Laserfiche WebLink
<br />000456 <br /> <br />followed by the Board to review the application. Staffwill provide input regarding how the <br />proposed application can meet the intent ofthe RICD rules. <br /> <br />6. Submissions Required from an Applicant <br />Within 30 days after filing an application for a RICD with any water court, an Applicant shall <br />submit a copy of the application to the Board Office, pursuant to section 37-92-102(5), C.R.S.. <br /> <br />7. Required Findings <br />The Board is required to make certain findings about RICDs. If the Board determines that the <br />amount of,tYater sought f-or a RICD does not represent the stream flow necessary to provide a <br />reasonable recreation e-xperienee in and on the ':later and/or that the RICD does not di':ert, <br />capture, and control water in its namal comse or location '/lith physical control stmctlH'es, then <br />the Board shall note that determination in its vlritteB recomm.endatioH to the water court and <br />specifieaUy preserve the Board's authority to argue these issues in water court. Section 37 92 <br />102((j)(b), C.R.S. (2001) requires the Board to make the follov:ing fiFldingsThe Board is required <br />to make certain factual findings relative to each RICD application. The statutory definition of <br />RICD requires that the applicant claim only the minimum stream flow. that the flow would be <br />used for a reasonable recreation experience in and on the water. and that the flow be diverted. <br />captured. controlled. and placed to beneficial use. Where the existing statutory factors contain <br />the statutorily defined term "RICD" definition. that definition must be met. Thus. wherever the <br />term "RICD" appears in a factor. an applicant must show that its RICD meets the definition or it <br />has failed to meet the reQuirements of the factor. Section 37-92-102(6)(b)(VI). C.R.S. authorizes <br />the Board to make findings regarding the factors listed below. The Board has included "sub- <br />factors" under each maior statutory factor and these subfactors include the type of information <br />that will assist the Board in making its determinations and provide notice to all applicants as to <br />what evidence is appropriate for consideration in the Board's establishment of its factual <br />findings. Thus. these sub-factors must be considered in order have a \lroper and meaningful <br />evaluation of an RICD application: <br />a. Whether the adjudication and administration of the RICD would impair the ability of <br />Colorado to fully develop and place to consumptive Beneficial Use its Compact <br />Entitlements. The Board, in making this finding, may consider, but is not limited to, the <br />following: <br />i. The amount and location of remaining unappropriated Compact Entitlement <br />waters in the basin in question and at the RICD point of diversion; <br />11. The proximity ofthe RICD to the state line; <br />111. The proximity ofthe RICD to suitable upstream points of diversion or storage <br />which may be utilized by those who would place the water to consumptive <br />beneficial use; <br />IV. The existence of suitable downstream points of diversion or storage for <br />consumptive beneficial uses before the water leaves the state; and, <br />v. Exchange opportunities within the state that may be adversely impacted by the <br />existence ofthe RICD. <br />VI. Whether the basin is over-appropriated: [Upper Gunnison River Water <br />Conservancy District sU22ests that this Rule is inappropriate and should be <br />deleted] [The Colorado River Water Conservation District and Pueblo <br /> <br />3 <br />