Town administrator David Varley on Oct. 14 gave the Orchard City trustees an account of how federal and state regulation turned a simple solution town water project into a regulatory Halloween spook show — complete with boogie men jumping unexpectedly out from behind the bushes.

“It’s not good news,” Varley said.

With regulatory hang ups and delays frustrating the Ward Creek Diversion project at almost every turn, Varley told the trustees at their October regular meeting, “I think it’s pretty much impossible that we’re going to get that project constructed this year.”

The seemingly simple and relatively inexpensive idea was proposed last year. It was seen as a way to increase the efficiency of the town’s water system by diverting an existing raw water supply directly into a pipeline to the treatment plant.

The project entailed about $38,000 in construction costs, and the town board had good hopes at the outset that the work could be completed in 2009.

But contingency planning for the project failed to foresee the entangling involvement of the Army Corps of Engineers and the state Water Quality Control Commission. Varley gave those two agencies most of the responsibility for regulatory delays that will push the project’s completion date into next year.

The engineering is completed, the financing is in place, a local contractor’s low bid has been accepted, the U.S. Forest Service has signed off, and Surface Creek Ditch and Reservoir Company, owners of Ward Creek Reservoir and Dam, had approved the project.

The town has gone ahead and bought the 440 feet of plastic pipe the project will require in order to lock in price and availability. But work has not commenced. As Varley explained, “The town has gone ahead and ordered all of the pipe needed for the project. The reason for that is because the price of the pipe and the availability of it were going up and down, so we wanted to lock it in and that’s been taken care of.”

But since last March when the project looked good to go, delays have appeared, Varley explained. “Last March we had the Forest Service’s signature (on the project) and thought we were good to go. Then every week another agency would jump out from behind the bushes and tell us to wait until they approved our project. That was when the archeologists and geologists showed up. The Army Corps of Engineers showed up. All his came at the tail end of the process in March when we thought we were ready to move.”

Varley continued, “But once the Army Corps gets involved the 404 Permit is the document you need to work in and around wetlands. The amount of wetlands or area being disturbed in this project is miniscule. It doesn’t even meet the quarter-acre (threshold requirement).

“But you had a new person there at the Corps. Our consultants are working with them and the latest we’ve heard is that the earliest we could get that permit is (the week of Oct. 12).

“There is also a new wrinkle in the project. We walked by another bush and somebody jumped out and grabbed us. Every so many years, the state’s Water Quality Control Division goes around Colorado and inspects municipal and other potable water providers’ systems. They issue a letter of finding which suggests requirements for changes and other things we need to do.”

The state hadn’t learned of the town’s Ward Creek project until that time. “So of course during this inspection they learned of our Ward Creek project,” Varley explained. “We thought things were OK until their letter came back to us with an item telling us that they have to receive, review and approve the construction plan for the project. Then we also have to take water samples from the new outlet at the bottom of the dam about four inches from the existing outlet since we can’t show or prove that we have sampled that water before. And we haven’t, because our water (comes) from above the reservoir out of springs.

“Since they don’t have that water sample, we have to collect water samples and send them in for testing. That is about a two week turnaround time, unless you pay them a little more money, then you can get the results quicker.”

Now, caught in a regulatory “Catch 22,” Varley laid out the town’s options. “We could go ahead and proceed without that test, but then all the liability falls on us. It was very clear in my telephone conversation that if we did (not test) this sample, that they would refer back to the telephone conversation where I was properly informed of the necessity of following their rules by the book.

“Nothing has been found in the water up there in the past. But, the reason they’re doing this is (it’s considered) a new source of water. We have not taken water from that point before, and since we have not these requirements kick in.”

So, Varley said he concluded the town’s best option is simply to wait on the state. “Because of that, and the lateness of getting all of this completed, I think It’s pretty much impossible that we’re going to get that project constructed this year.

“I’ve been talking to the contractor about carrying the work over, and so forth. I just don’t see any way possible even if we have a long mild fall. The state has not even received a copy of the plans yet and the turnaround time is two weeks. Then, with the water test it would take us into November. So that’s not good news,” he said.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed