DWR_3364083

• Board or Commission: Colorado Ground Water Commission
• Document Type - Board and Commission Meetings: Meeting Document
• Document Date: 5/16/2014
• Subject: MEETING MATERIALS

of water each time he pre irrigates. Mr. Keith Vander Horst addressed the Commission. He provided the administrative history to the permitting issues in question. Mr. Vander Horst
said that Rule 5.5 is the limiting factor. He said that staff does not see this as an injury issue and that it is up to the Commission to decide if they want to grant the exception.
Commissioner Smith talked about the water bearing formations in the Southern High Plains and how difficult it can be to complete good wells. He said that in his opinion, Mr. Thompson
is the farmer and that he knows how to farm the land, when and where to apply the water to get the best crop for himself and the Land Board. He will be doing that with less water than
in the past. There were no public comments on the matter. Mr. Vander Horst confirmed for Commissioner Clever that the hearing was properly published and that there were no objections.
Chairman Huwa closed the hearing. Commissioner Smith moved to grant the exception to Rule 5.5. Commissioner Clever seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Chairman Huwa called
for agenda item no. 8, a presentation on the Chatfield Reservoir reallocation effort, by Tom Browning of the CWCB. Mr. Browning informed the Commission that this study to change the
use of the reservoir from flood control (the dam was built at the confluence of the South Platte River and Plum Creek after the 1965 flood) and water supply to municipal and agricultural
was authorized by congress Ground Water Commission Meeting Minutes Page 4 February 21, 2014 in 1986. He said that Chatfield reservoir is designed to hold 350,000 acre-feet of water
however, the normal operating pool is 27,000 acre-feet. Mr. Browning said that the reallocation under study is a function of need. This study is one many being conducted to locate
water for the growing population, expected to double by 2050. It is planned that the reallocation will increase the normal pool by 20,600 acre-feet or twelve (12) vertical feet without
any physical enlargement needed. The additional water will come from existing or future water rights of those entities storing water in the reservoir. He also expects that the use
will average approximately 8500 acre-feet with a 1 in 3 year reliability. Mr. Browning expects the total cost to be approximately 130 million dollars. This amount is split between
cost of storage, recreational modification and mediation activities. There are hopes that implementation of the reallocation will begin in 2015. There were a few questions of Mr.
Browning by the Commission regarding the projected costs and clarification of the projected annual yield of the project. Commissioner Huwa confirmed with Mr. Browning that downstream
user’s would not be injured by this reallocation because the entities storing the water would be using existing water rights. Mr. Browning said that all would be done in accord with
Colorado water law. Chairman Huwa called for agenda item no. 9, a presentation on the WISE (Water Infrastructure and Supply Efficiency) project that would serve the south metro area,
by Eric Hecox of South Metro Water Supply Authority with Joe Stibrich of City of Aurora. Mr. Hecox provided a short history of the South Metro Water Supply Authority. He said that
the SMWSA is a membership organization created by water providers from the south metro area. There are currently 14 member providers who are either wholly or partially dependent on
Denver Basin water and who want to pursue renewable water. Mr. Hecox said that for the south metro area the only sources of renewable water are the South Platte, Chatfield, Plum Creek
and Cherry Creek, all over appropriated. He advised the Commission that the plight of the south metro area was brought to light during a weeklong Rocky Mountain News investigation.
The investigation in turn was spurred by the reported declining water levels and declines in production brought on by explosive growth in the area, from 65,000 residents in 1990 to
295,000 people in 2010. The newspaper articles lead to the South Metro Water Supply Study which came up with four (4) recommendations for the water providers in the south metro area:
conservation, maximizing reuse, full development of local resources and the conjunctive use of renewable surface water with the Denver Basin bedrock water which should be used mostly
during times of drought. Mr. Hecox turned the microphone over to Mr. Stibirch, Deputy Director of Water Resources for the City of Aurora. He said that Denver and Aurora have reusable
water supplies in the South Platte River at some times during the year. The proximity of these water supplies, the infrastructure and the need is what makes the partnership workable.
Mr. Stibirch let the Commission know that this regional project provides an alternative to the traditional buy and dry by making use of excess system capacities and maximizing existing
water supplies in the system. No waters are imported to make the WISE project work. The project makes use of the Prairies Pipeline and water project of the City of Aurora, water lines
from the City of Denver’s foothills plant, new infrastructure, Ground Water Commission Meeting Minutes Page 5 February 21, 2014 including Reuter Hess Reservoir, being constructed to
the south and negotiations are underway for the acquisition or use of the East Cherry Creek Valley pipeline. Mr. Stibirch explained that between Denver and Aurora there is almost always
excess water available in the river based on their needs. He added that this is a permanent agreement that is both variable and interruptible. Some years may have a lot of water while
others may see no water deliveries. In the years of little or no delivery the South Metro Providers can use their groundwater rights. The phase-in period, 2016 thru 2020, a period
for construction of additional infrastructure by South Metro District, will see deliveries of up to 5,000 acre-feet per year peaking in 2020. After the year 2020, the average annual
deliveries will be 10,000 acre-feet or 100,000 acre-feet over 10 years. Eric Hicox addressed the Commission again. He said that the project has been challenging in that the primary
agreement for water delivery is three way, South Metro, Denver and Aurora. There is also an agreement between each party of the South Metro group and each participant with the Cities
of Denver and Aurora. The agreement with East Cherry Creek Valley should be finalized soon as should the agreement for the use of Reuter Hess Reservoir. He went on to say that all
parties receive what they need. The City of Aurora gets to more fully utilize the Prairies Water Project infrastructure, the City of Denver gets greater access to unused return flows
and South Metro gets renewable water. Mr. Hicox concluded his comments noting that this project receives broad public and private support. Commissioner Clever asked what the cost
of the system is. There is no cost to buy in to the system, all costs are incorporated into the rate structure which is revisited every year. The rate per thousand gallons is based
on the operation and maintenance of the system and for Aurora a capitol recovery portion. The rate was set in 2013 at $5.50 per 1000 gallons. The South Metro partners have an additional
$140 million in infrastructure costs to pay off. Commissioner Smith clarified that all waters are reuse waters. Mr. Hicox answered that they are and that they are reusable. He anticipates
the water to be used to extinction. Commissioner Huwa noticed that the return flows to be used had been used by downstream water users. Mr. Stibrich agreed but noted that those users
had no legal right to the water. He did say that they had been in contact with big downstream users and they are aware of the potential loss. There being no further questions, Chairman
Huwa called for agenda item no. 10, the staff activity report. Mr. Keith Vander Horst discussed his written report. He directed the Commissioners attention to the large drop in over
pumping notices, 13 compared to the 300 notices of 2012. Ten of those orders were for new violators, receiving a 1:1 pay back of over pumped water and the other 3 being noticed for
the 2nd time and receiving a 2:1 payback penalty. He also mentioned that the Rocky Mountain Rooster Club in the Kiowa-Bijou Basin was issued a show cause order regarding their exposure
of ground water in some ponds. Mr. Vander Horst closed out his comments by mentioning that in Lost Creek Basin, there had been confusion over if PV Water had instigated the change
of Ground Water Commission Meeting Minutes Page 6 February 21, 2014 use of some wells or not and whether they had provided proper notification. The proper procedures for them to follow
when implementing the changes has been explained to them so there should be no further confusion. Chairman Huwa called for agenda item no. 11, the Attorney General’s report. Ms.
Jen Mele advised the Commission that all objections to the issuance of final permits in the North KiowaBijou Management District have been resolved. The Meridian case is set for trial
in July and August and Pat Kowaleski will represent the Commission. Ms. Mele closed her comments noting that the Gallegos trial will start, in Greeley, on Monday the 24th of February,
again with Mr. Kowaleski representing the Commission. Chairman Huwa called for agenda item no. 12, Management District Reports Mr. Nate Midcap, reporting for the Marks Butte, Frenchman,
Sandhills and Central Yuma GWMD’s, reported that they have had a little moisture but it has been cold. Four of his board members are serving on the preservation partnership group.
He has been attending the meetings and the discussions are “brisk” at times. He continues with his static water level measurements. Mr. Jack Dowell, reporting the W-Y GWMD, reported
that the static water levels in his District are complete. Measurements show that 51 wells are up, 20 down and 8 are even with last year. The large number seeing an increase could
be based on farming practices. He agreed with Nate that it had been cold and snowy. He did note that his District also saw blowing sand. Mr. Dowell closed his comments by noting
that W-Y District is thinking of conserving water by limiting farmers to historic use rather and permitted use when changing the description of irrigated acres. There was no report
for the Arikaree GWMD. Ms. BreAnn Ferguson, reporting for the Plains and East Cheyenne GWMD’s, informed the Commission that she has been seeing 1 to 5 foot declines in the wells as
opposed to the 15 to 20 foot declines of last year. She has been attending the partnership meetings. Mr. Max Smith, reporting for the Southern High Plains GWMD reported that they
had 7 to 8 inches of snow over Thanksgiving and Christmas and it has been extremely cold. He is hoping for good spring moisture. Mr. Robert Loose reporting for the North Kiowa Bijou
GWMD, reported that they had received a fair amount of moisture and the cows are starting to calve and the board has been busy working on small capacity well permits, educating the
new home owners. Another big issue is the water being transported out of the District for fracking and other uses. Ms. Tracy Doran, reporting for the Upper Black Squirrel GWMD,
reported that the District got through their election. They had 178 voters show up at one division with 107 at another out of 20,000 voters Basin wide. The Board is following the
progress of HB-1052 and would like the Commission to support it as they did last year. Hopefully the Commission could arrange to testify in favor of the bill at the hearing next week.
Ground Water Commission Meeting Minutes Page 7 February 21, 2014 Ms. Tracy Doran reporting for the Upper Big Sandy GWMD, reported that the District was not required to have an election
because there was only one candidate running for each open position. The District also supports HB-1052. There was no report for the Lost Creek GWMD. Mr. Scott Tietmeyer, reporting
for Upper Crow Creek Basin, reported that Crow Creek has been running bank full for over 100 days most likely because Wyoming is releasing water from her reservoirs in anticipation
of a high run off. None of the water has reached Briggsdale. Ms. Deb Daniel, reporting for the Republican River Water Conservation District, opened her comments thanking Ernie Mikita
and Grant Bledsoe for their years of service. Ms. Daniel reported that she, Commissioner Kramer and Commissioner Bledsoe met with the South Platte River Basin needs committee the day
before. The purpose of this meeting was to seek funding for the water preservation partnership in the Northern High Plains. She reported that the Republican River District began pumping
eight wells on January 17th and that they hope to have the allotted 4,000 acre-feet delivered to the state line by the later part of March. Ms. Daniel noted that she had sent fliers
advertising the Ogallala Symposium to over 1500 residents in the Northern High Plains. She concluded her remarks by inviting the Commission to the Ogallala symposium to be held on
March 17th. Chairman Huwa called for agenda item no. 9, old business. Mr. Pat Kowaleski, Commission Council, advised the Commission of the District Court’s standard of review for
de novo proceedings. For most Boards and Commissions in the State, the appeal goes before the Court for review on the record. Here, the judge reviews the record for legal errors and
to see if the decision may have been arbitrary and capricious. The Commission has a different appeal model, de novo hearing. Entirely new testimony and issues may be presented. He
pointed out that it has been discussed to amend the statute so that the de novo review is limited to the information that was presented to you and not allow a party to begin with a
brand new case. This was to present the matter to you as we are about to begin what can be another 10-day trial on the same subject matter. In other old business, Commissioner Smith,
noting his absence at the last quarterly meeting, asked if there had been any discussion about or decision to support HB-1052, the legislation to allow Management Districts the authority
to levy fines for violators. After some minutes of discussion which included comments from the public it was moved and seconded that Commissioners Burr and Kramer attend the hearing
before the Local Government Committee meeting and representing the Commission testify on behalf of the bill. Chairman Huwa called for agenda item no. 10, new business. Mr. Jodi Grantham,
Hearing Officer, advised the Commission that the Department of Natural Resources is about to implement a 2012 executive order from the Governor’s Office to review all rules and regulations
of each agency, division, commission and board. He hopes to be able to present something to the Commission regarding its two sets of rules and learn how they may want to proceed at
the May meeting. Ground Water Commission Meeting Minutes Page 8 February 21, 2014 Mr. Ralf Topper, staff hydro-geologist, presented to the Commission the static water level measurements
for the Northern High plains. He intends to present the Commission with the data for the remainder of the Basins at the May meeting. Chairman Huwa called for agenda item no. 11,
public comment. Mr. Dan Farmer, a resident agriculturalist in the Upper Black Squirrel District spoke in support of HB-1052. He said it was necessary to help Districts cover their
costs because their opponents have deeper pockets. He would like to see more enthusiasm for it. Mr. Bob Longenbaugh, consultant, addressed the Commission speaking in support of HB-1052.
He also encouraged the Commissioners and their constituents to get involved in the local round tables and provide their input into the state water plan. There being no further business
the meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Richard A Nielsen, P.E., Secretary Colorado Ground Water Commission
AG Report2014-5-16.docxATTORNEY GENERAL’S REPORT

ATTORNEY GENERAL’S REPORT
Cases involving the Colorado Ground Water Commission
May 16, 2014
The listing below summarizes matters in which the Office of the Attorney General represents the Colorado Ground Water Commission as of May 2, 2014.
cherokee metropolitan district
Case No. 08-GW-71
Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer and District Court
Attorney: Jen Mele
Subject: An application for approval of a replacement plan to make new appropriations from the alluvial aquifer within the basin. Objections were submitted by the District, along with
four other water users in the basin. A hearing was held for two weeks in Denver beginning on June 8, 2009 during which the applicants completed their initial presentation and the objectors
began their presentations. An additional week of hearing scheduled for August 3 through 7, 2009 was vacated following a ruling from the Division 2 Water Court regarding Cherokee’s
use of some of its wells, subject to further negotiations and amendment of the proposed replacement plan. This case was consolidated with change cases 08GW78 and 09GW15, and the trial
was set to continue in January 2010
Status: In November of 2009, the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District filed in District Court, in Case No. 98CW80 for a declaratory judgment asking the court
to determine whether Cherokee is required to use its waste water as recharge for the basin or if that waste water can be claimed as replacement credit under a replacement plan. On
June 17, 2013 the Court found that neither Cherokee nor Meridian is prohibited from claiming wastewater return credits for its replacement plan. Those orders were held to be final
appealable orders on October 31, 2103. UBS filed a notice of appeal on December 18, 2013 on the issue of whether Cherokee can use basin recharge as replacement water under the 1999
Stipulation between the parties. Meridian filed a notice of cross-appeal on December 27, 2013 on the procedural issue of whether the water court can hold up the replacement plan pending
in front of the Commission pending resolution of the issues before the court.
cherokee metropolitan district
Case No. 08-GW-78 09-GW-15</w:t></w:r></w
Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer
Attorney: Jen Mele
Subject: Applications to change the type and place of use of wells. Objections were submitted by the District and other water users in the basin. Both cases were consolidated with
08GW71.
Status: See above.
edna farmer et al.
Case No. 09-GW-02
Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer
Attorney:
Subject: This case involves the determination of water right in the Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer. An objection was filed by Cherokee Metropolitan District. The applicant moved to consolidate
this case with 08GW71, the replacement plan application by Cherokee and Meridian Service Metropolitan District, and09GW03, another application for determination of water right (discussed
below). This motion was denied by the hearing officer.
Status: The hearing officer will set the matter for a hearing.
daniel and theresa farmer et al.
Case No. 09-GW-03
Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer
Attorney:
Subject: This case involves the determination of water right in the Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer. An objection was filed by Cherokee Metropolitan District. The applicant moved to consolidate
this case with 08GW71, the replacement plan application by Cherokee and Meridian Service Metropolitan District, and 09GW02, another application for determination of water right (discussed
above). This motion was denied by the hearing officer.
Status: The hearing officer will set the matter for a hearing.
meridian service metro district
Case No. 09-GW-11
Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel
Management District: Upper Black Squirrel
Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer
Attorney: Jen Mele
Subject: Application for a change of water right. Two parties filed objections.
Status: The hearing set for February 25 and 26, 2010 has been stayed because the water rights to be changed were for use in the replacement plan in 08GW71. The matter is stayed pending</
resolution of the issues in case no. 98CW80 as described above for Cherokee Metro District’s replacement plan.
Gallegos, Reinaldo, et al
Case No. 03-GW-06
Designated Basin: Upper Crow Creek
Management District:
Before: District Court
Attorney: Pat Kowaleski
Subject: Petition to de-designate portions of the Upper Crow Creek Designated Ground Water Basin.
Background: The petitioners originally sent letters to the State Engineer in 2002 and 2003 seeking curtailment of wells within the Basin. The State Engineer declined to curtail wells
and the petitioners appealed the issue of the Commission’s jurisdiction over surface water rights first to District Court and eventually to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held
that the Commission has jurisdiction over surface water rights only to the extent the holder of surface rights seeks to change a boundary of a designated basin, in which case the surface
rights owner must show, using information that was not before the Commission at the time of designation, that pumping of the designated ground water has more than a de minimis effect
on the surface rights and is causing injury to those rights. The matter was remanded to the Commission, and this petition to de-designation a portion of the designated basin was filed
with the Commission on August 11, 2010.
Status: A trial was held starting on February 24, 2014 and lasting 7.5 days. Gallegos’ closing argument is due May 15, 2014, the Objectors and the GWC’s closing arguments are due June
13, 2014 and Gallegos’ reply in support of closing argument is due July 3, 2014. <
WILLIAM GREATHOUSE
Case No. 11-GW-06
Designated Basin: Southern High Plains
Management District:
Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer
Attorney: Jen Mele
Subject: Application for final permit. Applicant does not agree with Staff’s assessment of the amount of irrigated land associated with the permit.
Status: This matter is stayed while applicant applies for supplemental permit for the additional acreage.
meridian service metro district
Case No. 12-GW-10
Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel
Management District: Upper Black Squirrel
Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer
Attorney: Jen Mele & Pat Kowaleski
Subject: An application for junior surface and storage rights was filed in water court (10CW95), however objectors argue that the claimed water is actually designated ground water since
if not for the diversion, it would recharge the basin. Since only the Commission has the authority to decide when water is designated basin water, the matter is now before the Commission
to make this determination.
Status: The hearing was held January 22 - 24, 2013 before the Hearing Officer. <The Hearing Officer issued the Initial Decision of the Hearing Officer on April 25, holding that the
applicant must determine what portion of the water claimed in the water court application historically contributed to the water supply of the designated basin and subtract that out
from the surface water claim. An appeal of the Initial Decision was submitted to the Commission and the Commission upheld the Initial Decision. Meridian has appealed the Commission’s
decision to the district court. The case is set for trial July 29 – <31, 2014. Depositions are scheduled for May 28 and 29.<
Front Range ResourcesCase No. 13-GW-5
Designated Basin: Lost CreekManagement District: Lost CreekAttorney: Jen Mele
Subject: Front Range Resources filed for a change in place of use. Objections were filed by Equus Farms Inc. and Lost Creek Land and Cattle Company.
Status: The matter is set for a hearing on August 25, 2014 before the hearing officer.
Front Range ResourcesCase No. 13-GW-7
Designated Basin: Lost CreekManagement District: Lost CreekAttorney: Jen Mele
Subject: Front Range Resources filed for a replacement plan. Objections were filed by Equus Farms Inc., Lost Creek Land and Cattle Company and the Lost Creek Ground Water Management
District.
Status: The matter is set for a 15 day trial starting February 23, 2015 before the hearing officer.
4
6
AG Report2014-5-16.pdfATTORNEY GENERAL’S REPORT
ATTORNEY GENERAL’S REPORT Cases involving the Colorado Ground Water Commission May 16, 2014 The listing below summarizes matters in which the Office of the Attorney General represents
the Colorado Ground Water Commission as of May 2, 2014. CHEROKEE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT Case No. 08-GW-71 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management District: Upper Black
Squirrel Creek Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer and District Court Attorney: Jen Mele Subject: An application for approval of a replacement plan to make new appropriations
from the alluvial aquifer within the basin. Objections were submitted by the District, along with four other water users in the basin. A hearing was held for two weeks in Denver beginning
on June 8, 2009 during which the applicants completed their initial presentation and the objectors began their presentations. An additional week of hearing scheduled for August 3
through 7, 2009 was vacated following a ruling from the Division 2 Water Court regarding Cherokee’s use of some of its wells, subject to further negotiations and amendment of the proposed
replacement plan. This case was consolidated with change cases 08GW78 and 09GW15, and the trial was set to continue in January 2010 Status: In November of 2009, the Upper Black Squirrel
Creek Ground Water Management District filed in District Court, in Case No. 98CW80 for a declaratory judgment asking the court to determine whether Cherokee is required to use its waste
water as recharge for the basin or if that waste water can be claimed as replacement credit under a replacement plan. On June 17, 2013 the Court found that neither Cherokee nor Meridian
is prohibited from claiming wastewater return credits for its replacement plan. Those orders were held to be final appealable orders on October 31, 2103. UBS filed a notice of appeal
on December 18, 2013 on the issue of whether Cherokee can use basin recharge as replacement water under the 1999 Stipulation between the parties. Meridian filed a notice of cross-appeal
on December 27, 2013 on the procedural issue of whether the water court can hold up the replacement plan pending in front of the Commission pending resolution of the issues before the
court. CHEROKEE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT Case No. 08-GW-78 09-GW-15 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Before:
Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer 2 Attorney: Jen Mele Subject: Applications to change the type and place of use of wells. Objections were submitted by the District and other water
users in the basin. Both cases were consolidated with 08GW71. Status: See above. EDNA FARMER ET AL. Case No. 09-GW-02 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management
District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Subject: This case involves the determination of water right in the Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer.
An objection was filed by Cherokee Metropolitan District. The applicant moved to consolidate this case with 08GW71, the replacement plan application by Cherokee and Meridian Service
Metropolitan District, and09GW03, another application for determination of water right (discussed below). This motion was denied by the hearing officer. Status: The hearing officer
will set the matter for a hearing. DANIEL AND THERESA FARMER ET AL. Case No. 09-GW-03 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek
Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Subject: This case involves the determination of water right in the Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer. An objection was filed by Cherokee