Laserfiche WebLink
<br />above, are intended to accommodate a reasonable amount of time for Board questioning. <br />However, if Board colloquies among themselves or Board questioning of a particular <br />witness consumes an unusual amount of time, the Party may request the Board for an <br />equivalent amount of additional presentation time, which the Board may grant in its <br />discretion. <br />3. Additional written material. Without good cause shown, the Board will not <br />permit the introduction of written material at the hearing that has not been submitted <br />previously pursuant to the ISF Rules and this order. <br />4. Testimony and Exhibits. At the beginning of the hearing, the Board will make <br />any necessary determinations regarding method of direct testimony, availability of cross- <br />examination, and acceptance of exhibits. <br />5. Witnesses and Counsel. A Party's presentation may consist of any <br />combination of technical or factual testimony and legal statements or argument. Parties <br />with similar positions are urged to coordinate their testimony to avoid repetition and <br />duplication and to make most effective use of the hearing time. <br />E. Uncontested Issue <br />All Parties and the Contested Hearing Participant agree that the first of the <br />Board's three required findings is uncontested: <br />• That there is a natural environment that can be preserved to a reasonable <br />degree with the Board's water right if granted. Rule 5.40(A), ISF Rules. <br />F. Contested Issues <br />The second and third of the Board's three required findings are contested: <br />• That the natural environment will be preserved to a reasonable degree by the <br />water available for the appropriation to be made. Rule 5.40(B), ISF Rules. <br />• That such environment can exist without material injury to water rights. Rule <br />5.40(C), ISF Rules. <br />The Parties have identified in their prehearing statements a number of factual and <br />legal claims and issues that they suggest the Board should consider in making its required <br />findings. In deference to the craftsmanship of the Parties' lawyers, the Hearing Officer <br />will not try to summarize or recap those issues in detail here, but will note that the <br />following topics are on almost everyone's mind from one viewpoint or another and to a <br />greater or lesser degree: <br />1. Proposed "fill and spill" trigger for Blue Mesa Reservoir. <br />2. Present and future obligations and authorized purposes of the Aspinall Unit. <br />3. Aspinall Unit operations and operating criteria. <br />4. Availability of water to preserve the natural environment to a reasonable <br />degree. <br />5. Minimum amount of water needed to preserve the natural environment to a <br />reasonable degree. <br />5