Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District <br />02CW038 <br /> <br />CWCB may issue its findings and recommendation without exceeding the 90-day time frame <br /> <br />provided for by SB 216 at C.R.S. 9 37-92-102(6)(c) ("[w]ithin ninety days after the filing of <br /> <br />statements of opposition, the [Colorado water conservation] board shall report its findings to the <br /> <br />water court for review pursuant to section 37 -92-305(13)." Emphasis added.) <br /> <br />The 90-day time frame was established by the Legislature with the recognition that in the <br /> <br />usual case, CWCB would be considering a new application, could be required to hold a hearing, <br /> <br />and would apply all five statutory 1 02(6) factors. Ninety days was considered sufficient time to <br /> <br />accommodate this process. Here, 90 days is more than sufficient because no new hearing will be <br /> <br />held, and two, rather than five, factors will be considered. <br /> <br />Though the June 16,2005 remand order in this case stated that "it is inappropriate for the <br /> <br />Court to tell the CWCB when it shall issue its findings and recommendations," the Court was not <br /> <br />authorizing the CWCB to exceed the 90-day time frame provided for in SB 216. CWCB itself <br /> <br />has previously acknowledged in this case that "the 90-day time frame for the CWCB' s <br /> <br />submission of its Findings of Fact and Recommendation to the water court was established for <br /> <br />the benefit of applicants for recreational in-charmel diversion water rights to avoid undue delay <br /> <br />prior to the Water Court's consideration of the claims of such applicants." See May 28,2002 <br /> <br />Joint Motion for Extension of Time for Submission of Findings of Fact and Recommendation to <br /> <br />the Water Court at paragraphs 2 and 4. (Copy available upon request). Further, CWCB agreed <br /> <br />-3- <br />