|
|
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
|
|
| |
From The Aspen Daily News, "On Dec. 7, the water quality control division of the Colorado Department of Health reached an 'expedited settlement agreement' with local company Hansen Construction, resulting in an $8,000 penalty for stormwater run-off management problems on a residential construction site adjacent to Owl Creek..."
More from the article:
Before the county entered into a contract to do stormwater inspections for the state two years ago, no construction projects received notices of violation, according to Pitkin County natural resource specialist Warren Rider. That doesn't mean all contractors were being super vigilant, he said. "It means the state had just never been here," mostly because it doesn't have the staff to meet demand, he said. "For so long, you could fill out your paperwork, send it to the state, and you knew they weren't going to come." Rider added that "We caught wind of the program because there were lots of (state) inspections in Garfield County's oil and gas fields, but none up here." So Pitkin County signed on to contract Rider's services and the state trained him to "be their eyes and ears in the field" as a local inspector, Rider said. The county conducts inspections of 10 construction sites each year based on complaints, permit issues, proximity to surface water and other criteria...
The company hadn't done regular systematic inspections to make sure run-off mitigation measures were working, and they "didn't have best management practices, like silt fences," he said. But once they received the notice of violation, "they were very responsive" and quickly fixed the problem, Gunderson said. Because of that, and because the disturbance area was relatively small and without significant environmental impact, Gunderson said, Hansen qualified for a smaller penalty through an expedited settlement agreement.
Note: We like the new look of The Aspen Daily News.
Category: Colorado Water
6:55:16 AM 
|
|
Here's a recap of the first day of the Sierra Club's lawsuit against Colorado Springs over water quality issues in Fountain Creek, from The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
Sierra Club called its first witnesses in the trial, which is being heard before U.S. District Judge Walker Miller, without a jury. "It went fast today, and we may even be finished sooner than expected," Walsh said. "It's been so heavily litigated and the judge wants to get to the heart of the matter. But with a trial you never know. It's potentially a complicated issue."
In a pre-trial conference, Miller limited the number of witnesses and exhibits. Both sides are generally in agreement on the basic facts in the case - the dates, times and causes of releases into Fountain Creek. The disagreement arises over the nature of the penalties, with the Sierra Club arguing that federal penalties of up to $32,500 per incident should be allowed, rather than state penalties of up to $10,000 per day.
Jenny Kedward, who works for the Pueblo City-County Health Department and is president of the Sangre de Cristo chapter of the Sierra Club testified about potential impacts of the releases on Fountain Creek.
Sierra Club also called Bruce Bell, an environmental consultant from Monroe, N.Y., to testify. "He laid the groundwork for the Sierra Club and presented a list of all the documents that talked about the spills," said Ross Vincent, a senior consultant for Sierra Club who lives in Pueblo. Colorado Springs will cross-examine Bell in [Tuesdays] court session.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
6:40:56 AM
|
|
From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb): "Today, we have begun posting the supporting technical documents for our studies under the National Environmental Policy Act for the proposed Southern Delivery System. The reports, studies and other documents are available for your review on our SDS website at www.sdseis.com. We anticipate the Draft Environmental Assessment will be released for public review at the end of February. We are making the technical documents available beginning today to provide those interested additional time for review. Please see the press release below."
Reclamation Releases Technical Reports on Proposed Southern Delivery System
This week, Reclamation is making a variety of supporting documents related to the environmental study of the proposed Southern Delivery System available for public review. The documents, which include reports and studies, provide much of the technical background for the forthcoming Draft Environmental Impact Statement Reclamation is preparing in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act.
The technical documents will be posted to the www.sdseis.com website throughout the week with the majority of them becoming available today, Monday, January 28, 2008. Persons interested in the technical content of the Draft EIS may want to review one or more of the documents in advance of the Draft EIS release.
At this time, the Draft EIS is anticipated to become publicly available the last week of February. A series of public open houses will follow later in the spring.
More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
The Bureau of Reclamation might issue its draft environmental impact statement on Southern Delivery System without a recommendation of the best alternative, a Reclamation official said Monday. "Reclamation has not decided if we will identify an alternative or not," said Jaci Gould, who is supervising the preparation of the SDS environmental report. "If there is a preferred alternative identified, it still doesn't mean it's a done deal."[...]
Fremont County Commissioner Mike Stiehl wanted the meeting to clarify ways in which the project could affect Fremont County. While the county likes the removal of a return-flow pipeline from two of the seven alternatives Reclamation is considering, it remains concerned about the impact of the flows in the Arkansas River and the fact that the return-flow pipeline is still part of two alternatives. Stiehl also wanted to know when those decisions were made. "It was news to us," he said...
SDS Project Director John Fredell said Colorado Springs wanted to study the return-flow pipeline, but rejected it because it cost too much. The pipeline would allow a small benefit in yield, but would cost $300 million, compared with $130 million to build a return-flow storage reservoir on Williams Creek, a tributary of Fountain Creek, Fredell explained...
In its "no action" alternative, Colorado Springs said it would use existing water rights in a complicated scheme to bring water from some of its rights through the Otero Pumping Station, leave water from other rights in the river and pump from the Arkansas River at Florence. The concept would still leave less water in the river from Florence to Lake Pueblo, while satisfying minimum flow requirements at the Eastern Fremont Sanitation District outfall. There would be less water flowing through Pueblo, as Colorado Springs released return flows down Fountain Creek. That didn't sit well with interests outside Fremont County. "Is water quality being taken into consideration?" asked Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District. "I think the downstream intake should be a prime alternative." Winner was referring to an alternative in which Colorado Springs would take water downstream from the confluence of Fountain Creek, saying it would be the most effective at improving water quality for other users downstream. Winner was concerned that the EIS will look solely at the cost of the project to Colorado Springs, and not at the cost to other water users in the basin as well.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
6:27:22 AM
|
|
Here's a look at western issues and the presidential race, from The Denver Post. From the article:
Six drought years have reshaped the lake that supplies water to cities in Nevada, Arizona, Southern California and Mexico. There are fishing piers hanging over the desert, fish-cleaning houses nowhere near a lake, boat ramps extended until they resemble roads. The surface of Lake Mead has dropped 100 feet in six years. If it drops 50 feet lower, Las Vegas could lose an intake that supplies 40 percent of its water. Simultaneously, "Hoover Dam stops generating electricity," said Pat Mulroy, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority. "At the same level where we lose our upper intake, there is no more power out of Hoover." Mulroy hopes the next president will create a team of all federal agencies attached to water resources to develop a survival plan for the driest and fastest-growing region of the United States. The rapid decline of Lake Mead "begs the question for a comprehensive look at climate change," she said. "Our world is going to change dramatically." Nevada officials hoped that its early primary this year, just after Iowa and New Hampshire, would put the West and issues of special importance to the region on center stage. They claimed partial success: Some candidates did address Nevada's high foreclosure rate and immigration reform. But with the exception of Yucca Mountain, which the Democratic candidates all opposed as a repository for the nation's nuclear waste, two Las Vegas debates failed to yield a discussion of the federal government's immense role in the West as a landowner and resource manager.
Category: 2008 Presidential Election
6:20:37 AM
|
|
|
|
© Copyright
2008
John Orr.
Last update:
1/31/08; 9:25:57 AM.
|
|
|
