Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />~. (Slip Opinion at p. 7). <br /> <br />The sections of the Clean Water Act evidencing that <br /> <br />~ Congress intended dams, and other hydrologic modifications, <br /> <br />sg to be treated as non-point sources are 101(g), 102(b) (1)-(6), <br /> <br />~ 208, 304(f) and 502(12). Of these the strongest indication <br /> <br />appears to be 304(f) (304(e) in the 1972 FWPCA amendments) <br /> <br />which directs the Agency, for the purposes of 208, to pre- <br /> <br />pare guidance to States related to: <br /> <br />Changes in the movement, flow, or cir- <br />culation of any navigable waters or <br />ground waters, including changes caused <br />by the construction of dams, levees, <br />channels, causeways, or flow diversion <br />facilities. <br /> <br /> CWA, Section 304(f). See Report No. 92-1236, p. 307, Vol. 1, <br />. Leg. Hist. of 1972 FWPCA; Report No. 92-1236, p. 309, Vol. 1, <br /> Leg. Hist. 1972 FWPCA; Report No. 92-911, p. 767, Vol. 1, <br /> Leg. Hist. 1972 FWPCA ; Report No. 92-911, p. 783, Vol. 1, <br /> Leg. 'Hist. 1972 FWPCAi Report No. 92-911 , p. 796, Vol. 1, <br /> Leg. Hist. 1972 FWPCA; Report No. 92-1236, p. 284, Vol. 1, <br /> Leg. Hist. 1972 FWPCAi Repoz:t No. 92-414, p. 1430, Vol. 1, <br /> <br />Leg. Hist. 1972 FWPCA. <br /> <br />Since the Water Quality Control Commission is the <br /> <br />only body in Colorado which can approv: 208 plans for the pur- <br /> <br />pose of the Federal Act, because 208 planning is left up to <br /> <br />the States by the federal Act, and because the Commission is <br /> <br />constrained by its own Act not to supersede Colorado water <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />rights law and administration, it is highly questionable that <br /> <br /> <br />water quality regulation in Colorado can include control of <br /> <br />-14- <br /> <br /><:, <br />