Pueblo County still suspicious of Utilities' plan for pipeline

PUEBLO • Pueblo County officials harbor many concerns about Colorado Springs Utilities' Southern Delivery System, and county commissioners to the south are in no rush to make a decision on the water pipeline project.

Monday, on the third night of hearings on a 1041 land-use permit to build the $1.1 billion pipeline from Pueblo Reservoir, Utilities officials faced a deluge of questions. It was clear Pueblo County officials and their attorneys and consultants disagree with Utilities' assurances the environmental impact will be minor and are suspicious of Utilities' motives for building the pipeline, suggesting the pipeline could be used to sell Arkansas River water outside the river's basin.

The consultants have recommended Pueblo County attach conditions to any approval, including requiring Utilities to seek approval to sell or transfer water to any agencies beyond its current partners, which are Pueblo West, Fountain and the Security Water District.

Utilities opposes such a restriction, which could become a sticking point when commissioners announce their recommended permit conditions Jan. 21.

"We have indicated that we remain committed that the water from this project should stay in the basin," said Bruce McCormick, Utilities chief water services officer.

Some in Pueblo blame Colorado Springs for flooding and poor water quality in Fountain Creek, and they worry increasing flows could exacerbate the problems. There also is concern about the water level going down in Pueblo Reservoir and the Arkansas River.

Treated effluent from Colorado Springs would increase the flow of Fountain Creek by a third in Pueblo by the year 2046. Utilities assurances it will add little to floods may not mollify the county.

"I understand how, with the chart and the scientific view, it may seem minimal and it may not seem like much, but I can tell you folks in this room have suffered through it," said Pueblo County commissioner Jeff Chostner. "If we approve this, there's going to be a significant focus on flood control to protect the residents of Pueblo County."

Another major concern is making sure Pueblo County contractors get a share of the $750 million in construction work, $600 million in El Paso County and $150 million in Pueblo County.

"The reality of the situation is it may be difficult for Pueblo County residents to understand why their property is being transferred, why people are being removed from their homes, why we are paying the burden down here for the project but can't participate in the prosperity for the Pueblo work force," Chostner said.

"That is something all three commissioners feel quite strongly about. We like to see the benefits from the construction aspects of the SDS project, if indeed it does get approved," Commissioner John Cordova said.

Utilities officials said they plan workshops to help Pueblo County contractors bid for jobs, but they did not commit to ensuring them a portion of the pipeline work.

"I don't know how that would work. I'm pretty sure it would be fairly unique for us," Utilities spokesman Steve Berry said. As a city-owned utility, the agency must award contracts impartially, based on the best prices, he said.

Other conditions Utilities officials agree to include drawing up a plan for regular water quality monitoring on Fountain Creek, supporting a new watershed district for the creek, regular permit reviews to ensure Utilities is living up to its promises and adopting measures to minimize the impact on property owners affected by the pipeline.

Utilities plans another pipeline route through Fremont County if its permit is denied or the conditions are unacceptable. Asked if they would commit to spending the difference between the two plans - $100 million or more - on improvements to Fountain Creek, Utilities officials declined to make such a commitment.