OCR Text |
Show Colorado Oavieieols ash Sec. Duncan for wafer sfudy By Helene C. Monberg Washington Rep. James P. Johnson. John-son. R-Colo., has teamed up with the Colorado Senators in requesting Secretary Charles W. Duncan, Jr., of the Department of Energy to make a groundwater study of Piceance Creek Basin in Northwestern Colorado with regard to oil shale development. The letter went out of Duncan during the past week altho Johnson drafted the letter of April 3. It took some time to get the signatures of Sens. Gary Hart, D-Colo., D-Colo., and William L. Armstrong, R-Colo., R-Colo., added to Johnson's. It is estimated by water officials in the state that such a study in connection with the developmen of an oil shale industry in the Basin would cost $2 million. The letter stated the three members of Congress from the state "would be very interested in exploring the possibility of you" of having a Piceance Creek groundwater study done thru the Colorado Department of Natural Resources. "A precise hydrologic study of groundwater in the Piceance Basin is needed and would assist the nation in fully developing its energy resources in Colorado," the letter stated. Most of the groundwater studies in the: country are done by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in the Interior Department. When the Colorado Congressional delegation wrote to Interior and Energy last year about such a groundwater study by USGS in the Piceance Creek Basin, it got a , turndown from Interior Secreatry Cecil D. Andrus. Duncan indicated an interest in-terest however, in such a study. So the Colorado delegation asked Energy to fund the study thru the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, which recently completed a study on Upper Basin water resources available for use in energy development in the Upper Colorado states of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming. Whether there would be some redundance in the studies and whether all water studies should be channeled thru the Water Resources Council in line with the 1974 Energy Act would have to be determined by DOE, on the ' basis of the request from the Colorado members. Hearings which have just been published by the House Appropriations Committee indicate the U.S. Geological Survey has $2,760,000 allocated in 1981 under the 1981 fiscal year budget for oil shale hydrology in the three oil shale states of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. This is an increase of $1,546,000 over the current fiscal year. The 1980 fiscal year "ends on Sept. 30. The 1981 fiscal year starts on Oct. 1. Here is what is planned in the three states, Interior and USGS witnesses told the House Appropriations Committee Com-mittee recently.: Colorado: Expand the modeling of the (underground) acquifer systems in the Piceance Basin and study the behavior of potential wastes originating from oil shale spoil piles and their impact on water quality. Utah: Restore the hydrologic monitoring network to levels which were in effect prior to a program reduction in fiscal year 1978 which was made due to reduced prospects of development of oil shale tracts in Utah. The increase will also be used to perform per-form acquifer tests in the Green River Formation to ascertain water availability from this aquifer in Eastern Utah for possible use in oil shale development. Wyoming: Conduct studies to develop a digital model of groundwater system in proximity to the in-situ retorting test site near Rock Springs, Wyo. The hearings did not indicate how the money would be divided, but presumably the largest share would go to the Piceance Creek Basin in Northwestern Nor-thwestern Colorado, which has the best defined and highest-grade oil shale, with Utah getting most of the remaining share of the money. Oil shale development in Wyoming is- not expected to occur in the near term, but the Department of Energy is carrying on some in-sity (tests itself) at Rock Springs. The USGS hydrologic work would be thru Interior Department funding. The 1974 law provides that the Department of Energy is to request water studies to be carried on thru the Water Resources Council for energy development but Congress has appropriated ap-propriated only $1 million annual for such studies since 1976. So unless DOE came up with the $2 million requested by the Colorado delegation from another source, it could not use the study money provided under the 1974 act. That has already been allocated to six basin water assessments in connection con-nection with energy development, three demonstration oil shale projects by Tosco and Paraho in Uintah County, Utah, one demonstration oil shale project by Superior Oil Shale Co., in Rio Blanco County, Colo., and eight potential commercial oil shale developments, six in Colorado and two in Utah. |