Friday, August 1, 2008

UMETCO Water Rights Here's an update on the UMETCO water rights issue, from The Norwood Post. They write: Local municipalities and water boards are already starting to wrestle about what will happen when the UMETCO water rights on the San Miguel change hands next year. When the reclamation of the old Uravan uranium mill site is finally deemed complete, in 2009, the UMETCO (Union Metals Corporation) water rights -- nearly 300 cubic feet per second -- will be deeded to the CWCB (Colorado Water Conservation Board) per a 1987 consent decree. What the state board will do with those rights has been at issue this month, and last week, the board made its preliminary recommendations about how they will be used. "Montrose County and the Towns of Nucla and Naturita have expressed an interest in obtaining some of those rights," said Linda Bassi, the CWCB Chief of the Stream and Lake Protection Section. "But it's way too early for the board to be making any decisions or taking any actions on this. The water rights won't be conveyed until 2009 at the earliest." Montrose County, Nucla and Naturita aren't the only entities interested in the rights. The CWCB's mission is to keep the water in the river, as "in-stream flows," to protect the health of the system. Companies like the CC Ditch would like a share of those rights, especially if in-stream flow protection jeopardizes their claim during dry months. And the Norwood Water Commission has expressed some concern that any new water rights could conflict with the NWC's conditional water right on the San Miguel, even though it is a senior right. Currently, the local water commission doesn't draw on its water right on the San Miguel River. If and when they do start to use it, however, if they need to change the point of diversion, they would be obliged to make sure that it didn't injure any junior claims downstream like the CWCB or the basin municipalities... Should the CWCB obtain its water rights for in-stream flow protection, it could also affect future development. There would be enough water during certain times of the year to support development upstream, but when the flows are low, the water would need to remain in the river to preserve its health. Any water would need to be drawn during peak flows, and stored -- an added expense to a project. "Where it's really going to hurt developers, is you're going to have to create storage," said NWC member Finn Kjome at a July 8 meeting. The water commission agreed at that meeting to join a coalition of entities opposing the in-stream flow protection and kick in funds to support the effort. Leading that charge, according to some of the NWC members, is San Miguel County landowner/developer Neal Blue. Blue is offering legal aid to any other users who want to join his fight... San Miguel County officials -- despite Blue's and the NWC's contention -- are in favor of the CWCB protection. Last week, at a board meeting in Cortez, the state water board issued its preliminary recommendation about how to divvy up the water rights. That meeting came after an informal meeting with the Towns of Nucla and Naturita and Montrose County, with whom the CWCB had a 1991 agreement to offer the first right of refusal, should the rights be sold. The preliminary recommendation suggested that a small portion of those rights, approximately 50 cfs from the Johnson Ditch, be conveyed to Nucla, Naturita and Montrose County; that a very small portion, less than 2 cfs, be conveyed to Montrose County alone, and that the remaining lion's share of the rights be "relinquished to the stream," for in-stream flow protection. Bassi said that the agency is still a long way off from making a decision, but the benefits of any future protection would be shared by everyone along the San Miguel River. Bassi said that having adequate in-stream flows insures that certain declining fish species would still have habitat, that riparian areas remain healthy and that the tourist economy that depends on the river also remains vibrant. "The reason this program was created by the legislature back in 1973 was to find a balance between the water needs of people and the river-dependent natural environment," said Bassi. "The flows are the minimum needed to preserve the natural environment." More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 9:49:18 AM

8 firms win water quality award from Bouder's Water Quality and Environmental Services division From The Boulder County Business Report: "Operators of eight industrial facilities in Boulder won awards for their effective wastewater discharge systems. The awards were presented by the city's Water Quality and Environmental Services division. "Perfect Compliance" awards were issued to Amgen Inc., Astro Endyne Co. Inc., Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp., Boulder Reservoir at 63rd Street Water Treatment Plant, IBM Corp., Lexmark International Inc. and the University of Colorado at Boulder. Roche Colorado Corp. won an 'Honorable Mention' award, which was issued for only having one insignificant violation during 2007...The Industrial Pretreatment Program, which permits 14 industrial facilities and regulates the wastewater discharge from nonresidential sources in Boulder, has a primary focus of reducing hazardous and toxic pollutants discharged to the city's utility system." "colorado water" 9:38:30 AM

Water reuse in Orange County California Here's a story about water reuse in Orange County California, from The Christian Science Monitor. From the article: Orange County's water utility has been drawing the gaze of engineers, scientists, and policymakers since it opened the world's largest water recycling facility of its kind in January to scrub clean treated wastewater and turn it into drinking water. Now, many of those admirers want to replicate Orange County's model of replenishing freshwater supplies using purified sewer water. Los Angeles, San Jose, south Florida, and other locales are pursuing similar projects, which experts say are essential for coping with water scarcity likely to be associated with global warming. "For much of the world, water reuse is going to become a fact of life. The Orange County project is a model for the world," says William Cooper, director of the Urban Water Research Center at the University of California, Irvine. "When you have a precious resource like water, you have to do everything you can to protect it." The county's $480 million Groundwater Replenishment System takes already-treated wastewater from the sanitation district next door and sends it through a rigorous three-step cleaning process. It's washed through microfiltration, pressed through rows of reverse osmosis membranes, and then blasted with ultraviolet light and hydrogen peroxide. After 45 minutes, out comes clean, drinkable water. The final product doesn't go directly to the tap. Instead, half of it flows into a seawater barrier and the other half into a freshwater pond that replenishes the county's groundwater basin. In the end, the recycled water makes up about 20 percent of the drinking water for roughly 2.3 million people. It's not necessarily the technology that has garnered Orange County such attention from water utilities around the globe. Recycling wastewater has been going on to lesser degrees elsewhere for some time. What has intrigued many is that the system met almost no public resistance when it came online in January. "Technologically, it's almost trivial for us to do this now. The key is to get public acceptance and political buy-in," says Dr. Cooper, an early pioneer in water reuse practices. And that was something Orange County worked hard to do from the beginning, spending $4 million in public outreach over 10 years. Water utility officials in Orange County had seen a similar plan squashed in San Diego when the recycling issue became politicized and the public turned away from the idea of turning toilet water into tap water... Aurora's Prairie Waters project is currently being built to recycle water from the South Platte River into Aurora's potable water supply. "colorado water" 9:32:21 AM

Middle Park Land Trust: Land Stewardship of the Year Award From The Sky-Hi Daily News: "Middle Park Land Trust presented its annual 'Land Stewardship of the Year Award' to a group of five adjacent landowners on 210 acres near Granby. As neighbors, the individual owners came together for a common cause in the name of land conservation that will protect historic agricultural practices, wildlife habitat, view corridors as well as water quality and quantity." More from the article: Collectively, the group has senior rights to 16 cfs of water in the Fraser River dating to 1881. Theirs is the last diversion before Windy Gap. In drought years, such as in 2002 when the river was running at a low 2.4 cfs, the group could keep its share of flows in the Fraser to the Colorado River. Since the rights are part of the conservation easement, the easement promotes river health in perpetuity... Through the use of conservation easements facilitated by the Middle Park Land Trust, the group collectively protected as a landscape much of what was the original Barnard Ranch that John B. Barnard bought in 1922. In taking part in the easements, each owner obtained tax credits. "colorado water" 9:17:38 AM

Brighton imposes watering restrictions Brighton has imposed watering restrictions due to the drought building over the eastern plains, according to The Brighton Standard Blade. From the article: Hot and dry seems to be the theme for Colorado this summer. Very hot and very dry. With those conditions in mind, Brighton is again enforcing water restrictions for 2008. Setting a goal of reducing city water usage by 10 percent, city staffers still hope for rain, but are not counting on it to buffer flagging supplies. "The extended lack of rain, coupled with increased usage levels, is cutting into our reserves," Jim Landeck, director of public works/utilities said from his office Friday afternoon. "As we look at total usage, last year we saw a peak of 9.6 million gallons per day. This year, we are seeing 10.5 million gallons per day," Landeck said. "Those totals are per day, every day, and that extra million gallons is a lot of water." Contrast the summer totals with an average 2.3 MGD for the low-flow winter months, and it's easy to see that conservation measures become critical both for infrastructure and fiscal responsibility. Environmental concerns aside, the extra water is straining water treatment resources, pushing up expenses at a time when the city is looking to cut costs... 9:08:48 AM

Energy policy: Nuclear From The Santa Barbara News Press: " Environmental groups have filed a federal lawsuit claiming that a program clearing the way for uranium mines in western Colorado is illegal. The lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District in Denver says the Department of Energy's environmental analysis of the leasing program on federal land last year was inadequate. The groups want the court to make DOE do a more comprehensive analysis of the impacts of past uranium mining and potential impacts of new mines. More From the article: The area covers 42 square miles near Dolores River Canyon in southwest Colorado. The land is part of the Uravan Mineral Belt, a major uranium producing area in the 1940s and 1950s. Some of the material for the nation's first nuclear weapons came from the area... Travis Stills of the Energy Minerals Law Center, which is representing the environmental groups, said he believes the rush of applications is being fed in part by the DOE's decision to expand the leasing program. The agency concluded last year that the mining would have no significant environmental impacts. He said the analysis was inadequate and didn't detail the environmental problems, including contamination and waste, from previous uranium mining. Environmentalists have also complained that the DOE didn't release key information needed to assess the expanded leasing program until the process was completed. The groups sued to get some of the documents and are waiting for a decision on another request filed under the federal Freedom of Information Act. The DOE renewed 13 existing leases and approved 16 new 10-year leases in July. A uranium mill has been proposed near Paradox. The environmental groups say in their lawsuit that the potential environmental effects haven't been adequately considered as required by federal law. They say runoff from the public lands at issue flow into the Dolores River, a tributary of the Colorado River, a primary source of water in the Southwest. The two rivers provide habitat for river otters, bald eagles and four federally protected fish species. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. 8:44:54 AM

Big Thompson Flood July 31, 1976 Here's a look back at the Big Thompson Flood of July 31, 1976, from The Fort Collins Coloradoan. From the article: On Thursday...more than two dozen [gathered to] remember those who lost their lives in the flood. On that night in 1976, three storm systems collided over the upper Big Thompson Canyon, dropping 12 inches of rain on Glen Comfort and Glen Haven at rates reaching 5 inches per hour. A series of small dams, created by debris washing downstream by the surging river, started holding back large amounts of water. When the dams finally broke between 7:30 and 8 p.m., a wall of water swept toward the mouth of the canyon almost 20 miles away. In its wake, the Big Thompson flood injured 250 people and washed away millions of dollars of property... We were hunkered down in a motel in Steamboat that night after a week of drizzle in between thunderstorms in the Flat Tops Wilderness. We called Grandmother Gulch from there. She started off the conversation with, "Are you anywhere near the Big Thompson?" More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 8:30:06 AM

New irrigation rules for the Arkansas Valley? Here's a recap of Wednesday's meeting of the task force attempting to hammer out new irrigation rules for the Arkansas River Valley, from The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article: Agricultural improvements now present a tiny problem, in terms of satisfying Kansas demands for Arkansas River water, but could become as significant as well pumping in terms of depletion. The Colorado Division of Water Resources attempted to put numbers to the problem to satisfy members of an advisory committee on proposed irrigation consumption rules. The group met at Colorado State University-Pueblo on Wednesday. "Right now, we are low on the curve. Our impact is very small," Assistant Division Engineer Bill Tyner explained while reviewing a technical report on how sprinklers fed by ponds could deplete flows on each ditch. "But as you slide up that curve, you will produce an impact." The report looked at how sprinklers, ditch lining and other improvements could affect a model adopted by Colorado and Kansas as part of a U.S. Supreme Court case over the Arkansas River Compact. The report made a simplified comparison of what would happen if each ditch in the valley were to improve efficiency to 75 percent from 65 percent. If every ditch were to attain that level, it could mean an additional depletion of about 8,000 acre-feet annually from sprinklers alone. During 1950-85, the years after the 1949 compact leading up to the court case, depletion was calculated at about 9,000 acre-feet annually, said Dennis Montgomery, an attorney who has worked for Colorado for years on the case. Tyner's report also showed that lining ditches higher in the system with good water rights like the Bessemer Ditch and High Line Canal, would actually improve flows to the Arkansas River, while lining lower, water-short ditches like the Fort Lyon and Amity canals would harm state-line flows. "The information can help us determine which ditches it makes sense to do improvements on," Montgomery said. "If it's under the Fort Lyon, it looks like anything that's done will have an impact." That assessment added to the frustration of Fort Lyon farmers, who were among the most vocal objectors when Water Division 2 Engineer Steve Witte first proposed efficiency rules last fall. "I don't know where to start," said Dale Mauch, a Lamar farmer who was president of the Fort Lyon during a turbulent time when speculators snapped up one-fourth of the water rights on the ditch. "Everything said here today makes it sound like it's impossible for us to grow a crop." Mauch criticized state "nitpicking" over things like gated pipe, saying it would take dozens of new people to track down the pipe on individual farms and determine whether it was something that had been used for years, was new or simply replaced something else. "I don't think you realize how much gated pipe and how many cement ditches are out there," said Don McBee, who farms at the tail end of the Fort Lyon near Lamar... Former State Engineer Jeris Danielson, now a water consultant living in La Junta, suggested using state money to purchase water rights instead of trying to enforce new rules. He said it would be cheaper to set aside $250,000 each year to lease or buy water to satisfy Kansas than to hire 10 new employees to enforce overly restrictive rules. Ken Baker, a Salida attorney who represents the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District, suggested a similar plan using a setup similar to a "softening pool" established at Lake Pueblo as part of Aurora mitigation to satisfy upper basin depletions from surface irrigation... State Engineer Dick Wolfe said the idea is to reduce the burden on individual farmers while protecting the compact. No physical improvements to irrigation can increase consumptive use, reduce return flows or change the timing of return flows, Wolfe said. The rules now being considered would not penalize farmers for depletions since 1999, when Kansas and Colorado agreed on the historic rate of diversions from the river, but would require compliance in the future, Wolfe said. Many existing sprinklers would require a review under the state model before being allowed to continue, and new sprinklers would face the same review. A new provision would allow a general approval simply acknowledging improvements in areas where the state believes there would be no negative impact to state line flows or the compact. Wolfe said he would expect irrigators to abide by the new rules, as they have with well rules adopted in 1996 as a result of the Kansas lawsuit. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 8:13:47 AM

Southern Delivery System Here's an update on Colorado Springs' proposed Southern Delivery System, from The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article: The state Water Quality Control Division wants to ensure Fountain Creek water quality is addressed in the Bureau of Reclamation's analysis of the Southern Delivery System. "Over the last few years, the division has been actively involved in a number of the projects that are being implemented on Fountain Creek and therefore wants to make certain the alternative selected will not exacerbate the problems that the communities and stakeholders are working so diligently to correct," wrote Steve Gunderson, director of the division. Gunderson said there are five segments within the Fountain Creek watershed that are listed as impaired for E. coli or selenium standards. As growth increases in Colorado Springs, the primary beneficiary of SDS, the amount of water in Fountain Creek could increase contamination and stormwater runoff, Gunderson noted in his comments to Reclamation on its draft environmental impact statement on SDS. "Urban non-point source pollution, as well as increased stormwater runoff, will further contribute to the existing sediment and bacteriologic problems if not properly mitigated," Gunderson said. "The draft EIS should address the potential cumulative effect of the proposed SDS." Flooding, water quality or sewer flows on Fountain Creek were the most common concerns about SDS among comments to Reclamation. Reclamation recognizes a stormwater enterprise Colorado Springs established in 2005 as an existing condition that would address the concern. The enterprise raised about $15 million annually to address a backlog of $300 million in flood control projects in Colorado Springs. However, State Rep. Doug Bruce, R-Colorado Springs, is sponsoring a ballot proposal in Colorado that would make fees to the stormwater enterprise "voluntary." Colorado Springs recognizes the stormwater enterprise is threatened, but is banking on Bruce's measure to be defeated. Since it is in existence now, it does not require any further action in the EIS, said John Fredell, SDS project manager for Colorado Springs Utilities... The Water Quality Control Division recently battled Colorado Springs, Pueblo and other communities on Fountain Creek to keep the waterway a reviewable stream, a more restricted designation than the use-protected label sought by the communities. The Water Quality Control Commission sided 7-2 with the division. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 7:59:22 AM

Jay Winner: People are starting to line up to help on Fountain Creek Here's an update on plans for the management of Fountain Creek, from The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article: [Carol Baker of Colorado Springs Utilities] and Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District, presented a progress report on a Fountain Creek Master Plan to [the Pueblo City Council]. The plan is 10 months into a two-year, $600,000 program to improve Fountain Creek. The same presentation will be given to Colorado Springs City Council on Aug. 20. The master plan has identified two projects - an interpretive center at Pinon and an eco-recreation complex south of Colorado Springs - as well as a plan to improve the troublesome areas of Fountain Creek by mimicking the healthy areas. The effort has led to the formation of the Fountain Foundation, a nonprofit group that already has obtained a $1 million donation of land for the Pinon interpretive center. "People are starting to line up to help on Fountain Creek," Winner said. The idea of the master plan is to have projects waiting if and when funding becomes available through an authority being contemplated by the Fountain Vision Task Force, Winner said. The group is working within guidelines being adopted through an Army Corps of Engineers study on Fountain Creek, Baker added. That study offers two major points worth pursuing, she said: The need to improve the effectiveness of the Fountain Creek levee system through Pueblo and the value of a coordinated approach to fixing problems on the Fountain. There are two choices to fixing the levees, Baker said. One is to dredge the sediment from the channel which reduces the effectiveness of the levees. The other is to straighten the channel to speed flows to the Arkansas River. Overall, the goal is not to straighten Fountain Creek, but to add sinuosity, sweeping curves that remove cutting energy from the water, especially in areas where the stream is cutting at the bank, Baker said. In the process, wetlands and side detention would be created, she said... Baker said the costs of the two demonstration projects would be $25 million and about half the creek would need some work to reduce erosion. The master plan is leaning toward "nature's rip-rap" - trees or plants rather than rock - to guide channel flows. Neither the Colorado Springs-Lower Ark study nor the Corps study is looking at a large dam on Fountain Creek, Baker said. The Corps ruled out a large dam at one identified site, just north of Colorado 47, in its Fountain Creek Watershed Plan as too expensive for the benefits it would provide. Side detention ponds, with dikes smaller than dams, are envisioned up and down Fountain Creek, however, and have the potential to handle large flows over several hours. The ponds would not hold up to a 100- or 500-year flood, she said. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 7:53:34 AM

Energy policy: Oil and gas From Politics West: "The state of Colorado filed one of the 17,000 protests against the Bureau of Land Management's plan to lease the Roan Plateau for drilling next month. 'The BLM has rejected the state's proposals, and we have no choice but to object to the BLM's leasing plan,' Harris Sherman, executive director of the state Department of Natural Resources, wrote in the formal protest, filed Wednesday." "colorado water" 7:41:45 AM

© Copyright 2009 John Orr. Last update: 3/14/09; 10:25:45 PM.