My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01703
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01703
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:06:02 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:01:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
5/5/1981
Description
CWCB Meeting
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
82
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />~ <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />light of that fact, Mr. Fetcher urged the Board to consider <br /> <br /> <br />expressing its support for S. 777. <br /> <br /> <br />Mr. Montgomery noted that the jurisdiction of the Corps <br /> <br /> <br />is not really the underlying problem concerning the <br /> <br /> <br />administration of the Section 404 Permit program. Rather, he <br /> <br /> <br />noted that the real problem is that the Corps of Engineers, <br /> <br /> <br />in the administration of the program, goes beyond <br /> <br /> <br />considertion of the water quality impacts which would result <br /> <br /> <br />from the discharge of dredged or fill material to take in <br /> <br /> <br />account a wide range of environmental impacts relating to the <br /> <br /> <br />reductions in flows which a water development project would <br /> <br /> <br />cause. Mr. Montgomery indicated that it was his opinion that <br /> <br /> <br />administrative action would largely solve the problem should <br /> <br /> <br />the Reagan Administration choose to so act, and that an <br /> <br /> <br />amendment of the Act as such was not absolutely necessary, <br /> <br /> <br />although S. 777 certainly would be desirable. <br /> <br /> <br />At the conclusion of Mr. Montgomery's remarks, Mr. <br /> <br /> <br />MacFarlane moved, seconded by Mr. Robbins, that the Board go <br /> <br /> <br />on record as supporting in concept S. 777, 97th Congress. <br /> <br /> <br />There being no further discussion, the motion was passed on a <br /> <br /> <br />unanimous voice vote. <br /> <br /> <br />There being no further business to come before the Board <br /> <br /> <br />pursuant to Agenda Item 3, Mr. Kroeger asked Mr. McDonald to <br /> <br /> <br />proceed with Agenda Item 4 concerning the review of <br /> <br /> <br />legislation pending before the Colorado General Assembly. <br /> <br /> <br />Mr. McDonald began by reviewing the status of S.B. 414, the <br /> <br />I~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.