Laserfiche WebLink
Rules for Randy, Wilson Creek, and Hiawatha and West Hiawatha Fields. The <br /> State Engineer finds there is clear and convincing evidence supporting his adoption of <br /> rules identifying water withdrawn from the Weber Formation at Rangely Oil Field <br /> and the Morrison and Sundance/Entrada Formations at Wilson Creek Oil Field within <br /> the Piceance Basin in Rio Blanco County, Colorado, and the Wasatch Formation <br /> within Hiawatha and West Hiawatha Gas Fields within the Sand Wash Basin in <br /> Moffat County, Colorado, to be nontributary for purposes of his administration and <br /> permitting of wells pursuant to C.R.S. § 37-90-137(7). <br /> The State Engineer's finding is based upon testimonial evidence regarding an analysis <br /> performed by James Thomson, P.G., using the Glover-Balmer method for purposes of <br /> determining the timing of depletions to stream flow resulting from withdrawal of <br /> ground water from the delineated area. The State Engineer finds that this testimony, <br /> as well as the additional evidence in the record, provides clear and convincing <br /> evidence that the rules identify nontributary areas in manner that is consistent with <br /> C.R.S. § 37-90-103(10.5), and, therefore, provides a useful tool for the State <br /> Engineer's administration and permitting of ground water wells pursuant to C.R.S. <br /> § 37-90-137(7) within the delineated area. <br /> First, for reasons previously stated, the State Engineer finds the Glover-Balmer <br /> method is an appropriate method for determining the timing of depletions to stream <br /> flow for purposes of C.R.S. §§ 37-90-103(10.5) and 37-90-137(7). <br /> Second, the State Engineer finds the inputs to the Glover-Balmer model to be <br /> appropriate. The State Engineer finds the storativity and permeability values relied <br /> upon by Mr. Thompson are reasonable. The permeability values relied upon by Mr. <br /> Thompson were based upon appropriate site-specific or published data. The State <br /> Engineer finds the use of site-specific data to be convincing evidence that values used <br /> were appropriate. <br /> Certain parties initially questioned whether the proposed rules utilized appropriate <br /> values for the distance from the pumping well to the nearest potential point at which <br /> depletions could occur. These parties questioned whether the rules should generally <br /> consider all intermittent and ephemeral streams, as well as all perennial streams, as <br /> points of depletion to a"natural stream" for purposes of the definition of nontributary <br /> water at C.R.S. § 37-90-103(10.5). The State Engineer does not need to reach this <br /> issue with respect to these rules,because the model assumed the entire outcrop area <br /> for each of the formations at issue to be points of depletion, regardless as to whether <br /> the outcrop areas were crossed by ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial streams. <br /> Accordingly, the analysis convincingly demonstrated the proposed area to be <br /> nontributary regardless of whether intermittent and ephemeral streams are considered <br /> points of depletion to a"natural stream." <br /> Produced Nontributary Ground Water Rules 2 CCR 402-17, Statement of Basis and Purpose <br /> -21- <br />