Laserfiche WebLink
affects the natural environment that the ISF decreed to protect should this be a consideration. <br /> Construction of RICD structures may injure the natural environment the ISF was decreed to <br /> protect for a period of time. This should not prevent decree of an RICD. (Aspen) <br /> * Inclusion of"or the natural environment that rights protect (sic)" is noticeably absent from <br /> the Statue and constitute an impermissible expansion of the CWCB's authority. (Golden, <br /> Breckenridge, ERWSD) <br /> b Delete "or the natural environment that rights protect". Language should mimic the statutory <br /> language. The fact that ISF water rights are tied to a "natural environment" can be set forth in <br /> the actual factors identification (see comments below). (NCWCD, CSU) <br /> * Section substantially improved by identifying injury to the natural environment as a <br /> consideration. However it is still difficult to understand how an RICD could negatively <br /> impact an ISF or how RICD structures might injure ISF itself. Presumably RICD junior to <br /> existing ISF and could not reduce flow below decreed ISF. The CWCB should explain how <br /> negative impacts might occur if this is important to include. Duty of CWCB to adopt clear <br /> regulations and this issue needs clarification to comply with A. (CRWCD) <br /> i. The nature and extent of the ISF in the COMA reach or any affected downstream <br /> reach; <br /> ii. The timing and duration of the RICD as such may relate to the specific use which is <br /> the basis for the ISF; <br /> iii. Whether the RICD would negatively impact an ISF or the natural environment for <br /> which the ISF was decreed ;and, <br /> I► The Staff recommends changing the language, as suggested below. <br /> b Delete "an ISF or" and "that it protects" and add "for which the ISF was decreed" between <br /> "environment" . d "; and," per reason stated above. (NCWCD, CSU) <br /> •' <br /> iv. Whethere con res ma injure-cause material in'ur <br /> thel.S.E_, 1 ' - 0 0 '1 r „ , , -the-I-SF pretee-tom <br /> 14 The Sta commends changing the language, as suggested below. <br /> c Del- 'injure" and replace with "cause material injury to". Delete "or" and replace with <br /> "including". Language more closely mimics the statutory language. (NCWCD, CSU) <br /> e. Whether the adjudication and administration of the RICD would promoteprecrw.ae <br /> maximum utilization of the waters of the State. The Board, in making this finding, may <br /> consider, but is not limited to, the following factors: <br /> f► The Staff recommends that this language be changed to reflect the statutory language <br /> ("promote" should be substituted for "preclude"), as suggested below. <br /> b Proposed rules inappropriately require RICDs to compete with currently non-existent <br /> consumptive water uses. (Pueblo) <br /> - - Aspen believes-that-RICDs-promote maxiinuin utilization-of the waters-of the state as rnucl <br /> as other water rights do. As noted by others, the speculative nature of the required findings is <br /> disturbing and flies in face of Colorado's appropriation doctrine. Implied judgement that <br /> RICDs are less important or valuable than consumptive water rights is inherent in these <br /> criteria, and is also disturbing. (Aspen) <br /> 14 <br />