9377 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

indigenous population of fish, shellfish, and wildlife. . . ,it These changes ratify and endorse EPA's presently questionable interpretation of its authority.$1 S. 1081 also requires states to designate all waters as "fishable, swimable," and states are also required to protect recreational activities on the water. Again, these changes arguably ratify presently questionable interpretations of EPA's authority under the CWA. Moreover, it is not unreasonable to assume that once these designations are made, EPA will insist that the water necessary to support these uses be left in the stream, either by prohibiting additional development or by restricting existing diversions.-L" 2. Interstate Issues S. 1081 would grant EPA the authority for a "National River Assessment and Protection Program." The purpose of this program is to establish a basin-wide management plan for designated river systems. The extent of EPA's authority for implementation of the Program is unclear, but perhaps very substantial if existing regulatory programs are used to achieve the goals of the Program. The implications of this Program for the west are very troubling, particularly if EPA were to attempt to inject itself into the complex federal-state relationships on the Colorado River, which include two interstate compacts, federal reclamation projects and significant natural and manmade salinity problems, or the equally complex relationships in the Missouri River Basin. A related issue is whether the water quality standards of a downstream state can be applied to discharges in an upstream state, which is the subject of a pending case in the United States Supreme Court. An affirmation of the 10th Circuit decision that downstream state water quality standards do apply in upstream states would be a problem for most western states, as this issue was not addressed when the standards were developed. This issue may also be addressed in the July 17 and 18 hearings on S. 1081. 3. Section 401 S. 812 was introduced to address the Rock Creek decision which held that states did not have the authority to set minimum streamflows for FERC licenses. While S. 812, as currently drafted, is limited to hydroelectric projects under the See EPA Biological Criteria and S. 10812(x)(5), 8(a)(2) and 18, which explicitly refer to these concepts, and EPA's February 11, 1991 Paper on "Arid Area and Water Efficiency Issues." IQ/ SQe S. 1081 8(b)(2).