My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Staff's Recommended Findings of Fact and Recommendations
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
8001-9000
>
Staff's Recommended Findings of Fact and Recommendations
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2017 2:33:37 PM
Creation date
2/19/2013 3:09:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Chaffee County RICD
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Author
CWCB Staff
Title
Staff's Recommended Findings of Fact and Recommendations for Chaffee County RICD
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Entitlements is a factor that the Board must consider. The Board makes the finding that <br />the adjudication and administration of the RICD, for the flow amounts and time period <br />specified above, would impair the ability of Colorado to fully develop and place to <br />consumptive Beneficial Use its Compact Entitlements. The Board makes the following <br />findings about this RICD from July 1 through August 31, wherein 700 cfs is claimed: <br />i. There remains unappropriated water that Colorado could consumptively use <br />upstream of the RICD reach but for the RICD water right pulling water down <br />through this reach. This would impair Colorado's ability to fully develop and <br />place to consumptive beneficial use Colorado's compact entitlements under the <br />Arkansas River Compact; <br />ii. The Board finds that the distance of this RICD to the State line is significant, and <br />this information does not serve as a factual basis for the Board to determine that <br />the RICD should be denied; <br />iii. The RICD is in close proximity to suitable upstream points of diversion and <br />upstream storage, which may be utilized by those who would place the water to <br />consumptive beneficial use. Examples are specifically described in the pre - <br />hearing statements filed by Aurora, Colorado Springs Utilities, the Pueblo Board <br />of Water Works, and the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District. <br />More specifically, the location of Turquoise Reservoir, Twin Lakes Reservoirs, <br />Clear Creek Reservoir, and the Otero pump station all indicate how this RICD, as <br />applied for, during the months identified above, would impair Colorado's ability <br />to fully consumptively utilize its compact entitlements; <br />iv. The existence of suitable downstream points of diversion or storage for <br />consumptive beneficial uses before the water leaves the state both do not serve as <br />a factual basis for the Board to determine that the RICD should be denied under <br />this factor; and, <br />V. Exchange opportunities within the state will be adversely impacted by the <br />existence of the RICD and that this will impair Colorado's ability to place to <br />consumptive beneficial use its compact entitlements. The Board finds as a matter <br />of fact that the RICD will adversely impact the ability to operate exchanges from <br />Pueblo Reservoir to Turquoise Reservoir, Clear Creek Reservoir, and Twin Lakes <br />Reservoirs, as well as the Otero pump station. <br />b. Whether the RICD appropriation is for an appropriate reach of stream for the intended <br />use is a factor on which the Board must make findings of fact. The Board makes the <br />finding that RICD appropriation is not for an appropriate reach of stream for the intended <br />use, for the flow amounts sought and the time periods specified above. The Board makes <br />the following findings about this RICD from July 1 through August 31, wherein 700 cfs <br />is claimed: <br />i. The nature and types of recreational activity or activities for which the RICD is <br />sought were considered by the Board, and the types of recreational activities <br />sought are not appropriate for the flow rates sought at the times of year sought. <br />The Applicant has indicated that the flow rate of 700 could provide boating <br />opportunities through this time period, but this reach is not an appropriate reach <br />for the requested flow rate for this entire time period; <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.