__________________



What's your take?

Should the $10 million Blue River Pumpback be built without a county review? Let us know by reading this story online at www.summitdaily.com and clicking "comments."



__________________



SUMMIT COUNTY - Blue River pumpback negotiations intensified Tuesday, as local lodge owner Tom Gleason suggested that the Summit County commissioners are delaying approval for the project at the expense of residents and businesses who can't hook up to sewer facilities unless the project goes forward.

Several other locals also spoke in favor of the $10 million project at a public hearing, touting the potential benefits of the pumpback, which would carry Blue River water from Farmer's Korner back up to Breckenridge.

"I'm a little disturbed by the infighting between the boards," said Ron Shelton, referring to the ongoing negotiations between the BOCC and the Breckenridge Sanitation District. "You're bickering and racking up the legal bills ... There's so much positive to (the pumpback)."

At issue is county approval for the sanitation district's plan to build a roadside pipeline from the Farmer's Korner water treatment plan and pump up to 17 cfs of water back upstream. The pumpback could boost flows during the winter, when parts of the river dry up completely, especially during snowmaking season. Water from the project could also help the sanitation district meet strict water quality standards.

The county and the sanitation district agree that the project offers significant public benefits during the winter. But they have been unable to finalize an agreement that would govern summer operations, when upstream users could potentially divert the water.

The county wants to maintain its review authority for summer operations under its 1041 powers, established by state statute to regulate areas of state interest. The "unintended consequences" of the pumpback could include harm to downstream water users in the Lower Blue, for example.

A pending application by Colorado Springs (which diverts from the headwaters of the Blue River) shows there is a risk that other parties could take advantage of the increased flows from the pumpback, with potential impacts to downstream users, said Barney White, the county's water attorney.



Pig in a poke?

The sanitation district appears to be asking the county to buy a pig in a poke by approving the project without fully being able to regulate future impacts. The district's position is that the county's 1041 review authority doesn't apply to the pumpback.

"I just don't believe this is a state interest as defined by the statute," said Gene Riordan, the district's water attorney. "The thing I'm asking you is, don't draw a line in the sand today," Riordan said, adding that the issue of the county's jurisdiction over summer pumpback operations could be settled at some future date. "We could preserve for another day the (legal fight) over the county's jurisdiction over summer operations of the pumpback," Riordan said.

The repetitive negotiations frustrated County Commissioner Tom Long, who said he doesn't think the county can make a determination of no significant impact for summer pumpback operations based on currently available information.

"It's time to pee on the fire and call the dogs," Long said, explaining that, in his opinion, future conflicts over the pumpback water are inevitable. "Why do we have this problem in the Upper Blue? Everybody is coming for water ... It's going to be Denver Water, it's going to be Grand Junction. It's going to come, It's going to come," Long said.

At one point, White indicated the county might favor getting a legal ruling on the county's 1041 authority before issuing any approval for the pumpback.

"That avoids putting the county behind the 8 Ball as far as having to prove irreperable harm," White said.

But timing is a huge issue for the Sanitation District, which has lined up funding for project and worked with CDOT to build at least part of the pipeline during Highway 9 widening next summer.

The county commissioners sought to end the Mexican standoff by going to executive session during Tuesday's BOCC hearing, eventually offering a step toward a compromise on the issue of jurisdiction.

Under the proposal, as outlined by White, the district would "agree without qualifications" that the county has jurisdiction over future uses of the pumpback as they relate to water supply purposes.

Use of the pumpback water for water quality purposes (the sanitation district will eventually need the water to meet Clean Water Act limits) would be set aside as a separate issue, with neither side conceding on the issue of jurisdiction.

Riordan said that could be an acceptable compromise, but said the definition of "water supply" usage would have to be clearly defined. The district board will also discuss the possible solution at its next board meeting.

"What we've agreed to today is everyone takes a baby step toward the middle," County Commissioner Bob French concluded.



Bob Berwyn can be reached at (970) 331-5996, or at bberwyn@summitdaily.com.