Service | Rates | Gas | Water | Contact Us | Home
5.21.04 M.U.D. well project drawing late opposition An eleventh-hour effort to derail the Metropolitan Utilities District's $300 million expansion along the Platte River has laid bare the frustration on both sides of the project. Opponents of the well field and water treatment plant have filed a complaint with the Nebraska Attorney General's Office, charging that M.U.D. is not reasonably complying with the open-records law. And they have complained to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that M.U.D. isn't complying with some of the conditions attached to its federal permit. On a parallel track, the board for the Lower Platte North Natural Resources District has added significantly to the work that it wants M.U.D. to do before granting permits for new wells. For its part, M.U.D. has threatened to sue not only the natural resources district, but also to hold liable the district's elected board members individually. Furthermore, M.U.D. has told the district that it will withhold a $180,000 contribution to a Platte River levee if the drinking-water project doesn't move forward. The entire metro area has a stake in the issue, said Tom Wurtz, general manager of M.U.D., because an expanded water supply is essential to economic growth. The project will add about 40 percent to M.U.D.'s peak capacity, allowing the utility to meet demand for at least 30 years. Opponents, largely Saunders County residents but also Douglas, Sarpy and Lancaster County residents, oppose the project for two primary reasons. First, it will lower the water table, possibly dropping water levels in ponds and wells on adjacent property. Second, M.U.D.'s property is near a highly contaminated federal cleanup project, creating fears that M.U.D.'s pumping will draw polluted groundwater across clean parts of the aquifer. Monday and Tuesday, members of a citizens group opposing the M.U.D. wells went to the utility's headquarters to review documents relating to the expansion. They were turned down. In a subsequent letter to M.U.D., Lynda Wageman, one of the group's leaders, wrote that M.U.D.'s "steadfast refusal" to provide documents "gives the appearance that the project cannot withstand public scrutiny." But, Wurtz said, the project has been through an extensive public review spanning years. This group, at this late hour, he said, is simply trying to slow the project by making unreasonable demands. "It's obviously a bunch of people who don't want the project, and they're using harassment as a means to tie up our staff, period," Wurtz said. "We'll just let the lawyers sort it out." As for the well field and water plant, he said, it ultimately will move forward. In part to address environmental issues and concerns about the aquifer, the Corps of Engineers attached 86 conditions to M.U.D.'s federal permit. The citizens group, the Water Quality Environmental Council, says it believes that M.U.D. is violating some of the conditions of that permit. The Corps of Engineers disputes that. One of the conditions stipulates that M.U.D. shall complete a baseline study of ponds "in the period prior to construction and operation of the well field." Another stipulation indicates that "prior to proceeding with construction," a formal plan will be in place to compensate for adverse impacts. Construction has begun, and the ponds have not been studied. M.U.D.'s proposal for compensating landowners, which has been presented to the corps, relies on Nebraska's courts to act as arbiters. Wurtz said that is standard for governmental bodies. Rodney Schwartz, the Corps of Engineers project manager who wrote the permit conditions and is overseeing M.U.D.'s compliance, said the utility is fulfilling the intent of the conditions. The plant is about four years away from operation, Schwartz said, and although the timing may change on some things, M.U.D. will not be allowed to start up the plant without fulfilling the conditions. Schwartz said the corps added the compensation condition for two reasons: to get M.U.D. on record and to indicate that the corps would step in if the state's tort system failed to do its job. The utility has accelerated an expanded study of demands on the aquifer, Schwartz said, which will provide more complete data. The best data to date, he said, indicate that M.U.D.'s pumping will have a negligible effect on the section of the aquifer that is contaminated. "From my perspective," Schwartz said, "M.U.D. is bending over backwards." To explain why feelings are running so high, John Miyoshi, general manager of the natural resources district, likened the situation to the controversy two years ago when Colorado businessmen proposed hauling Nebraska water to Colorado. "People in Saunders County feel the same way that people of the state felt," Miyoshi said, "a sense of outrage that M.U.D. is allowed to come in here and pump." M.U.D., Wurtz said, is committed to avoiding the problems that landowners and environmentalists fear. "Water is a shared resource," he said. "We're going to pump this well field in a way that it does no damage." |
||||