BOARD02312

• Board Meeting Date: 11/19/2001
• Description: CWCB Director's Report
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

.

.

.

,

B. Colorado

.

Colorado's use designation does not include ground water recharge. The reason
Kansas has adopted recharge as a use is due to reversal of the relationships
between surface water and ground water during the past several decades. Contrary
to historic conditions, the reach of river between stateline and Garden City is now
a losing stream due to intense ground water mining in Kansas.
Colorado's 1998 list of impaired water bodies (303d List) includes the Lower
Arkansas River (from Fountain Creek to stateline).
Colorado has adopted a sulfate standard of 2400 mg/I for the reach between John
Martin Reservoir and stateline. This is generally the current ambient level. The
WQCD believes that the elevated concentrations are primarily due to natural
geological conditions and in part due to accretion of irrigation return flows (which
Colorado considers an irreversible man-induced condition).
Sulfate will no longer remain on Colorado's 303 d List (for the 2002).
The EP A has not approved Colorado's iron and selenium standards. The EP A has
also disapproved Colorado's sulfate standards, citing that sulfate loading from
irrigation return flows is not considered an irreversible man-induced impact.
The WQCD is currently waiting for the completion of a USGS water quality study
to provide technical justification for its proposed iron standards. The WQCD will
address the selenium issues after the EP A, in consultation with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, promulgates a standard for selenium.
The USGS study wi11likely identifY potential sulfate loading sources and also will
determine how much sulfate (and selenium) is contributed naturally and how
much reduction can be expected from reversible process (decreasing irrigation
return flows).
Colorado is reminding Kansas that strategies must be consistent with the Arkansas
River Compact and Colorado water law and that emphasis should be on avoiding
further degradation.
The WQCD hopes that Colorado and Kansas would cooperate with each other in
presenting solutions to the EP A instead of having the EP A serve as the referee
between the two states.
Colorado may also try to work through interstate TMDL issues in other multi-
states organizations, such as Western Governors Association.

.

.

.
.

.

.

.

.

.

CC: Dan McAuliffe
Dan Merriman
Steve Miller
Hal Simpson
Steve Witte
Suzanne Sellers