Laserfiche WebLink
Specific concerns that are analyzed and addressed by the Master Plan include: <br />• Poor channel condition <br />• Surface water quality problems <br />• Surface water quantity and year-round availability <br />• Groundwater quantity and quality problems <br />• Terrace Reservoir storage and maintenance problems <br />• Sediment problems <br />• Damaged habitat and lost biological resources <br />• Impeded agricultural uses due to lack of water and structural damage to water control <br />and storage structures <br />• Impeded recreational uses <br />1.3 Authorization <br />This Master Plan is being funded through the interest earned on a fund of money recovered by the State <br />of Colorado and the United States in litigation captioned United States ofAmerica and State of Colorado vs. <br />Robert ll/1. Friedland, et al., CV 96-N-1312 (D. Colo.). That litigation was instituted by the United States <br />and the State of Colorado under the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, <br />Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. ~ 9601, et seg., to recover <br />response costs incurred to remediate the Summitville Superfund site. <br />CERCLA authorizes states and the United States to bring actions to recover "response costs" incurred <br />by them to remediate hazardous substance sites that are releasing or threatening to release hazardous <br />substances into the environment. These response costs actions may be brought against potentially <br />responsible parties (I'RP's); i.e., those who contributed to the hazardous substance releases at such sites <br />through operation, ownership or contracting for the disposal of those hazardous substances. <br />Under section 42 U.S.C. ~ 96070, CERCLA also authorizes states and the United States to recover <br />from PRP's damages to "natural resources" that have been caused by the releases of such hazardous <br />substances. Any natural resource damage (NRD) recoveries from PRP's are to be administered by <br />appropriate state and federal natural resource trustees. Such recoveries must be used only to "restore, <br />replace, or acquire the equivalent of the injured natural resources. Restoration generally means <br />returning the environment to the conditions in which the resource would be had the release of <br />hazardous substances not happened, such as restoring habitat for fish in the watershed. <br />CERCLA defines natural resources as "land, fish, wildlife, biota, air, water, ground water, drinking water <br />supplies, and other such resources belonging to, managed by, held in trust by, appertaining to, or other~ise <br />controlled by the United States..., ~orJ any state or localgovernment,... "42 U.S.C. 9607(~(1)(emphasis supplied). In <br />other words, what one might normally consider to be a natural resource might not be a natural resource <br />under CERCLA if it is purely private property with no nexus to a state or federal government. <br />As a result of the settlement agreement and consent decree with Robert Friedland, one of the PRP <br />defendants in the above-referenced action, the State of Colorado and the United States recovered <br />$5,000,000 to use to restore, replace, or acquire the equivalent of the natural resources damaged by the <br />hazardous substances released from the Summitville Mine. The State of Colorado and the United States, <br />through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), established separate funds for their individual shares <br />of the settlement (the $5,000,000 was split equally between the State of Colorado and the United States) <br />and a mechanism to make joint decisions regarding how to use those funds to restore, replace, or <br />Alamosa River Watershed Restoration Master Plan and Environmental Assessment Page 1-4 <br />