Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />, ~ <br /> <br />proposed standards and classification, and the potential costs of compliance by municipal <br />dischargers. <br /> <br />We are also well aware that this hearing is a direct result of a water rights/water quality <br />dispute between Thornton and Denver in the Division I Water Court. These cities have <br />expressed opposing views with respect to impact on the exercise of water rights. Thornton claims <br />that lack of appropriate water quality standards for nitrate and TOC reduces its ability to divert <br />its South Platte River water rights. Denver on the other hand, argues that diversion under its <br />decreed water rights and exchanges will be severely limited should the WQCC adopt the <br />standards proposed by Thornton. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br /> <br />The DWR and CWCB acknowledge that if the WQCC adopts the proposals before it in <br />July there may an enormous cost associated with meeting the proposed standards. Depending on <br />the financial wherewithal of the discharger required to meet the standard, the proposal could - at <br />some point in the future and following many other procedural hurdles - be prohibitive with <br />respect to the use of water rights for diversion or exchanges of water. Indeed, both sides of <br />Thornton/FRlCO proposals have asserted that there may be an adverse impact on their water <br />rights (depending on the outcome of the WQCC's proceedings) due to high costs of treating <br />water or wastewater. <br /> <br />As a result, it is our position that the added costs may eventually impact the ability <br />of water users to maximize the beneficial uses of water, but by themselves, the proposals <br />will not prevent tbe exercise of water rights or water development. <br /> <br />We express this view fully cognizant that the law requires the WQCC to undertake a cost- <br />benefit analysis before adopting the proposed regulations. As a result, and especially in light of <br />the many comments received on the proposals addressing the cost-prohibitive nature of the <br />proposals, we urge that the WQCC to ensure the proposed standards and classifications are a <br />scientifically-appropriate and economically reasonable way to protect Colorado's streams before <br />adopting them. <br /> <br />Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact us if you have any questions. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Peter H. Evans <br />Director, <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br /> <br />Hal D. Simpson <br />State Engineer <br />Division of Water Resources <br /> <br />cc: <br /> <br />Greg Walcher <br />CWCB Members <br />Division Engineers <br />