Laserfiche WebLink
facilitate CBM production is not a beneficial use of water. <br />While we may take into account agency interpretations, we are <br />not bound by them. See Colo. Mining Ass'n v. Bd. of County <br />Commis, 199 P.3d 718, 731 -32 (Colo. 2009). Here, the <br />Engineers' interpretation of the term "beneficial use" is <br />contrary to the 1969 Act's definition of that term. Their <br />interpretation also conflicts with our case law interpreting the <br />term. We therefore decline to defer to the Engineers' <br />interpretation. <br />C. <br />In their final argument, the Engineers assert that the <br />legislature intended that CBM wells be regulated not by them but <br />rather exclusively by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation <br />Commission. They contend that, rather than subjecting oil and <br />gas wells to possibly overlapping, inconsistent, or conflicting <br />regulatory requirements, the General Assembly recognized and <br />sought to protect the regulatory authority of the COGCC. We <br />disagree with the Engineers' argument and hold that COGCC does <br />not have exclusive regulatory authority over the extraction of <br />water in CBM production. <br />In support of their argument, the Engineers point to the <br />fact that the COGCC has been given extensive authority to <br />regulate the production of oil and gas. See Oil and Gas <br />Conservation Act, §§ 34 -60 -101 through -129, C.R.S. (2008). <br />21 <br />