Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />not required to review and ratity the pretrial resolution. Staff may authorize its counsel to sign any court <br />documents necessary to finalize this type of pretrial resolution without Board ratification." <br /> <br />Staffhas resolved issues of potential injury in the following water court cases and authorized thc Attorney <br />General's Office to enter into stipulations that protect the CWCB's water rights: <br /> <br />(I) Case No. 5-04CWI44: AppHeatloD of Chris Eddy <br /> <br />The Board ratified this statement of opposition at its January 2005 meeting. The Board's main objective in <br />filing the statement of opposition in this case was to ensure that the Applicant would replace out-of-priority <br />depletions in time, place, and amount under his proposed plan for augmentation. Staff, in cooperation with <br />the Attorney General's Office, has negotiated a settlement to ensure that the CWCB's instrearn flow water <br />rights will not be injured. <br /> <br />The Board holds the following instream flow ("ISF") water right that could have been injured by this <br />application: <br /> <br />CWCB Case StreamlLake <br />No. <br />S-86CW226 <br /> <br />Plateau Creek <br /> <br />AmOUDt <br />(els) <br />16 <br /> <br />Eagle <br /> <br />Approp. Date <br /> <br />Watershed <br /> <br />Couoty <br /> <br />3/14/86 <br /> <br />Colorado River <br /> <br />The CWCB and the Applicants have agreed to the entry ofa decree that will prevent injury to the Board's <br />ISF water right on Plateau Creek. The Applicant has agreed to the following terms and conditions: <br /> <br />· At times when the CWCB's ISF water right on Plateau Creek is not being met, Applicant shall curtail <br />diversions under the water rights granted in this case. <br />· The decree contains standard measuring device and reporting language and provides that the <br />augmentation plan is subject to section 37-92-305(8), C.RS. <br /> <br />(2) Case No. I-03CW444: AppHcatloD of Lee aDd VlrgtDIa Enos <br /> <br />The Board ratified this statement of opposition at its March 2004 meeting. The Board's main objective in <br />filing the statement of opposition in this case was to ensure that the Applicants would replace out-of-priority <br />depletions in time, place, and amount under the proposed plan for augmentation. Staff, in cooperation with <br />the Attorney General's Office, has negotiated a settlement under which the parties agree that section 37-92- <br />1 02(3)(b) applies to the Applicants' storage water rights, which are appropriations that were in existence on <br />and before the date the Board appropriated its instream flow water right on Middle Boulder Creek.. <br /> <br />The Board holds the following ISF right that could have been injured by this application: <br /> <br />CWCB Case StreamlLake AmouDt Approp. Date Watershed COUDty <br />No. (els) <br />1-78W937S Middle Boulder 12 7111/78 Boulder Creek Boulder <br />Creek <br /> <br />The Applicants have provided documentation of their use of the subject storage water rights prior to 1978, <br />and the Division of Water Resources concurs with the claimed appropriation dates. The CWCB and the <br />Applicants have agreed to the entry of a decree that acknowledges the applicability of section 37-92- <br />102(3)(b) to the Applicants' storage water rights. The decree provides that: <br />· Because Applicants' appropriation dates for the storage rights, surface rights and spring rights <br />described herein are earlier than thc 1978 appropriation date for the existing instream flow water <br />right of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, decreed in Case No. 78W937S, for 12 c.f.s. on <br /> <br />29 <br />