Laserfiche WebLink
<br />John It Stulp <br />Executive Director <br />Colorado Department of Agriculture <br /> <br /> <br />Harris D. Sherman <br />Executive Director <br />Colorado Department of Natural Resources <br /> <br />AL <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />~ <br />,xecutive Director <br />olorado Department of Public Health and Environment <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this important Guidance. We look forward to a continuing dialogue toward <br />the end of meaningful protection of our state and this nation's water resources. <br /> <br />The proper course would be for EPA and the Corps to immediately revise the current Guidance to correct the unduly narrow <br />interpretation of the "significant nexus" test discussed above. Again, a meaningful application of this test in a manner <br />consistent with Justice Kennedy's decision requires consideration of the cumulative importance to water quality of multiple, <br />similarly situated tributaries (and their wetlands) in awatershed, rather than a focus only on a single tributary. <br /> <br />Conclusions <br /> <br />Because of the relatively short period oftime since promulgation of this Guidance, to date there is little practical experience <br />with how the Guidance will be interpreted and applied to specific water bodies in Colorado. In particular, there is not yet <br />adequate information available to know the extent to which the concerns expressed above will be reflected in non- <br />jurisdictional determinations for waters in Colorado. EPA and the Corps certainly should not interpret this lack of <br />information to mean that there is an absence of practical impacts from the current Guidance. <br /> <br />The result of the Guidance's narrow interpretation of the significant nexus test is that many waters, particularly in the <br />headwaters of important western streams, may be left unregulated by the Clean Water Act. This reduction in federal <br />protection would shift an important and potentially substantial water quality protection burden to the states. <br /> <br />Practical 1m <br /> <br />particular watershed. The focus on a single tributary is not a reasonable interpretation of this phrase, and <br />inconsistent with EPA's extensive efforts to further a watershed approach to water quality management. <br /> <br />ications of Current <br /> <br />Guidance <br /> <br />January <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Eiwironmental Protection Agency <br />7,2008 <br /> <br />is totally <br />