My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Response to Applicants' Joint Motion for Costs and Fees
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
4001-5000
>
Response to Applicants' Joint Motion for Costs and Fees
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2010 1:25:44 PM
Creation date
7/7/2010 2:27:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Case No. 00CW259 Vail RICD and Case No. 00CW281 Breckenridge RICD
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
8/2/2002
Author
Ken Salazar, John Cyran, Susan Schneider
Title
Response to Applicants' Joint Motion for Costs and Fees
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
STATE .OTC COLORAD O <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 721 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 866 - 3441' <br />FAX: (303) 866 -4474 <br />www.cwcb.state.co.us <br />OF <br />o =pLrt^ <br />47 L L a i, w�ri AL <br />December 17, 2001 <br />Mr. Tim Gagen, Town Manager and Samuel Mamula, Mayor <br />Town of Breckenridge <br />Breckenridge Town Hall <br />150 Ski Hill Road <br />Breckenridge, CO 80424 <br />Re: Case No. 5- OOCW281 <br />Dear Gentlemen: <br />Bill Owens <br />Governor <br />Greg E. Walcher <br />Executive Director <br />Rod Kuharicli <br />CWCB Director <br />Dan McAuliffe <br />Deputy Director <br />F E'S BIT <br />I am writing to you to suggest that we meet to discuss your pending application for a <br />recreational in- channel diversion. <br />The Colorado Water Conservation Board {'CWCB ") is not entirely opposed to your <br />application. Rather, the CWCB seeks to assure that your appropriation is for amounts that are, as <br />identified in the statute, "reasonable and appropriate, under reasonably efficient practices to <br />accomplish without waste the purpose for which the appropriation is lawfully made...." In <br />addition; your appropriation needs to demonstrate a requisite amount of control so as not to violate <br />the exclusive authority of the CWCB to appropriate instream flows between specific points. <br />The CWCB has settled fhe Fort Collins and Littleton cases, and the Board is actively <br />pursuing settlement with Aspen. Thus, we have a proven track record of settling these types of <br />cases, where the amounts are reasonable and appropriate. I believe that further discussions along <br />these lines could prove mutually beneficial. <br />As you know, the CWCB is in the process of appealing the Golden decision to the Colorado <br />Supreme Court. The Court's decision in this matter may have a direct bearing on your pending <br />application. Your application is not subject to Senate Bill 216 and the Water Court will hear your <br />application under the laws existing at the time of your appropriation. <br />A Supreme Court ruling adverse to the CWCB will cause us to re- examine the level of our <br />opposition to your application. I would suspect that if we are successful in our appeal, it will likel3 <br />affect the outcome of your application. Regardless, it is my suggestion that as public agencies it <br />Flood Protection • Water Supply Planning and Finance • Stream and Lake Protection <br />Water Supply Protection • Conservation and Drought Planning <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.