Laserfiche WebLink
,~ <br />premise proves false, then CES's arguments necessarily fail. <br />B. Upon judicial review the Board's inter- <br />pretation of its own rule is entitled to <br />great weight. <br />It is important to note that CES's contention i.s based <br />solely on one of the Board's own rules. It is well established <br />that "[a]n administrative agency's construction of its own <br />regulation is entitled to great weight...." Orsinger Outdoor <br />Advertising, Inc. v. Department of Highways, 752 P.2d 55, 66 <br />(Colo. 1988) (emphasis added). The agency's interpretation will <br />not be disturbed unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent <br />with the regulations. Schneider v. Industrial Commission, 624 <br />P.2d 371 (Colo. App. 1981). The discussion that follows demon- <br />strates that the Board's interpretation of the rule is reasonable <br />and consistent with the rule. Accordingly, the Board's decision <br />must not be disturbed upon review. <br />i <br />C. Rule 2.1.2(8)(d) does not require an <br />applicant to secure an adjudicated water <br />right before applying:for a reclamation <br />permit. <br />Rule 2.1.2(8)(d) provides that, as part of the permit <br />application: <br />The operator shall indicate the water <br />rights and sources of water to supply the <br />project water requirements. The sources <br />-7- <br />