Laserfiche WebLink
. : .i •.•..i a. • ' - • • ••• • • • • • . . • •. • •: •• „ . .• <br /> court. <br /> ■► The Staff recommends removal of Rule 15 as it is duplicative of information contained in <br /> Rule 18. <br /> b Delete Rule 15. It is unnecessary in view of Rule 18. (NCWCD, CSU) <br /> b Revise to read "At the close of the hearing,the Board shall determine whether to recommend <br /> that the application be approved, approved with conditions or denied. In making its <br /> determination, the Board shall evaluate the application in light of Rule 7 of these Rules <br /> pursuant to Section 37-92-102(6), C.R.S. (2001)based on the record which shall include all <br /> timely submittals to the Board by the Applicant, the Staff, any Party and the public." <br /> (NWCCOG-QQ) <br /> * Rule 15 would allow the CWCB to recommend indefinite postponement or denial of an <br /> application based on the vague standard of"adequate information" without any further <br /> particulars. Such a recommendation is not authorized by SB 216 and might result in a Rule <br /> 106, C.R.C.P. "mandamus" action against the Board. (Gunnison County) <br /> = = - <br /> , . • , :. . . • . . . . . • <br /> application, <br /> .► The Staff recommends removal of this Rule for the reasons suggested below. <br /> b Delete Rule 16. It no longer appears appropriate in view of the manner in which other <br /> sections of the Rule have been modified. In other words, the applicant is no longer required <br /> to provide information beyond a copy of the application. If information is not adequate, it is <br /> because the Board has not received it from Staff. The Board retains discretion to recommend <br /> denial or a grant with conditions if it does not believe that the statutory factors have been <br /> met.Naturally this is incentive for the applicant to supply additional information under Rule <br /> & Relativc to"-postponement" of application,there is a statutory deadline by which the <br /> Recommendation is to be forwarded to the water court. (NCWCD, CSU) <br /> CWCB does not have authority to deny application for lack of information. The CWCB <br /> should be able to continue the application process until it obtains information necessary to <br /> make its findings up to the point the statue requires finding and recommendation be made, <br /> which is 90 days. If a completeness determination were made in the beginning of the process <br /> before the application was officially accepted,there should not be many situations where <br /> information is inadequate by the time the Board makes its findings. (NWCCOG-QQ) <br /> b If CWCB does not have adequate information to make the findings required by SB 216, it <br /> should note that in its submission to the water court. It should not simply recommend denial <br /> or postponement of an application due to lack of information because it will be perceived as a <br /> punitive action against an applicant. It is the CWCB's responsibility to comply with the time- <br /> -- line establishe d in the statute, and the applicant should not be punished for CWCB's inability--- <br /> to compile the necessary information within the allotted time. (CRWCD) <br /> c> Rule 16 does not identify who may submit a petition for a "waiver," when such a petition <br /> may be filed, what a petition must contain, upon whom a petition must be served, the review <br /> IPto which a petition will be submitted, or the standards that must be satisfied for a petition to <br /> 24 <br />