Laserfiche WebLink
final determinations, including the issuance of final permits , <br /> must be filed within thirty days of the WQCD' s final determina- <br /> tion-. See § 25-8-404 ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) , C.R.S. ( 1989 ) . As such the <br /> Colorado legislature has imposed statutory finality on the WQCD' s <br /> issuance of CDPS permits . MCR' s CDPS Permit was originally <br /> issued in 1983 . Since then, the permit has been renewed at least <br /> twice and modified on several occasions . (R. 433-554 , Vol VIII ) . <br /> MCR never appealed its terms. MCR' challenge of the CDPS Permit <br /> effluent limitations for Outfall 016 on the grounds that it is <br /> duplicative of the conditions of the DMG Permit is untimely. <br /> Therefore, neither the District Court nor this Court have juris- <br /> diction now to effectively void terms and conditions of the CDPS <br /> Permit by rendering them unenforceable. <br /> 1 . The DMG permit and the CDPS permit are <br /> complementary not identical. <br /> Even if this Court finds that the District Court had juris- <br /> diction to effectively render the CDPS Permit condition sought to <br /> be enforced in the WQCD' s NOV unenforceable, the District Court <br /> erred in so doing. In this case, the conditions imposed by the <br /> DMG Permit and by the CDPS Permit with regard to the Outfall 016 <br /> area are complementary but not identical . This is clear from <br /> MCR' s description of the pertinent conditions. See Answer Brief <br /> at 29-32 . <br /> -15- <br />