Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />make additional reports concerning the development and use of this EfA Plan as reasonably required <br />by the State or Division Engineer. <br /> <br />20. All diversions requiring augmentation water under this Ef A Plan are subject to the provisions of <br />S 37-92-305(8), C.R.S., requiring the State Engineer to curtail, if such curtailment shall reduce, or <br />eliminate, injury to vested senior water rights, all out-of-priority diversions, the depletions from which <br />are not replaced so as to prevent injury to vested water rights, i.e., ifaugmentation water is not available <br />under this Ef A Plan. <br /> <br />21. Retained Jurisdiction: <br /> <br />A Pursuant to the provisions ofC.R.S. S 37-92-304(6), the Court shall retain jurisdiction and <br />this Decree is subject to reconsideration by the Water Judge on the question of injury to vested water <br />rights of others generally for a period of five (5) years from entry of the decree herein. <br /> <br />B In addition, with respect to each well or surface diversion which is first used under this Ef A <br />Plan later than six years after entry of this Decree, the Court shall retain jurisdiction on the question of <br />injury to vested water rights of others for five (5) years after the date such particular well or diversion <br />is approved by the Division of Water Resources for inclusion in this Plan. The issue of injury from a <br />particular Authorized Diversion shall not require the reopening of this entire case, but only the status <br />of a particular diversion as an Authorized Diversion. <br /> <br />C During the period of retained jurisdiction. in the event the District or any party hereto petitions <br />the Court for reconsideration of any of the elements of the Ef A Plan, the Court shall order appropriate <br />notice to be given to all parties hereto. Such petition shall be made in good faith, under oath, and shall <br />set forth with particularity the factual basis upon which the requested reconsideration is premised, <br />together with proposed decretal language to effect the petition. If someone other than the District seeks <br />to invoke the Court's retained jurisdiction, the entity or individual seeking to invoke the retained <br />jurisdiction shall have the burden of persuasion to establish the existence of the injury alleged. <br /> <br />Dated this <br /> <br />day of <br /> <br />,1999. <br /> <br />WATER COURT: <br /> <br />Gregory G. Lyman, Water Judge <br />Division No.7, State of Colorado <br /> <br />15 <br />