SECTION 404 PERMIT NEXT MAJOR REVIEW FOR SDS

Colorado Springs Utilities is developing an application for a Section 404 permit (404 Permit) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The 404 Permit is required by the Clean Water Act when a project involves the discharge of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, including wetlands, unless the activity is exempt from Section 404 regulation. The 404 Permit process requires a detailed review of the project by the Corps and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and includes an opportunity for public review and comment.

A recent story in the Pueblo Chieftain suggested that a separate environmental study for the SDS may be required by the Corps. Reclamation decided not to include the separate environmental review requirements for a 404 Permit in its DEIS because there’s no requirement for combining the two, and there is a possibility that Reclamation could approve an alternative that would not require a 404 Permit. The decision was made at that time to keep the NEPA and 404 Permit processes separate, in the event that the selected SDS alternative did not require a 404 Permit. As part of their consideration of the 404 Permit application, the Corps will review the DEIS and may produce an Environmental Assessment that highlights considerations applicable to the Clean Water Act.

The article also suggests a need to study groundwater use, reuse of return flows and new sources of water. The story implies that these potential sources were neglected by the DEIS.

In fact, both Colorado Springs Utilities and Reclamation studied all of these issues in detail while Reclamation was preparing its DEIS on SDS. For example, in its alternatives screening, Reclamation considered six reuse alternatives and rejected all of them because of cost and environmental issues. Groundwater was rejected as an alternative because it would require more than 500 wells at a cost of roughly $500,000 apiece – which was rejected as impractical and too expensive. Consideration of other sources of water, beyond those we own in the Arkansas River would not have resulted in additional viable alternatives to the seven currently considered in the DEIS. Other sources of water are clearly impracticable in terms of environmental impacts and sheer cost.

Also important to note is the fact that SDS will allow us to make more efficient use of our existing water rights, which increases the overall efficiency of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, and means SDS will not require additional Fryingpan-Arkansas Project water from the Western Slope.