Reservoir study moves ahead, but concerns arise

By John Serfustini

By JOHN SERFUSTINI, Sun Advocate Editor
and RICHARD SHAW, Contributing Writer
While there is no objection to the idea of increasing water storage in Carbon County, there are some specific concerns about the proposed Garley Wash site west of the the golf course for a dam and reservoir.
That’s because the dam and the 10,000 acre feet of water it would impound are also just west of the upscale neighborhood that borders the course.
It’s also partly because the Bureau of Reclamation took a look at the site 13 years ago dropped the idea.
“Homeowners aren’t opposed to anything that conserves and controls water. We live in a desert after all and we need water for growth, indusrial development and to support residents who are already here,” delared Bob Dalponte, a spokesperson for the residents who would be near the dam. “However, we think [project proponents] should think about putting it someplace that doesn’t threaten people or property.”
Dalponte, who spoke in an interview Tuesday, was aware that there are communities downstream of large reservoirs like Deer Creek and Jordanelle, but said residents in his neighborhood are still concerned about the geology and proposed earthen construction of the Garley Wash dam.
A geologic study is close to beginning, however. On Monday, the Carbon County Recreation/Transportation Special Service District Board granted permission to drill a test hole and excavate a 20-foot-deep pit on its property where the dam would go.
That approval came only after lengthy questioning of Collin Fawcett and Russell Seeley, though. Fawcett is a project manager for Jones and DeMille Civil Engineers, the firm doing preliminary work. Seeley is Price City Engineer.
Board member Mike Milovich brought up the issue of the 2003 Bureau of Reclamation study. It appears from the report that BOR was using geologic information available at the time but no test holes had been bored.
“I realize that the BOR data is fuzzy, but I am concerned that you are putting the cart before the horse by foregoing some other things that need to be looked at,” said Milovich.
Seeley said that the group does have some concerns about the geology, but by drilling the test holes they can see if the site is viable. He also added that the work must be done soon because “there is a time limit on using the money for that.”
Fawcett said the test holes on the district land, along with the others that are being done on other properties along where the dam is proposed “would give us a picture” of what was in the ground. He said the cost for the test holes and pits would amount to between $140,000 to $150,000.
The Price River Watershed Council, the group backing the lower elevation dam concept, has $300,000 in state money to conduct its initial research.
Aside from geologic issues, board members also expressed about environmental impacts, potential liability in the event of dam failure, feasibility of pipeline construction and available funding.
In an interview with the Sun Advocate shortly before their meeting with the Special Service District, Seeley and Fawcett both stressed that the point of the initial research is to find answers to the questions that have been posed.
The geologic conditions, with steep cliffs of alternating strata of shale and sandstone, are a concern. However, there are techniques such as pressure grouting that could apply, Fawcett said.
The analysis of potential sites began about a year ago. Beginning with about a dozen candidate locations, studies narrowed the field down to only two, Garley Wash and Warehouse Canyon in Carbonville. A third site east of Helper was ruled out because it could not impound the quantity of water needed.
The screening criteria included being close to but not on the river or major tributaries, higher than existing canal systems but lower than the water treatment plants at Castle Gate, and terrain suitable for economical construction.
Price City has 5,000 acre feet of primary storage rights on White River water flowing into the Price River. Price’s water could be diverted near the treatment plants, then transported by pipeline to the Garley site.
It would be feasible for irrigators along that route to tap into the pipeline for pressurized irrigation, Seeley and Fawcett said. That would mean benefits for Helper, Spring Glen and Carbonville as well as for users further downstream.
It would also be feasible for Price to trade its rights to irrigators in exchange for rights to Scofield Reservoir water. In that case, Price would add to its supply of water suitable for municipal and culinary use.
Estimated cost of the dam and pipeline is in the $60 million range, but that figure is too early to be exact.
The Watershed Council includes municipal water users, irrigation companies, the Price River Water Improvement District and other parties with an interest in water use and conservation.