My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00677
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00677
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:53:08 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:42:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/18/2005
Description
WSP Section - Steamboat Springs (RICD) Scheduling or Remand Associated with the Steamboat Springs RICD and Related Discussion
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />U6-23-2005 10:08AM FROM-DOL NATURAL RESOURCES <br /> <br />3038663668 <br /> <br />T-7D3 P.D06/DOe F-828 <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />reduced flow I'lltes can only minimize the impacT of the proposed RICD claim on <br />the five fe,crors that The CWCB is to review under C.R.S. S 37-92-I02(6)(b), the <br />CWCB has agreed that it will not recollsiller the factors that were previously <br />resolved in the City'S favor in the CWCB's May 2004 Findings of Fact and <br />Recommendations. These earlier findings are as follows: <br /> <br />. There is no compact impairment under C.R.S. ~ 37-92-102 (6)(b)(I). <br /> <br />. There is adequate access to the RICD reach under C.R.S. S 37-92-102 <br />(6)(b)(1I1). <br /> <br />. There is no injuty 10 any eWeB insm:am now rights under C.R.S. 937-92- <br />102 (6)(b)(lV) <br /> <br />Thus, Ihe only review required by this Order is whether the reduced flow rates <br />and limited hours and months of operation ofth~ RICD right oLltlined in <br />parab'Taph 6.f. ohhe Proposed De~ree will change the CWCS's recommendations <br />on whcthenhe RICD claim promotes ma,imum utilization under C,R.S. S 37-92- <br />102 (6)(b)(V). and whether Ihe RICD claim is for an appropriate stream reach <br />. un'der C.R_S: ~ 37-92-1 02 (6)(b)(I1)(collectively, Ihe "IWO additional faclors"). <br /> <br />2. <br /> <br />The ewcs slipulated that the further CWCB review pursL1ant to this remand <br />Order would be conducted under existing law, (lnd would not be subject TO any <br />new agency rueD rules th'lt were not alre'ldy fully in effect at the rime of the <br />initial agency review in May 2004. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />3, As agreed to by the CWCB, in irs review on the TWO additional factors, the <br />CWCB shall consider only whelherthe daim as revised by paragraph 6.f. of the <br />Proposed Decree will change !he eWCB's ellrlier findings on the two addilional <br />factors. <br /> <br />4. As IlgreedlO by tht: CWCB, the only further evidenct: allowed in the agency <br />proceeding is Ihat which related direclly to Ihe two additiooal factors as they <br />apply to the claim as modified by the reduced flow rates andlimiled hours and <br />months of operation of !he RlCD right outlined in paragraph 6.f. of the Proposed <br />Decree. <br /> <br />5. As agreed TO by rhe CWCS. no other parties shall be permitted to intervene in thi~ <br />case or participate in any way in lite CWCB review. <br /> <br />6. As agreed to by the CWCB, any recommend'ltions on the twO additional factors <br />shall submined by the CWCB to the Court no laler than September 23, 2005_ <br /> <br />The court mnk"s no ruling as \0 the loca\ion of any C WCB rem'lnd hearing_ However, <br />the Court slrongly encourages the CWCB to concluct any hearing at a location reasonably <br />convenientlo the Ci!y. How"ver, this coun nOles that that this is a Water Division 6 case <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.