Laserfiche WebLink
13 <br />1 I was an expert in the interpretation of CWCB's rules, <br />2 policies and statutes. <br />3 Q Okay. With respect to the City of Golden? <br />4 A Yes, I testified as an agent of the board. <br />5 Q Okay. And Upper Eagle River Sanitation District? <br />6 A I believe I testified as an agent of the board. <br />7 Q And Town of Breckenridge? <br />8 A I believe I testified as an agent of the board. <br />9 Q Were any of these cases involving RICD -- may I shut <br />10 that window, Your Honor? <br />11 I'm sorry. My last question was, were any of these <br />12 cases concerned with RICD cases? <br />13 A Yes, the City of Golden case involved -- <br />14 MS. COVELL: Objection. I think we've been using <br />15 RICD to mean recreation in-channel diversion under Senate <br />16 Bill 216. Could we get a clarification on this? <br />17 Q (By Ms. Coulter) Did Golden involve Senate Bill 216? <br />18 A No, Golden didn't involve Senate Bill 216. It was <br />19 prior to Senate Bill 216, but it did involve a recreational <br />20 in-channel diversion prior to the passage of 216 and a <br />21 whitewater boating application. <br />22 Q Just to ask you, did any of these cases involve <br />23 testimony under Senate Bill 216? <br />24 A No, none of them did. <br />25 Q In fact, they weren't enacted -- Senate Bill 216