Laserfiche WebLink
(a) High quality classifications represent extraordinary categories, and their use is <br /> optional at the discretion of the Commission; <br /> (b) It is important in these cases to assign specific water quality standards to protect <br /> the highest specific use classifications, and only specific use classifications <br /> provide the mechanism for assigning such standards. <br /> 5. In accordance with 25-8-104, C.R.S. 1973,the Commission intends that no provision of <br /> this regulation shall be interpreted so as to supercede, abrogate, or impair rights to divert <br /> water and apply water to beneficial uses. <br /> 6. Recreation-- Class 1 and Class 2 <br /> In addition to the significant distinction between Recreation - Class 1 and Recreation - Class 2 as <br /> defined in Section 3.1.13(1) of the Basic Regulations,the difference between the two <br /> classifications in terms of water quality standards is the fecal coliform parameter. Recreation - <br /> Class 1 generally has a standard of 200 fecal coliform per 100 ml; Recreation - Class 2 generally <br /> has a standard of 2000 fecal coliform per 100 mi. <br /> In accordance with the Colorado Water Quality Control Act,the Commission has decided to <br /> classify as"Recreation - Class 2"those stream segments where primary contact recreation does <br /> not exist and cannot be reasonably expected to exist in the future, regardless of water quality. <br /> The Commission has decided to classify as "Recreation - Class 1" only those stream segments <br /> where primary contact recreation actually exists, or could reasonably be expected to occur. The <br /> reasons for the application of Recreation Class 2 are as follows: <br /> (a) The mountain streams in this region are generally unsuitable for primary contact <br /> recreation because of low water temperature and low stream flows. <br /> (b) Fecal coliform is an indicator organism. Its presence does not always indicate the <br /> presence of pathogens. This depends on the source of the fecal coliform. If the <br /> source is agricultural runoff as opposed to human sewage,there may be no health <br /> hazard and therefore no significant need to reduce the presence of fecal coliform <br /> to the 200 per 100 mi. level. Also, control of nonpoint sources is very difficult. <br /> (c) Treating sewage to meet the 200 per 100 mi. level generally means the treatment <br /> plant must heavily chlorinate its effluent to meet the limitation. The presence of <br /> chlorine in the effluent can be significantly detrimental to aquatic life. Post- <br /> treatment of effluent to meet the residual chlorine standard is expensive and often <br /> results in the addition of more chemicals which have a negative effect on water <br /> quality and can be detrimental to aquatic life. Therefore, reducing the need for <br /> chlorine is beneficial to aquatic life. <br /> (d) Even where a treatment plant in this region might treat its effluent to attain the <br /> standard of 200 per 100 mi., agricultural runoff and irrigation return flows below <br /> the plant may result in the rapid increase of fecal coliform levels. Therefore,the <br /> benefits of further treatment are questionable. <br /> (e) The fecal coliform standard of 2000 per 100 mi. has been established to provide <br /> general public health protection. There is no significant impact on domestic <br /> drinking water treatment plants because they provide complete disinfection. The <br /> standard of 200 per 100 mi. is not intended to protect the water supply <br /> classification. <br /> 7. Water Supply Classification <br /> The Commission finds that Colorado is a water short state and that it is experiencing <br /> considerable growth which places additional burdens on already scarce water supplies. These <br /> 9 <br />