Laserfiche WebLink
<br />\ <br />aUgn1entation plan, the Applicant proposes to continue diverting under its 1903/1914 _ <br />water right (when it would have otherwise have be'en required to curtail its diversions) .. <br />because it is providing aUgn1entation water to the senior calling right (at a point <br />downstream of the CWCB's intervening instream flow water right). The Applicant <br />contends that it does not have to curtail its out-of-priority depletions of its senior water <br />rights when the CWCB's instream flow water rights are not being satisfied. The CWCB <br />Staff contends that Central City's must curtail its diversions under this aUgn1entation plan <br />because it would injure the Board's instream flow'water rights on North Clear Creek and <br />on the Fall River, as described below: <br /> <br />Case No. <br />1-87CW273 <br />1-95CW256 <br /> <br />Stream <br />North Clear Creek <br />Fall River <br /> <br />Amount (cfs) <br />1.5 <br />5.25/2 <br /> <br />Appropriation Date <br />12/11/87 <br />7/24/95 <br /> <br />Staff Recommendation <br /> <br />The Staff recommends that the Board authorize t!j.e Staff to proceed to trial to protect the <br />CWCB's instream flow water rights on North Clear Creek and on the Fall River. The <br />Staff is continuing to discuss settlement with the Applicant, and will present the Board <br />with any settlement proposals that are offered prior to the March 2003 Board meeting. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br />