Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Western States Water Council <br />Water Quality Committee <br /> <br />San Antonio, Texas <br />October 20, 2005 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Ben to take a position on this question. Paul Frohardt suggested we should ask Roger to take back <br />to Ben that this is a substantial priority. The logical extension is that it would apply to all kinds of <br />permits. Stephen Bernath said it goes back to the issue of consultation. It is more than about <br />consultation. How it is implemented between the various regions differs. Joan said the 5th Circuit <br />has ruled that there is no role for the federal government when the program is delegated. The <br />Committee agreed staff should schedule a conference call following the Court's ruling on rehearing <br />so states can discuss follow up and potential next steps. <br /> <br />Section 402 <br /> <br />Tom Stiles said he appreciated Ann Klee's memo. He said there are two issues to raise with <br />Ben: 1) given EPA's stance, what do those states do; 2) ask for clarification about meaningfully <br />distinct waters and distinguishing with unitary waters theory. Tom is doubtful that states can get <br />behind the unitary waters theory. <br /> <br />E.ffluent Dependent Waters <br /> <br />Paul Frohardt said that the EP A/state drafting group is working on a Q&A document. The <br />group has been through a number of drafts. He suggested scheduling a conference call of the WQ . <br />Committee in January to further discuss these issues, and prepare for Ben. <br /> <br />The meeting was adjourned to allow the Water Resources Committee to begin their meeting. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />10 <br />