Laserfiche WebLink
b Wording "existing in the State of Colorado"limits those identified in C.R.S. 37-92- <br /> 102(5). Words considered logical but would perhaps not pass legal scrutiny. (Gunnison <br /> County) <br /> • Grammatical changes—add `an' before RICD and delete `purposes' after RICD. <br /> (NCWCD, CSU) <br /> 1. Party. Means any person who has filed a statement of opposition to a RICD, or any <br /> person who has filed for party status pursuant to Rule 10 of the RICD Rules. <br /> 10 Because the Staff disagrees that this definition conflicts with Rule 10, the Staff <br /> recommends keeping this definition as it is. As currently drafted, this definition explicitly <br /> refers to, and comports with, RuleJ131' <br /> Definition as person "who has filed a statement of opposition"conflicts with Rule 10 <br /> where it's more broadly defined. (Gunnison County) <br /> m. Person. Means an individual, a partnership, a corporation, a municipality, the state of <br /> Colorado, the United States, or any other legal entity,public or private. <br /> n. Reasonable Recreation Experieni'e. Means an experience in and on the water that, <br /> would allow individuals of average skills,and abilities and intcrest°relating to the l <br /> specific recreational activity being souc-ht to enjoy partake in that activity in a lawful <br /> manner. <br /> 1+ The Staff recommends amending this definition as indicated to broaden this definition's <br /> applicability to different types of recreational activities. Colorado law certainly <br /> 1111 <br /> contemplates an agency providing further guidance about statutory language. An <br /> interpretation provided by an agency responsible for the administration of the statute is <br /> accorded deference by a reviewing court. Courts faced with interpreting a statute which <br /> establishes an agency-administered program must carefully consider the <br /> contemporaneous construction of the statute adopted by the administrative officials <br /> charged with its enforcement. Agency regulations regularly promulgated under those <br /> statutes are presumed valid and may be set-aside-only-if f . Of 9• a- <br /> reasonable doubt. If there is a contemporaneous interpretation of a statute by an <br /> administrative body charged with the responsibility of applying that enactment, the <br /> administrative interpretation should normally be granted significant weight by the courts. <br /> • CWCB should not impose subjective determination that reasonable recreation experience <br /> can only be had by a person of average skills, abilities or interests. Reasonable experience <br /> depends on nature of planned project and should be determined on a case-by-case basis. <br /> (Pueblo) <br /> b Limiting definition to an average experience is overly restrictive. Should be determined <br /> on cases-by-case basis. CWCB is not required by SB 216 to determine reasonable <br /> recreation experience. (Aspen) <br /> b Limitation to average skill level ignores broad range of RICD opportunities and is not <br /> - - authorized by the legislation.-Compares range-of experiences-to skiing-.-(Gunnison <br /> County) <br /> ▪ Statute does not authorize CWCB to determine what is a reasonable recreation experience <br /> nor that reasonable experience is that of an average user. Determination is solely within <br /> • the province of Water Court and goes beyond the expertise of CWCB or limited hearing <br /> 5 <br />