BOARD00949

• Board Meeting Date: 5/21/2001
• Description: CWCB Director's Report
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Stream and Lake Pr~tection Program
Summary of Re:solved Cases
May 2001

Section 9.41 of the ISF Rules states that:

"In the event the pretrial resolution includes temis and conditions preventing injury or interference and
does not involve a modification, or acceptance of injury or interference with mitigation, the Board is not
required to review and ratify the pretrial resolution.. Staff may authorize its counsel to sign any court
documents necessary to finalize this type of pretrial resolution without Board ratification."

Staff has resolved issues of potential injury in the following water court case and authorized the
Attorney General's Office to enter into stipulations that protect the CWCB's water rights:

(1) Case No. 5-99CW299; Town of Gypsum

The Board ratified the statement of opposition filed in this case at its March 21-22, 2000, meeting. The
Board has instream flow water rights on Gypsum Creek and the Eagle River that could have been injured by
this application. The Board's main objective in filing a statement of opposition in this case was to assure that the
Town did not divert water under its junior water rights at times when the Board's instream flow rights on Gypsum
Creek and on the Eagle River are not being satisfied, unl~ss the Town provided upstream augmentation water to
replace its depletions in time, place and amount. The Staff, in cooperation with the Attorney General's Office, has
negotiated a settlement that fully protects the Board's instream flow water rights.

Applicant proposed to divert waterout-of-priority from several surface diversions and two wells, all
located on Gypsum Creek and the Eagle River. The Applicant proposed to augment out...of-priority diversions
with releases from Eagle Park Reservoir, and Wolford tvtountain Reservoir. The Applicant also proposed to
operate an exchange from the confluence of the Eagle River and Gypsum Creek to a variety of diversion points on
Gypsum Creek.

The Board holds the following instream flow rights that could be injured by this application:

Case No.
5-80CW124
5-80CW116
5-80CW117

Stream
Eagle River
Gypsum Creek
Gypsum Creek

Amount (cfs}
130/50
6
5

Appropriation Date
12/31/1980
12/31/1980
12/31/1980

10C

.

.

The Applicant has agreed to the following tenns;and conditions that will provide full protection for the
Board's instream flow water rights on Sweetwater Creek;

. At times when the CWCB's instream flow on the !Eagle River is not satisfied, as decreed in Case No.
80CW124, the Applicant will either curtail all Qf its out-of-priority depletions tmder this plan for
augmentation at the Eagle River Pump and Pipelin~ and at Gypsum Well Nos. 1 and 2, or the Applicant
will replace in time, place and amount, the ouNof~priority depletions with releases from upstream
augmentation sources.

. The Applicant has agreed that it will not operate the exchange from the confluence of Gypsum Creek and
the Eagle River to the Little G Intake, the Norgaard Ditch, Town Enlargement, the Town of Gypsum
Gravity System Water Works, or the Eye Lake Supply Ditch at times when the Gypsum Creek instream
flows are not satisfied unless all such out-of-prioritY depletions are replaced in time, place, and amount,
with releases from augmentation sources located unstream of the stream reach which is being injured by
the out-of-priority depletions. .

. Pursuant to ~37-92~502(5), Applicant shall install, maintain and monitor at locations determined by the
Division Engineer and at Applicant's expense such measuring devices deemed necessary by the Division
Engineer to administer the terms of this decree.

(2) Case No. 5-99CW305; Galloway .

The Board ratified the statement of opposition fi~ed in this case at its March 20-21, 2000, meeting. The
Board has instream flow water rights on Spruce Creek arid the Blue River that could have been injured by this
application. The Board's main objective in filing a statement of opposition in this case was to prevent the

12