DWR_4535774

• Board or Commission: Colorado Ground Water Commission
• Document Type - Board and Commission Meetings: Meeting Document
• Document Date: 8/15/2025
• Subject: Meeting Minutes

Ground Water Commission Meeting Minutes Page 13
August 14 &t 15, 2025
clear and reasonable factor. Ms. Mete highlighted the difficulty of putting
guidelines and restrictions on the ability to object to permit applications made
inside Designated Basins, but that it would be helpful to put forward a process
that would ensure clarity for the basis of an objection. The AGO has drafted a
change to an existing rule and proposed a new rule to address this. DWR Staff
has also drafted a form that will be filled out by the Objector as part of the
objection process. The new rule includes a provision that requires a deadline to
filing objections to applications, known as new Rule 5.1.4.1. The objection
would also be subject to new Rule 13, which provides guidelines for objections
to applications. Under Rule 13, the Objector is required to specify wells
impacted by the application, and clearly state the basis of objections. A
revision to Rule 7.2 outlines requirements for publication of objections, and
specifies that objections are subject to Rule 13. Ms. Mete emphasized that the
new rule does not limit the basis of objections, but requires the Objector to
make a statement declaring if the objection is based on impairment to existing
water rights or will create unreasonable waste under Rule 13. Rule 13 also
clarifies that GWMD's are not limited in their ability to file objections under
this new rule, but do need to use the objection form. Ms. Mete believes the
second clause under Rule 13(C)(2) may not be needed, since 13(C)(1 ) does not
require that a reasonable claim only be based on injury to a water right or
create unreasonable waste. Ms. Mete also expressed concerns that
Commissioner Noble may not have had a chance to look at the proposed rule
changes and new rule, and is also not in attendance at this meeting.
Commissioner Hume agreed that the second clause under Rule 13(C)(2) is
redundant and could be removed.
Commissioner Denning agreed with Commissioner Hume and suggested the
draft Rule 13 could be amended to include "another relevant issue" to clarify
impairment of water rights and unreasonable waste are not the only basis for
objections.
Ms. Mete then pointed out that the Commission should consider whether the
rulemaking process should split out the proposed rule changes to correcting
clerical errors (new Rule 8) and proposed changes/new rules related to
objections into two separate processes, or combine them into one process.
Commissioner Denning asked if combining the changes into one process would
cause issues holding up all the proposed changes, due to one aspect of the
rules not moving forward.
Ms. Mete clarified that even if one of the changes did not move forward, it
would likely not hold up the other unrelated rule changes. Ms. Mete also noted
that a clear statement of basis and purpose that two broad categories of rule