Southern Delivery System: Colorado Springs Utilities requests Reclamation move forward on contract talks

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“To maintain our current schedule to begin construction on the Pueblo Dam connection in early 2010, we have requested that Reclamation move forward with the contracting process as soon as possible,” said John Fredell, project director…

The contract negotiations will provide an additional opportunity for public comment on SDS, a $1 billion-plus pipeline project on track to be completed by 2016…

Colorado Springs Utilities also is seeking permits in El Paso County, and expects to present its case to the El Paso County Planning Commission in February, Fredell said. The city also has scheduled meetings with the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District, its technical advisory committee and its citizens advisory group during December and January.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

Pueblo West: Pumpback plan update

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Pueblo West is seeking state health department approval of a pumpback plan it says will not harm Lake Pueblo, which is contested by State Parks and the Pueblo Board of Water Works. The Pueblo County commissioners and Pueblo Area Council of Governments have balked at approval of Pueblo West’s plan to return treated sewer flows into a gulch behind the golf course above Lake Pueblo. Right now, all options are open, said Pueblo County’s water attorney Ray Petros…

“On the one hand, they say they have the science,” Petros said. “Then why are they so reticent about putting in an application for a 1041 permit so there could be public scrutiny and independent verification of that science?” The county still would have to permit a discharge into Lake Pueblo, even if state approval is given. There also likely would be issues with the Bureau of Reclamation for long-term storage contracts in Lake Pueblo, Petros said…

The pumpback option would allow Pueblo West to use more of [transmountain] flows because there would not be the transit loss associated with Wild Horse Dry Creek.

More Pueblo West coverage here.

Pueblo West: Discharge site request change spawns ill will

From The Pueblo West View (Mike Spence):

The 3-0 vote to reject the site application plan came after a 30-minute debate in which Pueblo West officials accused the county commissioners of singling out the Pueblo West project for rejection, of going back on their word, and connecting this project with the county’s battle with Pueblo West over the Southern Delivery System.

Those charges brought a rebuke from Commission Chairman Jeff Chostner. “It was the procedural compliance that is the problem,” Chostner said. “We are not hostile to your option. I have no opinion on your option. Until it comes to us formally, we are going to hold you to strict procedural compliance…

The war of words was over the metro district’s filing of an application with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to relocate the discharge site of its wastewater plant from the Arkansas to Lake Pueblo. The application is one of the first steps in the metro district’s attempt to build a pump back project that will clean wastewater from its wastewater plant and pump it six miles to the Golf Course Wash and into Lake Pueblo. Pueblo West’s water is non-native to the Arkansas Basin, so it can be re-used to extinction, according to state law. It also would negate the need for exchanges from Lake Pueblo, metro district officials said. Currently, Pueblo West cleans its wastewater and pumps it to Wild Horse Dry Creek and into the Arkansas River. Pueblo West is given credit for that water and exchanges those credits for water from Lake Pueblo.

More Pueblo West coverage here.

Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Director Jim Broderick pow wows with Reclamation’s Mike Ryan

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“I think they are starting to understand the significance of what we are trying to do, and listening to the Secretary of Interior,” Jim Broderick, director of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District told the board Thursday. Broderick went to Billings, Mont., last week to meet with Mike Ryan, regional director for Reclamation, and other officials. He took a list of about 20 issues that have been of concern to the district in recent years. It’s a new era of cooperation for the district, which has had an often placid, but sometimes stormy relationship with Reclamation in the past. A large part of the credit for the thaw belongs to Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar, Broderick said. Salazar met with Southern Colorado water interests in August. His major action as a result of the meeting was to appoint Deanna Archuleta, deputy assistant secretary for water and science, as liaison for Arkansas Valley issues, like Southern Delivery System and the Arkansas Valley Conduit. Ryan also attended that meeting.

More Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District coverage here.

Change in Pueblo West effluent discharge point (to Lake Pueblo) debated

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“State parks’ greatest concern surrounds the public perception of a direct wastewater discharge into the North Marina Cove,” John Geerdes, regional manager for state parks wrote in a letter to Pueblo West officials last week. The public perception could decrease use of the north boat ramp as well as the North Marina Cove, impacting visitation and revenue at the state park, the most heavily used in Colorado, Geerdes said. A lengthy list of other concerns also is addressed in the letter.

Pueblo West wants to change its discharge point for treated sewage from Wild Horse Dry Creek to a gulch behind the Pueblo West Golf Course, about two miles from Lake Pueblo. The $6.5 million project would discharge water that meets state Department of Public Health and Environment guidelines and would allow Pueblo West to fully use its transmountain water rights, said Steve Harrison, Pueblo West utilities director. The metro district is confident its releases into the gulch won’t be detrimental to water quality in Lake Pueblo, noting that Pueblo West also takes its water from the lake and would not want to jeopardize its own supply, Harrison said…

Geerdes said state parks’ concerns include: Long-term effects of nutrient loading in the lake are unknown and create the potential for algae blooms that could affect both wildlife habitat and the appearance of the lake; Increased weed production, including tamarisk, along the drainage in the gulch. The state is asking for assurances that weeds would be controlled; The lack of dilution of water that is released into the gulch; State parks wants a long-term monitoring plan that includes the point of discharge into the reservoir; State parks has a potable water line that crosses the drainage, which could wash out with increased flows.

“State parks requests Pueblo West explore, evaluate and present other alternative options before making any final decision to release water return flows into Golf Course Wash,” Geerdes wrote.

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Peter Roper):

Pueblo West is filing an application with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to relocate the discharge site of its wastewater plant from the Arkansas River below Pueblo Dam to Lake Pueblo. The discharge would be of treated water, not wastewater. Currently, the treatment plant discharges water into Pesthouse Gulch and then into the Arkansas River below the dam. The application would change the discharge route into Golf Course Wash, which leads into Lake Pueblo near the North Marina. District Manager Larry Howe-Kerr told the [Pueblo County] commissioners the district would satisfy all of the state’s water quality requirements in making the change.

Commissioners, however, turned down the request for approval, agreeing with county planning staff that the regional water-quality management plan, called a “208 plan” after the pertinent section of state law, needed to be amended first. That process could take six months or longer, according to Kim Headley, the county’s planning director. Howe-Kerr challenged that assessment, saying the regional plan should be modified later, after the state approves the change in the discharge site…

Headley said Lake Pueblo is a major source of drinking water to the region and other communities would want to comment on the Pueblo West application. Amending the 208 plan would require public hearings on the proposed change. After the commissioners voted not to approve Pueblo West’s application to the state, Howe-Kerr said Pueblo West would press ahead with the application anyway with the state’s Water Quality Control Division.

More Pueblo West project coverage here.

Arkansas River: Streamflow below Lake Pueblo

From The Pueblo Chieftaian (Chris Woodka):

Flows from the dam were cut from about 350 cubic feet per second Saturday to 70 cfs on Sunday, as irrigators began a program that allows them to store winter flows for use later in the year. The winter water program was started by ditch companies under an agreement with the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District in 1975, after Pueblo Dam was completed. It became a decreed water program in 1984. Water is stored in Lake Pueblo, as well as several downstream reservoirs, from Nov. 15 to March 15 of the following year…

Under a recovery of yield program, created by an intergovernmental agreement in 2004, a minimum flow of 100 cfs below Pueblo Dam is maintained throughout the winter months. The flow is calculated at the river gauge above Pueblo, with flows through the state fish hatchery added. This week, flows above Pueblo have been between 60-65 cfs, while fish hatchery flows have been between 30-40 cfs. “What we’ve agreed to is that the flow won’t go under 100 cfs, with retroactive curtailment of exchanges after March 15,” said Alan Ward, water resources administrator with the Pueblo Board of Water Works. Ward supervises the recovery of yield program. That decision was made last year, after flows in the Arkansas River dropped to nearly nothing in 2005 and were in danger of running low again in 2007. The IGA among Pueblo, the Pueblo water board, Colorado Springs, Aurora, Fountain and the Southeastern district calls for curtailment of exchanges when the river drops below 100 cfs…

In practice, Colorado Springs is the only IGA participant that exchanges in the winter months, storing water out of priority in Lake Pueblo in exchange for return flows, mostly from treated sewage, down Fountain Creek.

More Arkansas River Basin coverage here.

Reclamation: Fryingpan summer flows concern for fishermen

From The Aspen Times:

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is preparing a response to a letter of concern about summer water releases from Ruedi Reservoir, and it should be available to the public next week, an agency spokeswoman said. The Basalt town government and Ruedi Water and Power Authority asked the reclamation bureau for a detailed review of the water releases. The releases from the dam created a six-week “disaster” for anglers on the Fryingpan River, says a letter from the entities. Copies of the letter were sent to members of Colorado’s congressional delegation and state legislators. The reclamation bureau received the letter Monday and is collecting information for the response, said spokeswoman Kara Lamb.

More Fryingpan-Arkansas Project watershed coverage here.

Southern Delivery System: Fountain Creek improvements still on tap despite Colorado Springs’ stormwater enterprise fund uncertainty

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The stormwater enterprise, which is expected to be phased out over eight years after Colorado Springs voters passed Doug Bruce’s Issue 300 last week, was linked to the Bureau of Reclamation’s environmental impact statement. “We need to read the language carefully,” Bruce McCormick, Colorado Springs water chief, said Friday. “While the enterprise is losing funding over time, SDS is still going to be funded according to the commitments in the EIS.” If necessary, Colorado Springs would pay for those commitments through the rate structure associated with building the $1 billion-plus SDS project, McCormick said. The EIS, released earlier this year by Reclamation, says Colorado Springs is responsible for improving storm drainage in the city as it grows, so that it will not exacerbate problems associated with runoff into Fountain Creek – erosion, sedimentation and pollution…

In replies to concerns about the future of the enterprise, Reclamation responded that the actions promised by Colorado Springs are independent of the enterprise. The EIS talks about the purposes for forming the enterprise in 2005. Colorado Springs sought to address a 20-year backlog of $300 million in stormwater improvements and strengthen planning with $17 million annually in new revenues. Some of those improvements were tied to correcting conditions that led, in part, to more than 100 sanitary sewer spills between 1998 and 2005, which were cited in a federal lawsuit by the Sierra Club. Colorado Springs has promised Pueblo County it would make $75 million in improvements to fortify its sanitary sewer system, pay $50 million to the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District and make other improvements as a condition for a 1041 permit. “We plan to begin dredging in the channel through Pueblo and enhancing wetlands in 2010,” McCormick said. “Those actions have nothing to do with the stormwater enterprise. The commitments are a separate component.”

Meanwhile it looks like there will be a legal challenge to Douglas Bruces’s Issue 300, passed by Colorado Springs’ voters last week. 300 would phase out the city’s stormwater enterprise. Here’s a report from Daniel Chaćon writing for The Colorado Springs Gazette. From the article:

The confusing and ambiguous language of ballot issue 300 is subject to various legal interpretations, and unnamed citizens groups are already talking about challenging the legality of a major part of the initiative, outgoing Assistant City Manager Mike Anderson said Thursday. The ballot initiative, which voters approved last week, is apparently in conflict with the city charter, Anderson said during a candid and wide-ranging speech before the Colorado Springs Press Association…

Anderson said Issue 300 amended the city code, but not the city charter, and the city charter allows payments in lieu of taxes. The city charter, which is analogous to state or U.S. constitutions for the city, trumps the city code, which is comprised of enacted city ordinances, he said…

Anderson said the city at this point doesn’t plan to challenge the legality of Issue 300, and he wouldn’t identify the citizens groups considering the legal challenge. Anderson would only say that “there’s some talk out there.” But the city is just starting to “dig into the implications” of 300, he said.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Colorado Springs voters approve Douglas Bruce’s Issue 300 but Mayor Rivera says it will have no effect on the operation of the city’s stormwater enterprise fund

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (R. Scott Rappold):

The Douglas Bruce-sponsored ballot measure requires payments in lieu of taxes to the city to be phased out over eight years, beginning in July 2010, and the money returned to rate payers. The payments are designed to compensate the city for tax revenue it would receive if Utilities were privately owned. That amounts to more than $3 million in 2010. According to the city clerk’s analysis of the ballot measure, residential bills would drop 52 cents each month, beginning in January 2010.

More coverage from The Colorado Springs Gazette (Lance Benzel). From the article:

“Even though the language was extremely vague, I’m going to be recommending on Monday that we adopt a resolution repealing the Stormwater Enterprise and the fee (associated with it),” [Colorado Springs Councilman Darryl Glenn] said. Glenn said he plans to propose the immediate creation of a committee that would include county officials. The group would be tasked with developing a proposed regional stormwater authority to take to voters for their approval in November 2010. “That’s the way we should have done it in the first place instead of imposing a fee,” he said. But in the short-term, the council has a “responsibility to carry out the voters’ intent,” Glenn said. “One thing you can’t argue is that if you drove around the community, there were enough signs that clearly stated that this issue dealt with the stormwater tax and fee,” he said. “This council is in trouble if we, in my opinion, ignore the will of the voters on 300,” he added. “We need buy-in, and there has to be a relationship of trust with the electorate and to me, this will be a slap in the face if we don’t follow the direction that we’ve been given.”

More coverage from The Colorado Springs Gazette (Daniel Chacon). From the article:

Mayor Lionel Rivera, who said Tuesday night that issue 300 wouldn’t affect the Stormwater Enterprise, left open the possibility that it did. “There’s a question on whether or not the language the way it was spelled out in 300 really applies to the Stormwater Enterprise,” he said during a news conference. “I don’t know the answer,” he added. “We have to have a discussion with the city attorney to determine how we’re going to do an implementing ordinance to put all this into effect.”

The Douglas Bruce-sponsored ballot measure requires payments in lieu of taxes to the city to be phased out over eight years, beginning in July 2010, and the money returned to ratepayers. Bruce said it was “absurd” for city officials to say the ballot issue didn’t apply to the Stormwater Enterprise…

Meanwhile, Colorado Springs Utilities officials said they were still determining when ratepayers will see an impact from issue 300. The payments made by Utilities to the city, designed to compensate the city for tax revenue it would receive if Utilities were privately owned, amounts to more than $3 million in 2010. According to the city’s analysis of 300, residential bills would drop 52 cents each month, beginning in January 2010.

Folks in Pueblo County are looking north to see if Issue 300 will effect Colorado Springs’ commitments to Fountain Creek imposed on the city utility through the permitting process earlier this year. Colorado Springs Utilities is planning to build the Southern Delivery System pipeline through Pueblo County. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Wednesday morning, Mayor Lionel Rivera and Councilman Scott Hente challenged Bruce’s interpretation that Issue 300 ended the stormwater enterprise. On Tuesday night, Bruce triumphantly tore up his stormwater bill for TV cameras, proclaiming the end of what he calls a “rain tax.” The stormwater enterprise was approved by Colorado Springs City Council in 2005 and implemented in 2007. It was designed to raise $17 million a year to address a $300 million backlog of storm sewer projects in the Fountain Creek watershed. In 2008, Colorado Springs voters rejected a similar attempt by Bruce to gut the stormwater fees. This year’s version did not mention the stormwater enterprise by name, but Bruce campaigned against it while promoting Issue 300.

Colorado Springs issued a statement Wednesday that made it clear there are no intentions to remove the stormwater fee: “The passage of Issue 300 created a new ordinance relating to City Enterprises. City Council will have to take action to implement any changes as a result of the new ordinance. “Unless and until that occurs, we will continue to proceed under current City Code. Any changes made to the Stormwater Enterprise would require future action by City Council. “City Council has publicly stated that Issue 300 will not impact the stormwater enterprise so we do not anticipate any changes at this time to our operations.”[...]

In Pueblo, those who fought to gain concessions from Colorado Springs believe the stormwater enterprise is needed. “We believe the interpretation that storm sewers were not included in the ballot language is correct,” said Pueblo County Commissioner Jeff Chostner, who is also a member of the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District. “I think the people of Colorado Springs see good things happening on Fountain Creek and realize that on an important issue like this, you need to establish trust,” Chostner. Regardless of what happens to the stormwater enterprise, Colorado Springs is still obligated to meet the $125 million in payments under Pueblo County conditions, Chostner said. “I don’t think that voting down the stormwater enterprise would affect the SDS requirements,” Chostner said. “Then, the question for them internally would be how they fund it.”[...]

Ross Vincent, of the Sierra Club, said Colorado Springs still has an obligation to take care of Fountain Creek regardless of what happens as a result of Tuesday’s vote. The Sierra Club successfully sued Colorado Springs in 2005 over violation of the federal Clean Water Act. “It’s disconcerting to say the least,” Vincent said. “Clearly, the Springs has got to capture and manage its stormwater effectively, and the residents and taxpayers of Colorado Springs will have to find a way to pay for it. “If not the current stormwater enterprise, then what, and paid for by whom? They need answers – quickly – and so do we.”

More Fountain Creek watershed coverage here and here.

Pueblo West: Looking at options to enable reuse of effluent

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Pueblo West indicated it would still submit a site application to the state for a $6.5 million project to discharge sewer flows into a wash two miles above Lake Pueblo near the golf course, even after the Pueblo Area Council of Governments rejected the proposal on an 11-1 vote earlier this month. “We don’t know what’s going to transpire with the lawsuit against the county,” said Steve Harrison, Pueblo West utilities director. “In case we can’t come to some sort of agreement, we are applying for the site application.”

PACOG rejected the proposal because it goes against county regulations on Section 208 of the federal Clean Water Act, adopted in 1993. Pueblo West would pursue the plan because it offers the best solution for future water needs. The 208 regulations are being applied to the metro district selectively and are out of date, Harrison said.

Most of Pueblo West water comes from the Colorado River Basin, which means the community can reuse the non-native flows to extinction. Currently, Pueblo West reuses the water by exchange, sending its treated sewer flows down Wild Horse Dry Creek, and recapturing about 30 percent of them after transit losses. Pueblo West estimates it could recapture 98 percent of flows with a direct exchange into Lake Pueblo.

But other water users like the Pueblo Board of Water Works and the Fountain Valley Authority are concerned that nutrient loading from the proposed pumpback could upset the biological balance of the reservoir and create new water quality issues. There is also growing pressure to regulate traces of compounds from pharmaceuticals, detergents and fertilizers that would be more likely to make their way into the water supply. “We have serious concerns for the health of the reservoir, not only in terms of water quality, but taste and odor issues as well,” said Alan Hamel, executive director of the Pueblo water board. “Pueblo Reservoir is also the most-used recreational facility in the state.”[...]

Wild Horse Dry Creek discharges into the Arkansas River about six miles downstream of a river gauge critical to the flow program, and about one mile above the river intake for the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo and Black Hills Energy. It is a significant source of selenium loading, probably because of the geology of the area – water running over shale formations.

Among the alternatives that have surfaced are:

-Building a discharge pipeline to discharge just below Pueblo Dam above the river gauge.

-Building a discharge pipeline to carry effluent to the Wild Horse confluence at the Arkansas River.

-Creating a trade with the Pueblo water board to use Pueblo West effluent to supply the Comanche Power Plant, with the water board providing water to Pueblo West. The water would still get payments from outside water sales.

-Possibly developing a cooperative arrangement among Pueblo West, Colorado Springs and the Pueblo water board to recapture flows downstream.

-Maintaining the status quo, which could leave Pueblo West in the position of having to buy new water rights if its other plans fail or with a pumpback plan in place despite the local objections…

The State Department of Public Health and Environment would have to buck the PACOG recommendation if it approves the site application…

Pueblo County also has notified Pueblo West that it would require a 1041 permit for the pumpback plan, since Pueblo West identified it as a water supply issue, Headley said.

More Pueblo West coverage here.

Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District budget hearing November 12

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District will have a hearing next month on its proposed 2010 budget, which totals $14.5 million. The hearing will be at 1 p.m. Nov. 12 at the district’s offices, 31717 United Ave., Pueblo, in the Airport Industrial Park…

About $5.3 million would repay the Fountain Valley Pipeline and is assessed only in El Paso County. The pipeline, built in the 1980s, serves Colorado Springs, Fountain, Security, Stratmoor Hills and Widefield. About $6.5 million would repay the costs of building the Fry-Ark Project itself. Personnel costs are about $1 million, while legal fees are a little more than $500,000. The overall amounts would not change significantly from the 2009 budget.

More Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District coverage here.

Pueblo West is applying to water court to move discharge point in order to store effluent in Lake Pueblo

From The Pueblo Chieftain (James Amos):

Pueblo West wants to change how its wastewater is released so that it can claim more return-flow credit for it. That would allow the district to reuse the water by collecting it again at Pueblo Dam. The water rights that supply Pueblo West come from the Western Slope, so the water can be used over and over, either physically or through exchanges of return-flow credits. Right now, Pueblo West releases treated water from its sewage-treatment plant through Pesthouse Gulch and Wildhorse Creek to the Arkansas River. That journey uses up a lot of the return-flow water by evaporation and feeding plants that grow along the gulches. Pueblo West gets return-flow credit for only 31 percent of the water that leaves the wastewater plant, Harrison said. If Pueblo West can pipe that water four miles west and release it down Golf Course Wash to Pueblo Reservoir, it can claim return-flow credit for as much as 98 percent of the water. Water rights are getting scarce in the Arkansas Valley, and Harrison said it may not be possible to buy the 3,400 acre-feet of water the “Pumpback Project” is expected to save the district. It’s enough water to supply thousands of new homes, he said.

More Pueblo West coverage here.

Lake Pueblo winter storage program update

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“What we’re trying to do is look at the reservoir operations before we’re at the point where we’re making decisions,” said Jim Broderick, executive director of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, which administers the program. “We’re trying to manage it so it does not spill.” There is little danger that winter water would spill in most years. It is far down the ladder of priorities used by the Bureau of Reclamation to determine which accounts would be released as the reservoir fills. “If winter water were to spill, there would be so much water no one would know what to do with it,” Broderick said. Water stored in most excess capacity accounts would spill first. Right now, that totals more than 36,000 acre-feet and an average winter would result in a spill of about 14,000 acre-feet under current conditions if no changes are made…

A snag could come in late April because federal rules require a maximum level on April 15 for Lake Pueblo to accommodate flood waters. The court decree that set up the winter water program gives ditch companies until May 1 to move their winter water from the previous year out of storage. Meanwhile, Reclamation is clearing out space in Turquoise and Twin Lakes to make room for next year’s imports. At the same time, Lake Pueblo will fill even more as it stores river flows in the winter water program, which allows storage rather than the former practice of flooding fields in winter months. For years, the Southeastern District routinely approved requests to store carryover water more than one year. That’s not likely now, Broderick said…

Last year, about 140,000 acre-feet of water were stored in the winter water program, but only about 48,000 acre-feet in Lake Pueblo. Water also is stored in John Martin, Lake Meredith and other downstream reservoirs. There are still 15,000 acre-feet in Lake Pueblo, primarily in accounts for the Bessemer, Catlin and High Line canals, which cannot use downstream storage. “If you can help us get the water out by April 15, that will help us manage everyone’s water a little more easily,” said Roy Vaughan, Fryingpan-Arkansas Project director for Reclamation.

“We can get it out by April 15 if the weather is good and the ground is ready,” replied Dan Henrichs, superintendent of the High Line Canal. “But if it’s not and the wind blows, it’s gone.”

Update: Here’s a look at the model being developed to measure transit loss in the Arkansas River from Pueblo Dam to John Martin Reservoir, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

[Engineer Russ Livingston] is developing a transit loss model for the Arkansas River from Pueblo Dam to John Martin Reservoir.

The reach is the most complicated along the river because of tributaries, diversions and natural features. Water is lost as it splashes on the banks, soaks into the aquifer or becomes mired in riverbed ponds and evaporates. The rate of evaporation is also influenced by whether there is a lot of water in the river or just a little. The rate is factored in when a large block of water is released from Pueblo Dam to a headgate miles away or moved into John Martin. The trouble is, the current rate being used is 0.07 percent per mile, a figure based on a court case from the 1940s and applied since the 1970s…

More data is being included in the new study – $120,000 is being provided by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District, Southeastern Water Conservancy District and other partners. Information from 58 gauges at four-hour intervals from several events in carefully chosen conditions are being used, Livingston said. The model can also be calibrated and verified against historic events. “We can segment out natural flows versus reservoir releases,” Livingston said. “At the end, you have a tool that can show you how well your model works.” The information can be useful both for ditch companies trying to account for their own water deliveries, as well as for the state in making sure other water rights aren’t injured.

More Arkansas Basin coverage here.

Twin Lakes, Turquoise and Lake Pueblo are in good shape heading into winter

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Bureau of Reclamation already is clearing space in mountain reservoirs – Turquoise and Twin lakes – by flowing water to Lake Pueblo, said Roy Vaughan, manager of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. Reclamation is expecting to clear out 65,000 acre-feet of space in anticipation of making room for 2010 imports from the Fryingpan River through the Boustead Tunnel. If snowpack and runoff were average this year, and no other adjustments made, about 14,000 acre-feet of water in some accounts would spill next spring, Vaughan said. The first 10,000 acre-feet is in a controversial account in Lake Pueblo under a long-term contract to Aurora. Other accounts holding non-project water within the basin also could be at risk as well.

However, as in the past two years, water planners are figuring out ways to use the water rather than lose it, Vaughan said. “The entities that know this is coming are finding a way out of it,” Vaughan said, noting that he is on the phone weekly to most of them as projections and water levels change. Water can be moved downstream to other reservoirs, which are far from full, either as part of water management plans or under low-rate sales to the Division of Wildlife. “Leasing water gets cheap when things get full,” Vaughan said.

More Arkansas Basin coverage here.

Arkansas Valley Conduit: U.S. Senate approves $5 million in funding

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The prospect of an infusion of federal funds is also a call to action for the district. “Our planning processes will be accelerated when we take a strong look at our cash flow,” said Jim Broderick, executive director. Broderick developed an idea that would use revenues from the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project to repay federal costs for the conduit. The bill includes a 65 percent federal match, which makes the project more affordable for Arkansas Valley communities.

On Thursday, the Senate approved a funding bill that includes the $5 million for the conduit. It will be added to a $1 million project already under way, which is funded in part by an Environmental Protection Agency grant. That work was scheduled to take more than two years, but would be completed much sooner in order to begin work on new phases of the project, Broderick said.

Other sources of money also must be lined up, including a loan from the Colorado Water Conservation board and commitments from local sponsors – the Southeastern district, the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District and up to 42 communities from St. Charles Mesa to Lamar that would benefit from the conduit. “We need to tell communities we’ll need money sooner rather than later,” Long said.

The money from this round of appropriations will go for planning and to begin work on the environmental impact statement the conduit will require. The Bureau of Reclamation already is putting a team together to complete the EIS, Broderick said.

More coverage from the La Junta Tribune Democrat. From the article:

“The people of southeastern Colorado have fought long and hard to make the vision of the Arkansas Valley Conduit a reality. Today, we are closer than ever to honoring a promise made to them nearly half-a-century ago,” [Colorado U.S. Senator Michael] Bennet said. “Forty-seven years ago, President Kennedy proclaimed this project ‘an investment in the future of this country.’ Finally, we can begin making that investment in earnest.” “Thanks to the strong support and leadership of Representatives John Salazar, Betsy Markey and Senator Mark Udall, we can begin work on the Arkansas Valley Conduit,” Bennet continued. “This is a significant step forward but we also remain committed to making sure funding for the conduit continues to flow in the years to come.” Earlier this year, Congress passed legislation authorizing the construction of the conduit that was signed into law by President Barack Obama. Bennet, Markey, Salazar and Udall requested funding for the project earlier this year.

More Arkansas Valley Conduit coverage here.

Estes Park: Alpine Anglers meeting October 15 to feature impacts of transmountain diversions

From the Estes Park Trail Gazette:

Ken Neubecker, president of Colorado Trout Unlimited, will speak Thursday on the impact of water diversions from the upper Colorado River. “More than half of the water of the upper Colorado is already diverted to the Front Range for agricultural and municipal use,” said Neubecker. “Now two new projects could take almost half of what remains.” But as conservation, government and business interests in Grand County geared up for a protracted fight, water developers Denver Water and Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District agreed to work with local agencies to find ways to meet the water needs of the Front Range while minimizing the impact on wildlife and recreation on the Colorado and Fraser Rivers. Neubecker will speak about the situation at the Alpine Anglers` monthly meeting at 7 p.m. Thursday, Oct. 15 in the Hondius Room of the Estes Park Public Library. The public is invited.

More transmountain/transbasin diversions coverage here.

Colorado Springs Utilities to hike water rates

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (R. Scott Rappold):

for the first time Utilities officials are aware of, the utility will ask for approval of a multi-year schedule of water rate hikes, 12 percent a year from 2011 through 2017, to pay for the $1.4 billion Southern Delivery System water pipeline, which would double water rates in Colorado Springs. Construction is expected to begin in 2010. Officials said the future water rate hikes would kick in automatically unless city council takes action to stop them.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

Southern Delivery System: Colorado Springs Utilities jumps into the permitting process in El Paso County

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The El Paso County Planning Commission will have a public hearing and solicit comments, most likely in early 2010. In addition, the SDS partners will host two public meetings in November to explain the project.

In Phase 1, a treatment plant in the northeast part of the city, two pumping stations and 33 miles of pipeline will be constructed in El Paso County as part of a $1 billion-plus plan to build a 50-mile pipeline from Pueblo Dam. The pipeline would serve Colorado Springs, Security, Fountain and Pueblo West and would be designed to meet water supply needs until about 2046. The first phase of the project is expected to be complete by 2016, but construction of parts of the project would begin in 2010. Colorado Spring Utilities plans to begin work on the dam connection and some of the pipeline in El Paso County next year, as well as dredging and restoration projects on Fountain Creek, according to a timeline. Construction on the treatment plant and pump stations is not expected to begin until 2012.

In Phase 2 of the project, scheduled to begin in 2020-25, two reservoirs would be constructed on Williams Creek. Colorado Springs already has obtained approval for the project from the Bureau of Reclamation, but has not begun contract negotiations for storage, exchange and conveyance at Lake Pueblo. An Army Corps of Engineers permit under the Clean Water Act is in progress, as is an agreement with the Colorado Division of Wildlife.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

Fountain Creek: Pueblo County Commissioners approve the use of SDS mitigation funds to hire administrator for the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Pueblo County commissioners Tuesday approved applying Colorado Springs funds from the Fountain Creek Corridor Master Plan effort toward its conditions on a 1041 permit for the Southern Delivery System…

The move clears the way for hiring an administrator by the end of this year, according to a timeline presented at earlier meetings of the newly created district. [Pueblo County Commissioner Jeff] Chostner is the vice-chairman of the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District, formed earlier this year by the Legislature to improve Fountain Creek. The new district, Colorado Springs and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District reached an intergovernmental agreement to provide $100,000 for each of the next two years to hire an administrator and fund office expenses.

The money would be part of $600,000 committed jointly by Colorado Springs and the Lower Ark to complete the Corridor Master Plan. Colorado Springs’ $300,000 for that effort will be credited toward the $50 million the city would pay over five years once SDS is completed. Colorado Springs will pay another $300,000 over the next three years for a study of a dam or other means of flood control on Fountain Creek…

The district has direct land use authority in the Fountain Creek floodplain from Fountain to Pueblo, but will make recommendations on pertinent land use matters throughout the watershed. In its first three months, the district has recommended approval for a 62-unit subdivision that will be annexed into the city of Fountain, and denial of approval for a gravel-pit operation proposed near Pikes Peak International Raceway.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

150 volunteers show up for Lake Pueblo cleanup day

Here’s a recap of yesterday’s cleanup at Lake Pueblo, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

By the afternoon, they had bagged 2,000 pounds of trash. “We only had hand scales, but we also found things like couches and tires that we couldn’t weigh,” said Tracy Wynn, owner of Aquatic Adventures. “Next year we hope to obtain two industrial floor scales so we can get actual weight on everything collected.” Most of the people worked along the shoreline, but a few divers showed up as well. Boaters ferried crews to shallow coves as well…

Future events will take place on the third Saturday in September to coincide with Project AWARE (Aquatic World Awareness, Responsibility and Education), Wynn added. To help with next year’s event, contact Wynn at 543-3483.

More Fryingpan-Arkansas Project coverage here and here.