BOARD02592

• Board Meeting Date: 1/27/1999
• Description: Directors' Reports
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

.

.

.

~ 11\1 t:. Ui LULU1v\uU

Colorado Water Conservation Board
Department of Natural Resources
721 Centennial Building
1313 Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

-.:.
. .
,

Roy Rorr.er
GOvernor

January 4, 1999

J<lmes S. Lochhead
EXl..'Cucive Director, DNR
D<lries C.ljle, P.E.
Directo~, CWCB
Peter H. bans
Acting Director, eweB

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
. 401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460

. Attn: WQS-ANPRM Conunent Clerk
Water Docket, MC 4101

Re: Water Quality Standards - Advance Notice of Proposed Rule Making

Dear EP A:

We would like to offer the following comments on behalf of the Colorado Water
Conservation Board (CWCB). The CWCBis the agency within Colorado's Executive Branch
having responsibility for the protection, conservation, and development of Colorado's water
resources. The CWCB is also responsible for appropriation and maintenance ofinstream flow
water rights in the Colorado. We have a cooperative relationship with the Colorado Water
Quality Control Commission (WQCC) and its staff, and generally rely on their technical
expertise and programmatic authority for the protection of water quality in Colorado.
Accordingly, we want to take this opportunity to supplement the conunents provided to you by
the WQCC and to underscore certain aspects that are more directly related to the responsibilities
of the CWCB.

We found your Advance Notice of Proposed RuIe Making (ANPRM) to be very
informative concerning the implementation of the Clean Water Act (CW A) requirements and
policies. However, it does not summarize the basis to conclude that so many aspects of the
implementation effort require such extensive' overhauI. Colorado and other states have
developed extensive regulatory and technical assistance programs consistent with EP A
guidelines' for the implementation of the CW A, and have invested heavily in the implementation
of those programs. Extensive changes to the underlying federal guidelines, as indicated in the
ANPRM, will require substantial involvement by state and local agencies (as well as non-
govenunental interests) and should only be proposed in such areas and to such extent as can be
clearly justified by an obvious need. That justification is very important and the CWCB urges
that the EP A provide a summary and a list of references for the studies and other sources of
information that support such extensive and costly changes and additions to the program. We do
not accept EP A's suggestion that increased interest in watershed management and the
development of improved technology, by themselves, justify a "comprehensive evaluation for the
purpose of strengthening the regulation." We agree, however, that "the current regulation is not
broken" and that a "structured national debate is needed" before proceeding with such an
overhaul of the existing policies, criteria and programs.