Plan to Drill Water Wells at Prison Site Draws Fire : Lancaster: County and city officials say the state should follow the same building codes as any other developer.

Plans to supply a proposed 2,200-bed prison in Lancaster with water tapped from underground wells have angered local officials who say the state is ignoring municipal regulations controlling water use.

City and water officials said they want the state to adhere to the same regulations as any developer who builds in the area.

Both the city and the Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 4 require developers to use surface water obtained from the State Water Project as the primary water source. Ground water should only be pumped during periods of peak use or as a backup should the state water supply be unavailable.

“We have a legitimate concern for the preservation of our ground water,” said Jeff Long, director of public works for the city of Lancaster. “I think that, morally and ethically, there’s a question that has been raised.

“They think they’re exempt, basically because they’re the higher governmental entity, and they won’t be subject to our rules and policies,” he said.

The state agency asserts it is exempt from the guidelines the city imposes on developers, because it is not subject to the Planning Commission approval process.

A state corrections spokesman characterized the local officials’ arguments as a last-ditch effort to halt construction of the $250-million prison by opponents who have been unsuccessful in legal challenges.

“It appears that, since they were not successful, that they’re trying to take another bite of the apple,” said Tipton Kindel of the state Department of Corrections.

The city and county filed suit in January, 1990, to block construction of the prison, charging that the environmental impact report was inadequate, but a Superior Court judge ruled in favor of the state last September. The city and county have filed an appeal, which will be heard this spring. Meanwhile, construction on the prison has begun.

Kindel said prison opponents are engaging in a stalling tactic.

“All of that was addressed in the environmental impact report,” Kindel said. “The opposition made its points then, and they are essentially the same points they’re making now.”

The state wants to go ahead with plans to drill three wells in excess of 1,000 feet into a deep aquifer, an underground layer of rock containing water, because it is less expensive than buying state water. They dismiss charges that the wells will endanger the ground-water basin, because the deep aquifer is not the primary aquifer from which most drinking water is pumped.

According to state estimates, it will cost about $8.6 million to connect to the county waterworks. That figure includes sharing the cost with area developers of building a mile-long pipeline to hook into the system, a million-gallon storage tank and a distribution system.

To drill the on-site wells, the cost would be $5.2 million, which includes building two million-gallon storage tanks and a distribution system.

But Gary Hartley, assistant deputy director of waterworks and sewer maintenance, said the county agency would provide a cheaper and more reliable source of water for the prison, and he would like “to see just how they came to this conclusion.”

To that end, Hartley, along with several Lancaster council members and others opposed to the proposed ground-water pumping, will meet Wednesday in Sacramento with state corrections officials to press their point.

“We’re hopeful that we’ll be able to convince them,” Hartley said.

Meanwhile, Lancaster officials say they are bothered as much by the attitude state officials have shown as by the actual issue of drilling the wells.

“You’d think that these people would try to work with the people in the community to make it more acceptable,” Lancaster Councilman Arnie Rodio said.

“Ever since they got going with this thing, they’ve hardballed it with us, and they just don’t care.”