My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Rebuttal Statement of Town of Silverthorne
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Rebuttal Statement of Town of Silverthorne
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:41:19 PM
Creation date
7/24/2009 12:13:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.51A1
Description
Applicant's Prehearing Statements: Legal Documents
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
6/6/2005
Author
David W. Robbins
Title
Rebuttal Statement of Town of Silverthorne
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Litigation
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
• to senior water rights and senior exchange rights. Objectors raising this issue admit they have <br />senior exchanges, but generally decline to explain the magnitude of these senior rights, or <br />quantify the amount of upstream m-basm and trans-basm development these existing semor <br />rights could support. <br />Moreover, Silverthorne has effectively agreed, by the trigger flow provision of paragraph <br />8.3 of the proposed decree (attached hereto as Exhibit O, that Silverthorne's RICD call will only <br />be placed during two narrow bands (between 90 and 100 cfs during the summer daylight hours; <br />and between 540 and 600 cfs during the daylight hours of 3 summer holidays). During all other <br />times of the year and flow regimens outside of those bands there would be no RICD call from <br />Silverthorne. Dr. Eisel and Mr. Richards have analyzed the available exchange capacity outside <br />of these flow bands and have determined, as indicated on Exhibit S, that approximately 110,589 <br />acre feet would be available for future exchanges or other uses that could operate in an average <br />year without any injury to Silverthorne's RICD. Thus, the RICD claimed by Silverthorne in this <br />case will not cause any significant impairment of the ability of water users to seek and obtain <br />future decrees for exchanges and other uses of water that can operate outside of the narrow time <br />and flow bands in which the Silverthorne RICD will operate. <br />STIPULATIONS <br />The issues raised by Trout Unlimited have been resolved by a stipulation filed with the <br />Water Court and language included in the proposed decree attached as Exhibit O. Silverthorne is <br />? participating in ongoing negotiations with the remaining parties in this case and anticipates that <br />stipulations will be entered into with additional parties prior to the Hearing. <br />EXHIBITS <br />EXHIBIT A through N- ATTACHED TO PREHEARING STATEMENT. <br />EXHIBIT O-PROPOSED DECREE DATED JUNE 29, 2005 <br />EXHIBIT P-PLAT MAP FOR RNERVIEW SUBDIVISION, FILING NO. 1 <br />EXHIBIT Q-TABLE OF BOATING DAYS WITH FLOWS GREATER THAN 100 CFS <br />EXHIBIT R-PERCENTAGE OF HOLIDAYS WITH FLOWS GREATER THAN 600 CFS <br />EXHIBIT S-FLOWS AVAILABLE FOR FUTURE EXCHANGE WITH RICD <br />REBUTTAL TESTIMONY <br />The written Rebuttal Testimony of Dr. Leo Eisel and Mark Richards, P.E., is attached hereto. <br />? <br />5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.