From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
Colorado’s senators are crying “whoa!” and its major water providers “no” on a proposed rule by federal agencies to manage all watersheds under the Clean Water Act. In March, the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed rules that attempt to resolve conflicting rulings on the Clean Water Act by the U.S. Supreme Court. The 370-page rules connect every part of a watershed, from mostly dry arroyos and wetlands to large streams and rivers, to be included under the definition of “waters of the United States.” It establishes a “nexus” of waters, rather than simply a connection to navigable waterways.
Last week, Sens. Mark Udall and Michael Bennet, both Colorado Democrats, sent a letter to EPA Chief Gina McCarthy and Assistant Secretary of the Army Jo-Ellen Darcy urging them to extend the public comment period for the rule.
“We have heard from many Coloradans who are concerned about unintentional consequences arising from the proposed rule, especially due to Colorado’s unique relationship with its water resources,” the senators wrote.
“Colorado landowners and water users need certainty and commonsense interpretation concerning federal jurisdiction under the CWA in order to maintain current operations and plan for future growth.”
On Wednesday, Mark Pifher, a Colorado Springs Utilities executive and member of the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission, testified before the water resources subcommittee of the U.S. House that the proposed rule adds regulations that would hamstring Colorado water projects.
Pifher oversaw the construction of the $600 million Prairie Waters Project, which allows Aurora and other Denverarea water providers to recycle return flows. He is the permit manager for Southern Delivery System, a $900 million project by Colorado Springs and its partners to reuse water in the Arkansas River basin.
Pifher claimed the new rules would have added costs to Prairie Waters by including mostly dry streams under federal jurisdiction, and pointed to additional costs added by regulation for SDS.
The rules, as written, also would have adverse impacts for agriculture, Pifher said.
“Unfortunately, the waters of the U.S. rule, as currently proposed, could serve to impose additional regulatory burdens on local communities and economies without any concomitant environmental benefits,” Pifher testified.
“Western municipalities and irrigated agriculture are prepared to work with the federal agencies and Congress in the crafting of a rule that adds clarity and certainty to the CWA and its implementing regulations, yet respects local needs.”
More Environmental Protection Agency coverage here.