Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />I. <br /> <br />187 <br /> <br />made a proper detennination as to the scope of its authority to require mitigation <br />measures. Section 25~8-302(1)(t) limits the Division's authority to attach conditions <br />to a certification; conditions may only implement rules made applicable to 40 I <br />certifications by the Commission. Regulation No. 82, section 82.5(A), makes no <br />provision for requiring otf..site remediation or stream restoration such as that <br />proposed unless the applicant agrees to such conditions. Dundee has not agreed to <br />such a condition. <br /> <br />As Appellants concede, the issue in the North Fork is about the amount of <br />flow in the stream. Even assuming that the USFS habitat standard is not valid, <br />mitigation conditio~ would involve the amount of stream flow. Similarly, the issues <br />in the Snake involve either stream flow (dilution) or off-site mitigation. In order to <br />resolve these legal issues, the Commission need not reach factual issues such as <br />whether the USFS standard of 30% habitat loss is valid. <br /> <br />Conditions requiring either off-site remediation or stream restoration as <br />proposed here are beyond the authority of the Division. The Division's detennination <br />lIS to the limits ofits authority under section 25-8-302(1)(f) was correct. <br /> <br />Even assuming that the Commission could by regulation require an appIictult <br />to remediate pollution on someone else's property or perform stream restoration that is . <br />unrelated to the construction or operation of the project, the Commission has not <br />pllSsed such a regulation. Accordingly, the Commission cannot grant either of these <br />relief measures as requested by the Appellants in this proceeding. <br /> <br />CONCLUSION <br /> <br />The Commission concludes that it cannot grant the relief requested by the <br />Appellants and, therefore, GRANTS the motion to dismiss the appeal, <br /> <br />Dated this 13th day of March, 2001, by the Colorado Water Quality Control <br />Commission. <br /> <br /> <br />ROBERT . SAKATA, Vice-Chair, for the <br />Colorado Water Quality Control Commission <br /> <br />File: P:INRINRTRUMASIWQC\ClINICUN ORDER CIS.FIN <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />"'~" <br />