission, inspectors promised the mine owners not to warn workers of radiation hazards, Holaday testified in a lawsuit brought by Navajo uranium miners. “You had to get the survey done, and you knew perfectly well you were not doing the correct thing … by not informing the workers,” Holaday said, according to the Openness Project report.

More energy policy nuclear coverage here.

Lower Dolores Plan Working Group: Issue fact sheets

Here’s the link to the Dolores River Dialogue’s Lower Dolores Plan Working Group set of issue fact sheets. Here’s a report from the Cortez Journal. From the article:

The goal is to gather information, identify values worthy of protection in the planning area, formulate ideas for protection of the values, and make recommendations to the Dolores Public Lands Office – the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Once the Lower Dolores Management Plan Working Group makes its recommendations, the public lands office will initiate a formal environmental assessment process, conduct public involvement, and issue a decision notice.

More Coyote Gulch Dolores River coverage here.

Energy policy — nuclear: Montrose County Commissioners to hold hearing for new uranium mill August 13

From the Montrose Daily Press:

A public hearing for the proposed Piñon Ridge uranium mill between Naturita and Bedrock is slated for 5:30 p.m. Aug. 13, at the Nucla High School gym, 224 W. Fourth St., Nucla. Commissioners are considering whether to approve a special use permit for Energy Fuels to operate the mill in an area zoned for agriculture. Energy Fuels recently secured the approval of the Montrose County Planning Commission, which, after several hearings, voted unanimously to forward the application on to the county commissioners with a recommendation for approval.

Proponents say the mill will bring badly needed jobs to the West End and regenerate the economy. Opponents contend the mill could pose health and environmental hazards that will last well beyond the anticipated economic boost.

More Coyote Gulch nuclear energy policy coverage here and here.

Precipitation (storage) news: San Juan River seeing increased flows

From The Durango Herald:

[Wednesday, July 8] Declining river flows in the San Juan Basin are leading the Bureau of Reclamation to increase water releases from Navajo Reservoir to 800 cubic feet per second…The increase goes into effect today at 4 a.m…”We’re releasing what’s required for irrigation,” about 610 cubic feet per second, [Vallecito Reservoir Superintendent Hal Pierce] said. Lemon Reservoir was releasing water at 175 cubic feet per second Tuesday.

From the Cortez Journal (Kristen Plank):

McPhee Reservoir is sitting at an active capacity of 217,000 acre-feet, with a maximum capacity of 229,000 acre-feet. The result is an approximate 12,000 acre-feet decrease, or an almost 3-foot drop in elevation, said Mike Preston, general manager of the Dolores Water Conservancy District…

In June, McPhee sat completely full until the 10th. Last year, the reservoir stayed full until July 19. “The reservoir did not stay full as long (this year) because we didn’t have the snowpack that we did in 2008,” Preston said. “But since the water usage was more moderate because of the cool, cloudy weather, we are only about six days ahead of where we were in 2008.”[...]

“The good news is that we filled this year for the second year in a row,” Preston said. “We are in good shape to meet all of our allocations for 2009…

Jackson Gulch Reservoir is also in good shape for the season, said Mancos Water Conservancy District Superintendent Gary Kennedy. The reservoir’s active capacity sits at 10,000 acre-feet and is roughly 200 acre-feet from full now. The reservoir was very close to full for July 4, which Kennedy said is unusual for this time of year.

San Juan Skyway land and water projects

From The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh):

The 16 projects started in 2005 with a $5.7 million challenge grant from Great Outdoors Colorado. More than 30 partners, including cities, counties, private foundations, individuals and landowners who contributed part of the value of their conservation easements found $11.8 million to supplement the GOCO grant. “We’re very pleased we exceeded our own expectations,” said Ken Francis of the Fort Lewis College Office of Community Services, who coordinated efforts. “We raised more money, got more work done and preserved more land than anticipated.”[...]

Nina Williams, executive director of the Montezuma Land Conservancy, which acquired conservation easements on 3,100 acres of 10 working ranches along the Mancos and Dolores rivers, spoke of the relationship between people and the landscape in Southwest Colorado. “The San Juan Skyway and Southwest Colorado is defined by the relationship that people – ranchers, farmers, sightseers and hunters and fishermen – have with the land,” Williams said. “The vision of the Skyway coalition has been to preserve the intrinsic quality of the region so people can continue to maintain that relationship and their way of life.” The San Juan Skyway is a 236-mile highway loop that takes the traveler from Durango and back via Silverton, Ouray, Ridgway, Telluride, Rico, Dolores, Cortez and Mancos.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Montezuma County: Dolores River Festival

Here’s a recap of the Dolores River Festival, from TJ Holmes writing for the Dolores Star via the Cortez Journal. From the article:

The free raft rides proved a popular offering again, with high demand. More than 200 groups went down the river from Riverside Park to Joe Rowell Park with some 25 volunteers acting as guides, helping with put-in and take-out and driving shuttles. “It went really smoothly, and we had a lot of dedicated volunteers helping with the raft ride activities,” Gans said. “It’s a really intensive activity to offer, but we are committed to offering that as a river festival. I think the families really enjoyed the rides this year.”

The fun and wild water competitive kayak races had about 10 participants with prizes awarded to the top three finishers in each category.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Dolores River: ‘It’s a complicated river’ — Amber Kelley

From The Durango Telegraph (Missy Votel):

If ever there was an enigma wrapped in a riddle, it would be the Dolores River. Not only does the “River of Sorrows” take an abrupt northward about-face on its 250-mile journey to the Colorado River, but the origins of the name itself (“El Rio de Nuestra Senora de las Dolores,” possibly bestowed by a Spanish explorer in the mid 1700s) are shrouded in mystery. However, more than 250 years after the first white settlers laid eyes on it, the Dolores continues to confound those looking to protect the increasingly precious resource. “It’s a complicated river,” said Amber Kelley, a Cortez native who now lives in Dolores and works as the Dolores River Campaign Coordinator for the San Juan Citizens Alliance. In her role, Kelley helps head up the Dolores River Coalition, a group conservation and recreation organizations that “care about the fate of the Dolores River.” The coalition, in turn, gives input to the Dolores River Dialogue, a broader group made up of stakeholders from farmers to federal agencies. That group formed in 2004 with the goal of balancing ecological conditions of the stretch of river below McPhee Reservoir with water rights, and recreational interests. To make things more complex, that Dolores River Dialogue, or DRD, dovetailed in 2008 to help form the Lower Dolores Management Plan Working Group. Also made up of a broad cross section of interests, the work group is preparing recommendations for an update to the San Juan Public Lands Center’s 1990 Dolores River Management Plan, slated for later this fall. Throw in the Bureau of Reclamation and Dolores Water Conservancy, which oversee operation of McPhee Dam, the Bureau of Land Management, which is responsible for management of much of the river’s surrounding public lands, as well as a Wilderness Study Area, Wild and Scenic River suitability and increasing pressures from the mining and oil and gas industry, and the scenario has more twists and turns than the meandering river itself.

Nevertheless, there is an overriding theme to it all: protection of the Dolores and its myriad uses. It is this common thread that has been guiding the work group’s attempt to reconcile the different uses with preserving the river, or in some cases, bringing it back to life…

The work group has divided the river into eight distinct sections, but the bulk of concern is over the first five, from the dam to the confluence with the San Miguel River. [Mike Preston, manager of the Dolores Water Conservancy] said the four major areas of concern include: the health of the cold-water fishery, including non-native trout; the warm-water fishery, which includes native species such as suckers, chubs and minnows; the riparian zone, which includes eradication of tamarisk and re-establishment of native cottonwoods and willows; as well as the geomorphology, including sediment build up and flow. “The opportunities to do something positive for the river vary from reach to reach,” said Preston. “The original flow from McPhee was designed with the sport fishery in mind, but the objective now has grown much broader.”[...]

the Lower Dolores is also home to the eastwood monkeyflower and the kachina daisy, both found in only a few dozen sites throughout the Four Corners. Aside from the stresses low flows put on the downstream ecology, [Ann Oliver, the South San Juan Mountains Project Director for the Nature Conservancy] sees the biggest threats to the Lower Dolores as invasive species, such as tamarisk and Russian knapweed, and the extractive industry. In addition to past and possible future uranium mining in the area, natural gas drilling could also have impacts. Recently, the Denver-based Bill Barrett Corp. began conducting natural gas exploration in Paradox Valley using Dolores River Project water in the hydraulic frac-ing process.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Jackson Gulch and McPhee reservoirs update

From the Cortez Journal:

Jackson Gulch reservoir live content stood at 7,723 acre-feet with a 9,948 acre-feet maximum capacity and a 7,333 acre-feet average (1971-2000) end-of-month content. At Jackson Gulch, a daily maximum/minimum of 0 cubic-feet-per-second was released into the Mancos River, and 44 acre feet were released for municipal purposes.

McPhee Reservoir live content stood at 329,978 acre-feet, with a 381,051 acre-feet maximum capacity and a 336,999 average (1986-2000) end-of-month content. At McPhee, 3,023 acre-feet were released into the Dolores River, and 8,554 acre-feet were released for transbasin purposes. At McPhee, a daily maximum/minimum of 63/49 cubic-feet-per-second was released into the Dolores River.

CWCB: Instream flow water rights

Here’s a recap of this week’s meeting of the Colorado Water Conservation Board Stream and Lake Section this week in Montrose, from Mallory George writing for the Montrose Daily Press. From the article:

“We are here to balance human needs with some reasonable preservation of the natural environment,” said Jeff Baessler, the deputy section chief at CWCB. He cited the Tragedy of the Commons, in which everyone has free use of resources and eventually exhaust those resources because of lack of regulation, as the need for water appropriations…

After groups such as the Bureau of Land Management, a homeowners association and the U.S. Forest Service recommended 54 streams and rivers to be protected this year, the CWCB began conducting tests to ensure that a natural environment exists, which is typically, but not always, marked by fishery. Baessler said the CWCB also makes sure that the natural environment in question will be preserved by the water available for appropriation. Not all of the water in streams is recommended to be a part of the instream flow program, just enough to preserve the environment. The water is then unavailable for consumptive use. The final statutory requirement the board must meet before finalizing an appropriation is to ensure that the new appropriation will not conflict with an existing water right.

Hydrologists are currently conducting water availability tests, while other Stream and Lake Protection staff members are meeting with local governments and communities to address concerns. In January, the Stream and Lake Protection Section will present recommendations to the CWCB, which will then declare intent for the appropriations. Baessler discussed the Division 4 recommendations, which include those in Montrose, Gunnison, Hinsdale and Delta counties. Big Dominguez Creek, Little Dominguez Creek, an increase to the Blue Creek instream flow, South Willow Creek, Alpine Creek, Spring Creek, two sections of Cebolla Creek, Red Canyon Creek, the San Miguel River, three segments of Tabeguache Creek, North Fork Tabeguache Creek, two sections of Cochetopa Creek and East Beaver Creek were recommended to the department. The San Miguel River section — from Calamity Draw to the Dolores River — which holds several sensitive species of fish, prompted confusion when it was initially recommended in February 2008 because people were concerned there would not be enough water available for consumption…

In the Uravan area, many of the water rights belong to Umetco Minerals Co., which operates a uranium mill. The company is in the process of remediating and closing down its operations and is estimated to finish by the end of this year. In anticipation of that, and for the CWCB to receive those water rights, a study was conducted by the Stream and Lake Section, the Southwester Water Conservation District and Harris Water Engineering, Inc., that resulted in several recommendations for the area. “We tried to create a package of the best water rights for local entities and the state as well,” said Dan Merriman of Harris Water Engineering. The study recommended that two Tabeguache wells and a Uravan well be given to Montrose for its use. Three other wells and the San Miguel Power Company Canal water rights would be abandoned; that is, they would be relinquished to the stream, but not be protected instream flows. Johnson Ditch water rights would shift to local government entities such as Nucla, Naturita and Montrose Country to meet existing and future needs, Merriman said. Until Umetco is out of the area, however, these recommendations cannot be carried out.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

CWCB: Potential Division 4 Instream Flow appropriations in 2010

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Rob Viehl):

The Stream and Lake Protection Section of the Colorado Water Conservation Board is meeting with interested parties to discuss recommendations received for potential Division 4 Instream Flow appropriations in 2010 on Alpine Gulch, Big Dominguez Creek, Blue Creek (increase), Cebolla Creek, Cochetopa Creek, East Beaver Creek, Little Dominguez Creek, North Tabeguache Creek, Red Canyon Creek, San Miguel River, Spring Creek, Tabeguache Creek, and Willow Creek.

Two separate public meetings are scheduled on May 27th to discuss the proposed recommendations.

9:00 AM to Noon
Montrose County Administration Building
BOCC Board Room
161 S. Townsend Ave
Montrose, CO 81401

5:30 PM to 7:30 PM
Lake City School
614 North Silver St.
Lake City, CO 81235

The Stream and Lake Protection staff will provide a brief presentation on the ISF program as a background for the discussion. For additional information on these segments, please visit the CWCB’s website at: http://cwcb.state.co.us/StreamAndLake/NewAppropriations/ISFAppropriationNotices/2010ProposedAppropriations/2010Appropriations.htm

Questions about new appropriations may be directed to Jeff Baessler at 303-866-3441 ext 3202 or Jeffrey.Baessler@state.co.us

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Energy policy — Oil and gas: Leases pulled near Dolores River

From the Telluride Daily Planet:

About 400 acres of high desert land will be removed from an upcoming oil and gas lease sale due to its proximity to the Dolores River. Stretches of the Dolores, which pours through the Big Gypsum Valley and has worn grooves through the red rock of the southwest, are up for wild and scenic river corridor designation, potentially affording the river lofty environmental protections. Part of the roughly 1,200 acres in San Miguel County in the Bureau of Land Management’s mineral rights auction on May 14 inched toward the Dolores, prompting a review from county officials. The BLM has deferred about 400 acres near the river.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Norwood: Trihalomethanes in water supply

From the Telluride Daily Planet:

Letters went out last week letting water users know that the municipal water was once again over the limit for TTHM (Total Trihalomethanes) during the first quarter of 2009. TTHM are the by-products created by the disinfectants in the water, by-products that some people believe cause problems with the liver, kidneys and central nervous system. “We have to do something to try and alleviate the by-products within our system,” said Patti Grafmyer, Norwood’s town administrator. “The board is moving forward with the chloramination, even if we don’t get the funding.” The water commission is trying to tap into the stimulus funds, the ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) package passed by Congress this year, to fund the chloramination project. The board submitted its request last week.

Chloramination is a more drastic measure than the first steps taken by the commission and the public works department. They initially hoped to solve the water issues with improvements to the system made last April. Those upgrades were on the system’s front end, where water enters the system. The TOC (total organic compounds) that enter the system are what binds with the disinfectant to create the byproducts. Those upgrades successfully reduced the TOC intake, and they also alleviated another problem by-product, HAA5 (haloacetic acids), but the TTHM problem has been more persistent. Chloramination means adding chlorine and ammonia to the water, a process that should produce water that meets the standards even at the ends of the 85-mile distribution line, when the water has had time to react with the disinfectants. “Chloramine is a disinfectant produced by combining chlorine and ammonia at a weight ratio of five to one or slightly less, which produces monochloramine,” said Grafmyer. “Monochloramine is the dominant compound formed and is considered to a suitable ‘residual’ disinfectant, i.e., appropriate for maintaining effective disinfectant levels throughout the distribution system.”

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.