Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Section 11 <br />Implementation <br /> <br />t/}i~"',~ <br /> <br />cost. In addition. the information can be used to <br />compiicate logistics and legal and regulatory <br />processes. Water providers sometimes view state <br />involvement as complicating these issues even <br />further. <br /> <br />. Larger water providers have traditionally dominated <br />water development issues. As growth dynamics <br />change and service areas of major providers are <br />defined and near buildout, these providers are not <br />planning for the future growth areas beyond their <br />service area boundaries. These larger providers are <br />not responsible for providing solutions to entities <br />beyond their immediate customer base. The SWSI <br />process needs to be expanded to ensure inclusion of <br />interests of the future growth areas, even though <br />there may not currently be an agency responsible for <br />planning for future water needs. <br /> <br />. Permitting was identified as one of the primary <br />implementation hurdles for water supply projects, and <br />has the greatest impact on the uncertainty associated <br />with the Identified Projects and Processes. Many <br />water providers and agricultural users believe that <br />one of the most significant hurdles to reliable water <br />delivery in Colorado is environmental permitting. <br />Federal permitting triggered by authorizations, <br />funding, rights-of-way, licenses, or Section 404 of the <br />CWA can entangle projects for years and cost millions <br />in delays, consuitants, and attomeys. Where <br />threatened or endangered species or their habitat are <br />present (every major river basin in Colorado), onerous <br />consultations with the USFWS and iengthy, often <br />litigated NEPA procedures, present daunting <br />obstacles towards progress. Local and state permits <br />may also be required for water projects. State water <br />quality reguiations and 1041 land use authority have <br />the ability to impact the feasibility of water supply <br />development. Existing water projects and water rights <br />are also subject to permitting issues. <br /> <br />. Environmental and recreationai interests and local <br />governmental agencies view the federal, state, and <br />local permit process as vital to protecting the <br />environment, recreational opportunities, and the local <br />economy. These regulatory processes are viewed as <br />the only way that these interest groups can have <br />meaningful input to ensure that the local interests and <br />the environment and recreational opportunities are <br />protected. <br /> <br />CDtII <br /> <br />11-6 <br /> <br />III )" <br /> <br />11.4.2 Funding <br /> <br />The costs to impiement water supply and water <br />resources projects continue to escalate. In light of the <br />significant investments that must often be made to meet <br />the needs of water users, numerous federal and state <br />agencies have developed programs for partnering with <br />project sponsors. Some agencies, such as the BOR, had <br />their genesis in the immense need to support water <br />management solutions in working with local project <br />sponsors. Many of today's water resources programs <br />include the ability to provide funding to support water <br />supply and water resources projects, through grants, <br />loans, or related mechanisms. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Colorado water resources projects are currently funded <br />through a variety of sources, including outlays from <br />cities, businesses, water districts, and local water users. <br /> <br />Some of the key existing funding agencies that are <br />relevant to water resources projects in Colorado are <br />highlighted below. Relevant funding programs of each of <br />these agencies are detailed in Appendix I. <br /> <br />. Federal agencies <br />- USACE <br />- BOR <br />- EPA <br />- USDA <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. State of Colorado <br />- CWCB <br />- CWRPDA <br />- CDPHE <br /> <br />. Local entities, such as water providers and <br />conservancy districts <br /> <br />In the next phase of SWSI, CWCB will examine CWCB's <br />two principal funding sources (Construction Fund and <br />Mineral Severance Tax Perpetual Base Account). <br />Potential modifications could increase CWCB's ability to <br />address water supply needs for rural and agricultural <br />users, and to help address environmental and <br />recreationai enhancements. However, this may only offer <br />a partial solution. Other funding options such as fee <br />based approaches, alternate state fund sources, federal <br />funding, and other revenue generating options will also <br />be considered. In addition, if the state wishes to take a <br />more prominent role in water resource protection and <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~SW5I <br />--:s.p.IIr- <br /> <br />C:\OOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ROWANNC\DESKTOP\S11_ 11-2J..04.DOC <br />