WEEK OF JULY 17, 2025
VOLUME 80 | ISSUE 39
$2
Colorado considers challenging ‘energy emergency’ January declaration invoked by BLM to fasttrack rain facility expansion BY DAVID O. WILLIAMS COLORADO NEWSLINE
“We appreciate that the court provided a comprehensive evaluation of the facts in this case and found that both the city of Thornton and Larimer County abided by and complied with all County regulations and state laws,” said Thornton City Attorney Tami Yellico in the news release. “When the city of Thornton engaged with Larimer County for this permit, both governments took intentional initiative and time to understand the complexities of the project and its impacts. This engagement between two governments provided deep insight and consideration for how to best meet the concerns and needs of both the communities represented.”
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser’s office will consider joining a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s declaration in January of a national energy emergency, he told Newsline in an exclusive interview. The Trump administration’s Bureau of Land Management invoked the emergency declaration to complete accelerated environmental review of a permit to expand a loading facility near Price, Utah for oil coming out of the nearby Uinta Basin. The expansion could increase oil capacity on the main rail line through Colorado by up to 80,000 barrels a day. It’s anticipated that the expansion of what’s known as the Wildcat Loadout facility — located on publicly owned federal lands — and other nearby facilities will allow the trucking and transfer to rail of up to 75% of the oil proposed for transport in the Uinta Basin Railway project. Eagle County and state officials have long opposed increased oil trains along the Colorado River. In a June 27 letter to Jerry Davis, acting Utah state director for the BLM, Weiser wrote that an expedited environmental assessment for the proposed Wildcat right-of-way expansion would be a “violation of applicable laws and regulations” that would block proper public input and “subject Colorado communities to significant economic, environmental, and health and safety risks.” Weiser argued there is no national energy emergency given the United States produced more oil last year than any nation in history, and he urged the BLM to follow standard, legally required procedures in reviewing the project. An attorney for Eagle County and an environmental group that successfully sued the federal government to delay the rail project, also sent letters. However, the BLM issued its approval, finding “no significant impact” related to the expansion, which Colorado opposes due to increased derailment, wildfire and oil-spill risks, and the agency directly cited its authority
SEE WATER PROJECTS, P8
SEE ENERGY, P8
A 2019 view of Larimer County’s Cache La Poudre. FILE PHOTO
Thornton Water project wins in district court The 70-mile Thornton pipeline can proceed with water expected in 2028 BY MONTE WHALEY MONTE@COTLN.ORG
A district court’s decision to dismiss a lawsuit trying to block the construction of a water pipeline from the Cache La Poudre River in Larimer County to Thornton means the project can continue as planned, city officials said Monday. The Larimer County District Court on Thursday ruled in favor of the City of Thornton and the Larimer County Commissioners who in May approved the Larimer portion of the 70-mile pipeline which will diver water from the Cache La Poudre to help feed housing growth in Thornton. Environmental group Save The Poudre filed a lawsuit claiming that commission-
ers should have required that Thornton send the water down the Poudre River in Fort Collins instead of putting it in a pipeline. The commissioner’s decision violated multiple sections of the county’s land use code, according to Save The Poudre. But the Larimer District court said Save The Poudre offered their opposition to the commissioner’s decision, but no evidence the board abused its discretion in granting the 1041 permit for the pipeline project, Thornton city officials said in a news release. ”Mere disagreements with the conclusions reached does not render a Board’s judgment an abuse of discretion, nor may this Court reweigh the evidence or substitute our own judgment of that of the (Board of Commissioners),” the court states.
VOICES: 6 | CALENDAR: 15 | SPORTS: 17
WESTMINSTERWINDOW.COM • A PUBLICATION OF THE COLORADO TRUST FOR LOCAL NEWS