Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1434 <br /> <br />California Gulch Superfund site and related mining drainage from the Leadville area should <br />be considered for both alternatives at Pueblo Reservoir. <br /> <br />The offices for the USFWS are in Lakewood, Colorado. <br /> <br />U.S. Environmental Protection Agency <br /> <br />The EPA is responsible for Environmental Impact Statement Review as authorized under the <br />National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NEPA. Under NEPA, an EIS or EA must be <br />submitted for any project that directly or indirectly affects the human environment and uses <br />federal funding, federal land leasing or requires federal permits for operation. <br /> <br />Similar to the Corps, the EP A will require that the proposed project beneficiaries document <br />the development of the storage site assessment and alternative selection in order to <br />demonstrate the range of alternatives which have been considered by the beneficiaries. The <br />EPA emphasizes the use of water conservation and other non-structural programs. The EPA <br />is particularly concerned that any foreseeable future actions be considered, and that the <br />environmental analysis cover the cumulative actions on the Arkansas River. The EPA had <br />comments similar to those of the USBR and USFWS regarding loss of wetlands, water <br />quality, dam safety and NEPA compliance. The EPA also indicated that an EIS would be <br />required for Administrative Actions and Legislative Actions. <br /> <br />Applicants for individual Section 404 permits are required to submit an environmental report <br />with the application which includes a complete description of the proposed project, analyzes <br />each project alternative for a full range of environmental impacts (404(b)(I) Alternatives <br />Analysis) and recommends mitigation measures. The EPA also performs a section 404(b)(I) <br />Compliance Review. The EPA has a broad oversight and veto power over the Corps' 404 <br />permit decisions. Criteria used by EP A include water quality, review of alternatives, <br />threatened and endangered species and proposed mitigation activities. <br /> <br />The office EP A office is in Denver. <br /> <br />U.S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation <br /> <br />The U.S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Advisory Council) conducts a Cultural <br />Resource Clearance review which focuses on protecting cultural, historic and archeological <br />resources in the project area for all projects subject to NEP A Compliance and 404 permit <br />decisions. This is authorized by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of <br />1966. Section 106 requires that every federal agency "take into account" how each of its <br />undertakings could affect historical properties. The agency must afford the Advisory Council <br />a reasonable opportunity to comment on the Agency's project. <br /> <br />The purpose of this review is to identify and protect properties which have historical, <br />architectural, archeological, engineering, or cultural significance. The actual identification of <br />historic properties is carried out by the federal agency and must be done in consultation with <br /> <br /><m> <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />Permitting and Regulatory Issues <br /> <br />. ..... ,-." ~ .. <br />