Environment Colorado asks for 'no' on water plan
By Jerd Smith, Rocky Mountain News
Published August 7, 2008 at 8:43 p.m.
Updated August 8, 2008 at 12:13 a.m.
Environment Colorado has launched a legal battle to deny Tri-State Generation and Transmission the water needed for a newly proposed power plant in southeastern Colorado.
This week, the group asked a special water court to dismiss the utility's application to use and store water from the Lower Arkansas River, saying the utility would not be able to win the special federal and state approvals needed to make the plan work.
The water is critical to development of the site, which could become home to a coal-fired or nuclear plant.
The case is being closely watched because:
* It involves a large amount of water, 20,000 acre feet, enough to serve about 40,000 urban homes for one year or to irrigate more than 16,000 acres of farm land.
* It could affect the state's future ability to manage supplies of water held in federal reservoirs.
Environmentalists argue it will require an act of Congress to store the water in the federally owned John Martin Reservoir.
* It could hamper Colorado's ability to supply Kansas water as required under the heavily litigated Arkansas River Compact.
But Tri-State, Colorado's second largest electric utility, said its water plans have been carefully thought through and will not harm the river, the state's thorny relationship with Kansas, or federal storage guidelines that govern John Martin Reservoir.
"We're ensuring the river is protected," said Tri-State spokesman Lee Boughey.
"We've put together a very thoughtful plan for our project that maintains the system as it is today and protects the rights of others."
Still many, including the state of Colorado, are carefully sifting through the implications of Tri-State's proposal.
"This is a very big change case," said Bill Tyner, an assistant division engineer who helps oversees the Arkansas River Basin for the state Division of Water Resources.
Environment Colorado said its effort to stop the utility's water plans is only the first step in what is likely to be a long battle over construction of a new coal-fired or nuclear power plant.
"The big picture is that this is an incredibly large amount of water," said Pam Kiely, legislative director for Environment Colorado.
"Water is a precious resource in Colorado. It is just one of the many reasons that investment in these types of power facilities is the wrong way for Colorado to go."
Tri-State, which was turned down by the state of Kansas last year when it tried to build a coal- fired power plant there, said it is critical that new plants come on line, even as it prepares to build other renewable power facilities elsewhere.
"It is very important that we move forward to develop new resources," Boughey said.
"As energy costs rise and power is increasingly in short supply, Environment Colorado's tactics will hurt rural energy consumers who depend on reliable and affordable electric service," Boughey said.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
August 8, 2008
7:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mike_In_Hartsel writes:
Environment Colorado needs to step back and let us develop power supplies. Enviro-radicals don't want ANYthing built ANYwhere, at ANYtime.