Laserfiche WebLink
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING RICD DRAFT RULES <br />AS SUBMITTED TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2001 <br />1. TITLE <br />Rules Concerning Recreational In- Channel Diversions, adopted pursuant to section 37 -92- <br />102, C.R.S. (2001), and hereinafter referred to as the "RICD Rules. " <br />2. PURPOSE OF RULES <br />The purpose of these Rules is to set forth the procedures to be followed by: 1) Applicants for <br />Recreational In- Channel Diversions, and 2) the Colorado Water Conservation Board when <br />making Findings of Fact and recommendations to a water court regarding Recreational In- <br />Channel Diversions (hereinafter referred to as "RICDs'). By this reference the Board <br />incorporates the Basis and Purpose statement prepared and adopted at the time of the <br />rulemaking. A copy of this document is on file at the Board office. <br />}► The Staff recommends that Rule 2 be redrafted to reflect the conflict between the stated and <br />actual purpose of the rules as identified in the comments below and that the following <br />sentence be added after the first sentence: `In addition the purpose of these Rules is to <br />provide further guidance about the type of information that will assist the Board when it <br />makes its recommendation to the water court. " <br />b Comment that there is a conflict between the purpose as stated in Rule 2 and the actual <br />purpose of the rules as written. Rule 2 states purpose to set forth procedures to be followed <br />by applicant and CWCB. Rules seem to go beyond identification of procedure and establish <br />`substantive' policies and review criteria. Conflict should be resolved. (Gunnison County) <br />b Rules go beyond establishing a process as stated in purpose. (NWCCOG -QQ) <br />3. STATUTORY AUTHORITY <br />The General Assembly specifically recognized the appropriation and adjudication of RICDs by <br />local governmental entities, pursuant to sections 37 -92 -102, 37 -92 -103, & 37 -92 -305, C.R.S. <br />(2001). The statutory authority for these Rules is found at section 37- 92- 102(6)(b)(VI), C.R.S. <br />(2001). Article 10, Title 24, C.R.S. makes certain exceptions to the sovereign immunity of and <br />contains provisions regarding potential liability of state and local governmental entities. By <br />promulgating these Rules, the Board assumes no liability related to RICDs and expressly does <br />not waive its sovereign immunity under Article 10, Title 24, C.R.S. <br />}► The Staff recommends that the Board accept the change suggested below. <br />b Suggestion to delete the sentence "Article 10, Title 24, C.R.S. makes certain exceptions to <br />the sovereign immunity of and contains provisions regarding potential liability of state and <br />local governmental entities." Considered unnecessary and confusing. (NCWCD and CSU) <br />4. DEFINITIONS <br />t► The Staff recommends that the Board not define "maximum utilization of waters of the State " <br />and "basin. " The Board discussed whether to define these terms at several of its meetings <br />and there seemed to be a general consensus that maximum utilization if a court created <br />concept and that it should not be defined. Moreover, the term "basin " only appears once in <br />the Rules, its meaning is basic, and it does not need to be defined. <br />b Suggestion to include in definitions `maximum utilization of waters of the State' and `basin'. <br />(NWCCOG -QQ). <br />