Feds Want New Study on Bigger Dam

Home Browse Search

Feds want new study on bigger dam Page 1 of 2 A ,. The Pueblo Chieftain Online Select file then print to print this article. Publish Date: March 23, 2002 Feds want new study on bigger dam By PETER ROPER The Pueblo Chieftain Legislation to study the enlargement of Pueblo Dam and reauthorize the Fryingpan- Arkansas federal water project should be before the full U.S. House of Representatives for a vote by the end of May, according to Steve Arveschoug, general manager of the Southeastem Colorado Water Conservancy District. Although there are issues to be resolved with the federal Bureau of Reclamation, Arveschoug said congressional supporters of House Resolution 3881 intend to bring the bill out of the House Resources Committee and to the floor for a vote. During a hearing before the House Subcommittee on Water and Power this week, officials from the bureau said they wanted authorization to do a full feasibility study of the impact of enlarging the reservoirs before supporting the legislation. For example, they want to study the potential impact of the project on the Arkansas River compact, which is the subject of a long - running lawsuit between Kansas and Colorado. Kansas Attorney General Carla Stovall testified against the measure last week, saying the project would further diminish that state's access to Arkansas River water. John Keys, bureau commissioner, said the bureau also wants to do a legal review of the legislation to determine if it would cause problems in the bureau's authority to enter into contracts. Asked about the bureau's issues, Arveschoug said the Southeastern district is not opposed to a feasibility study as long as it is based on the central purpose of the legislation - enlarging the Fry-Ark reservoirs and dims. "We support having the bureau look at the broad impacts of the project," Arveschoug said Friday. "But we would want it to incorporate the work we've already done in studying the enlargement of reservoirs." That may not sound like much of a difference, but Arveschoug said a study might be a problem if it strays too far from the purpose of the enlargement project, which the Southeastern district has been working on for years. "We're not asking the federal government to pay for the enlargement, so we don't need the bureau to do a traditional cost - benefit analysis," Arveschoug said. "But we support a study of the larger impacts. We also expect the bureau to do an environmental impact study of the project." Brian Person, area manager for the bureau, said the federal agency "owns" the Fry-Ark project on behalf of the government and has a responsibility to look at how the proposed enlargement would affect the region and water agreements. would say we have a strong relationship with the Southeastern district and I'm optimistic we are going to work this out," he said Friday. Under the reoperations plan, Colorado Springs stands to get an additional 28,500 acre -feet of storage space in Fry-Ark Project facilities for non - project water that it has. Other entities also would get more storage space for non project water - a total of 48,000 acre -feet, according to Arveschoug. And HR 3881 would permit the bureau to enter long -term "if and when" contracts for such storage, compared to the one -year contracts they can receive now. Only the city of Pueblo has a long -term "if and when" storage contract for non - project with the bureau. "If and when" contracts mean when the reservoir is full, the non - project water will be spilled to make room for project water storage. Asked if he could envision the end result of any bureau study being a recommendation against the expansion project, Person said that's unlikely http://www.chieftain.com/print/archive/2002/mar/23/ni1.htm 03/25/2002