Staff's Recommended Findings of Fact and Recommendations

Home Browse Search

The length of the proposed RICD further demonstrates as a factual matter that this RICD appropriation is not for an appropriate reach of stream. The Board finds that the RICD appropriation is essentially for a 25 -mile reach and this is not an appropriate reach of stream. ii. The Board finds that there are adequate stream gages to measure the RICD, but that the Wellsville gage is not adequate to measure the flows at the RICD reaches, and if the Wellsville gage is to be used, the amount of the water right should be reduced at each location accordingly; iv. The Board finds that RICD reach may affect flooding, flood control, or the one- hundred year flood elevations and that the Applicant has failed to provide any credible information demonstrating that the RICD would not affect flooding, flood control, or the one - hundred year flood elevations. Whether there is access for recreational in- channel use is a factor upon which the Board must make findings of fact. The Board makes the finding that there is not adequate access for the RICD. The Board makes the following findings about this RICD from July 1 through August 31, wherein 700 cfs is claimed: i. The nature and extent of the access required for the activity for which a RICD is being sought does not serve as a factual basis for the Board to determine that the RICD should be denied under this factor; ii. The ownership, leasehold, or other legal interest held by or available to the Applicant for purposes of obtaining access have not been demonstrated. As such, the Board finds as finding of fact that there is not adequate access for the RICD; and, iii. Whether there are impediments for the Applicant obtaining adequate access does not serve as a factual basis for the Board to determine that the RICD should be denied under this factor. d. Whether the exercise of the RICD would cause material injury to existing ISF water rights. The Board makes the following findings about this RICD from July 1 through August 31, wherein 700 cfs is claimed: i. There are no ISF water rights in this reach of the Arkansas River, and therefore the exercise of this RICD will not cause material injury to exist ISF water rights. e. Whether the adjudication and administration of the RICD would promote maximum utilization of the waters of the State is a factor upon which the Board must make findings of fact. The Board makes the finding that the RICD, for the flow amounts and time period specified above, would not promote maximum utilization of Colorado's water resources. The Board makes the following findings about this RICD from July 1 through August 31, wherein 700 cfs is claimed: i. The Board finds that there are probable future upstream junior appropriations for direct diversion or storage. Examples are specifically described in the pre - hearing statements filed by Aurora, Colorado Springs Utilities, the Pueblo Board of Water Works, and the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District. More specifically, the location of Turquoise Reservoir, Twin Lakes Reservoirs, Clear Creek Reservoir, and the Otero pump station all indicate how this RICD, as