|
subsection shall prevent the Commission or hHearing oOfficer from admitting any pPerson as a pParty to any proceedings for limited purposes. Rule 10 Final Agency Action for Adjudicatory
<br /> and Other Non-Rulemaking Hearings A. The Commission or hHearing oOfficer shall proceed with reasonable dispatch to conclude any matter presented to it with due regard for the convenience
<br /> of the parties or their representatives, giving precedence to rehearing proceedings after remand by court order. § 24-4-105(10), C.R.S. B. Hearings before the Commission and initial
<br /> decisions by a hHearing oOfficer shall be based on the record. The record shall include: All pleadings, applications, evidence, exhibits and other papers presented or considered, matters
<br /> officially noticed, ruling upon exceptions, any findings of fact and conclusions of law proposed by any pParty, and any written briefs fFiled. § 24-4-105(14)(a), C.R.S. C. In any case
<br /> where the Commission has conducted the hearing, it shall prepare, fFile and serve upon each party its decision. In any case where the hHearing oOfficer has conducted the hearing, the
<br /> hHearing oOfficer shall prepare and file an initial decision that shall be served upon each party, except where all parties with the consent of the Commmission have expressly waived
<br /> their right to have an initial decision rendered by the Hearing Officer. Each decision and initial decision shall include a statement of findings and conclusions upon all the material
<br /> issues of fact, law or discretion presented by the record and the appropriate order, sanction, relief, or denial thereof. § 24-4-105(14)(a), C.R.S. D. In the absence of an appeal
<br /> to the Commission the initial decision of a hHearing oOfficer shall become the final decision of the Commission. In such case the evidence taken by the hHearing oOfficer need not be
<br /> transcribed. Any appeal to the Commission from the initial decision of the hHearing oOfficer shall be taken by a party by filing exceptions within thirty (30) days after service of
<br /> the initial decision of the hHearing oOfficer upon the parties, unless extended by the Commission, or a review upon motion by any member of the Commission within thirty (30) days after
<br /> service of the initial decision of the hHearing oOfficer. §§ 24-4-105(14)(a)(II), (14)(a)(III), C.R.S. DE. Within twenty days following an initial decision of the Hearing Officer,
<br /> aAny pParty who seekings to reverse or modify the initial decision of the hHearing oOfficer shall promptly fFile with the Commission a designation of the parts of transcript of the
<br /> proceedings that shall be prepared and advance the cost therefore. Within ten days thereafter, any other pParty or the Commission may also fFile a designation of additional parts of
<br /> the transcript of the proceedings that are to be included and advance the cost therefore. The transcript or the parts thereof which may be designated by the pParties shall be prepared
<br /> by the reporter or, in the case of an electronic recording device, the agency conducting the hearing, and shall thereafter be filed with the Commission. No transcription is required
<br /> if the Commission’s review is limited to a pure question of law. The Commission may permit oral argument. The grounds of the decision shall be within the scope of the issues presented
<br /> on the record. The record shall include all matters constituting the record upon which the decision of the hHearing oOfficer was based, the rulings upon the proposed findings and conclusions,
<br /> the initial decision of the hHearing oOfficer, and any other exceptions and brief filed. § 24-4-105(15(a), C.R.S. EF. Unless the hHearing oOfficer’s findings of evidentiary fact
<br /> are contrary to the weight of the evidence, those findings, as distinguished from ultimate conclusions of fact, shall not be set aside by the Commission on review of the hHearing oOfficer’s
<br /> initial decision. The Commission may remand the case to the hHearing oOfficer for any further proceedings as they may direct, affirm, set aside, or modify, including any sanction or
<br /> relief entered therein, in conformity with the facts and the law. § 24-4-105(15(b), C.R.S. FG. Each decision and initial decision shall be served on each Party all parties by personal
<br /> service or by mailing by first class or in person, or via electronic means (upon agreement between the Parties) mail to the last address furnished to the Commission or hearing officer
<br /> by each party, and shall be effective as to such party on the date mailed or such later date as is stated in the decision. § 24-4-105(16)(a), C.R.S. H. Upon application by a Party,
<br /> and prior to the expiration of the time allowed for commencing an action for judicial review, the Commission may change the effective date of a decision or intitial decision. § 24-4-105(16)(b),
<br /> C.R.S. GI. A party seeking judicial review of Commission action may apply to the Commission to postpone the implementation date of the agency action. The Commission, upon a finding
<br /> that irreparable injury would otherwise result, shall postpone the effectiveimplementation date of the action pending judicial review. Postponement of the implementation date of an
<br /> action does not stay the time for seeking judicial review and does not constitute Commission agreement to grant a hearing, rehearing or reconsideration. § 24-4-106(5), C.R.S. Rule
<br /> 11Reconsideration A. During the time permitted for seeking judicial review of any final order rendered by the Commission or hHearing oOfficer in any adjudicatory or other administrative
<br /> hearing, any party affected or aggrieved by such order or determination may apply to the Commission or Hhearing oOfficer for a rehearing with respect to, or reconsideration of, such
<br /> order or determination. The determination by the Commission or hHearing oOfficer whether to grant or deny the application for a rehearing, or reconsideration shall be made within 10
<br /> days after receipt by the hearing officer of such application. Determinations by the Commission as a body whether to grant or deny the application for a rehearing, or reconsideration
<br /> shall be made at the next regularly scheduled Commission meeting. B. If the application for a rehearing or reconsideration is granted, the order or determination to which such application
<br /> pertains shall not be considered final for purposes of judicial review and the Commission or hHearing oOfficer may affirm, reverse, or modify, in whole or in part, the pertinent order
<br /> or determination. Thereafter, such order or determination shall be final and not subject to reconsideration under this section. C. If the application before the Commission (an initial
<br /> decision of the hHearing oOfficer is not included herein) for a rehearing or reconsideration is denied, the applicable order or determination shall be considered final agency action
<br /> as of the date the denial is originally signed or indicated in the relevant decision under application for reconsideration. An application under this section extends the time period
<br /> for seeking judicial review of the original order or determination only for the number of days that it is pending, since such an application merely stays the time period for seeking
<br /> judicial review. D. Applications for reconsideration by the hHearing oOfficer shall stay the time for running an appeal to the Commission only by the number of days that it is pending.
<br /> Applications for re-hearing or reconsideration filed with the hHearing oOfficer must be filed within 10 days of the hHearing oOfficer’s initial decision and the hHearing oOfficer must
<br /> file a written decision concerning such reconsideration within 10 days receipt of its filing. E. The decision to grant or deny a rehearing or reconsideration pursuant to this section
<br /> is not subject to judicial review.
<br />November 2016 GWC Enforcement Report.docx
<br />Enforcement Items and Actions
<br />For the period of August - November staff has responded to 17 complaints involving the perceived unpermitted use of wells and designated groundwater. Show cause letters and subsequent
<br /> field inspections have been used to verify well permit compliance on those not listed here.
<br />The matters described below have been determined to be violations occurring last quarter:
<br />NORTHERN HIGH PLAINS
<br />Plains
<br />Buol Farms was found be using small capacity commercial wells without totalizing flow meters. They have agreed to have meters installed by December 1, 2016 and begin providing us with
<br /> monthly meter readings. Meter installation will be verified by our office in December.
<br />UPPER BIG SANDY
<br />Upper Big Sandy GWMD
<br />Albert Kobilan was found to be irrigating expanded acres without GWC approval. Mr. Kobilan has indicated that he will apply to expand the irrigated acres. Our office has not yet received
<br /> the application. To ensure the well permit has the appropriate approval by the beginning of the 2017 irrigation year, we are requiring the application be received by our office by December
<br /> 31, 2016. If the well continues to irrigated unpermitted expanded acres in 2017, we will issue an immediate cease and desist order.
<br />PacketMemo2016Nov.docx
<br />Ground Water Commission
<br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 821
<br />Denver, CO 80203
<br />November 10, 2016
<br />MEMORANDUM
<br />TO: Ground Water Commission Members
<br />FROM: Keith Vander Horst, Designated Basins Team
<br />SUBJECT: Upcoming Ground Water Commission Meeting
<br />The upcoming Ground Water Commission meeting is scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on Friday, November 18, 2016, at the Town of Castle Rock Council Chambers, 100 N. Wilcox, 2nd Floor, Castle Rock,
<br /> CO 80104. Please find attached the following:
<br />Meeting agenda
<br />Minutes of the last Commission meeting, Agenda Item No. 3
<br />For the appeal from the Initial Decision of the Hearing Officer in the matter of an application by Gayln Einsphar for a reduction in permitted acres and annual appropriation for permits
<br /> nos. 13530-FP & 16927-FP, Case no. 15-GW-10, Agenda Item No. 6:
<br />The Initial Decision of the Hearing Officer
<br />Appeal brief of Mr. Einsphar.
<br />Appeal brief of Staff
<br />The exhibits to both parties’ appeal briefs are too numerous to provide by email, and are made available for access on the Hearing Officer’s ftp site at:
<br />https://dnrftp.state.co.us/https://dnrftp.state.co.us/#/DWR/Hearings/Einshpahr%2015GW10/Appeal/
<br />Staff Activity Report, Agenda Item No. 7
<br />Attorney General’s Report, Agenda Item No. 8
<br />Memo concerning the State Engineer’s role as an implementing agency under SB-181 of 1989, Agenda Item No. 10.C
<br />Drafts of proposed amendments to Rules of Procedure For All Hearings Before the Colorado Ground Water Commission (both redlined and not redlined versions), Agenda Item No. 11.a
<br />Hearing Officer's Report
<br />Please call myself or Rick Nielsen if there are any questions about the Commission meeting.
<br />cc:Commission Staff
<br />Designated Ground Water Management Districts
<br />
<br />
<br />PacketMemo2016-Nov.pdf
<br />
<br />QRTSTAT-2016Nov.xls QRTSTAT.XLS
<br />Print_Area_MI
<br />TABLE 1
<br />DESIGNATED BASINS BRANCH
<br />QUARTERLY ACTIVITY REPORT
<br />C.R.S. 37-90-
<br />BASIN
<br />RECEIVED
<br />ISSUED
<br />KIOWA BIJOU
<br />LOST CREEK
<br />CAMP CREEK
<br />UPPER BIG SANDY
<br />TOTAL
<br />SUMMARY OF APPLICATION ACTIVITY
<br />INCOMPLETE
<br />AP
<br />NP
<br />AU
<br />AR
<br />AD & AW
<br />CHANGE APPLICATIONS
<br />UPPER CROW CREEK
<br />TOTAL RECEIVED
<br />NEW ISSUED
<br />REPLACE ISSUED
<br />NEW RECEIVED
<br />DENIED & WITHDRAWN
<br />NORTHERN HIGH PLAINS
<br />SOUTHERN HIGH PLAINS
<br />UPPER BLACK SQUIRREL CREEK
<br />RESUBMITTED
<br />SMALL CAPACITY PERMITS
<br /> REPLACEMENT
<br />CA
<br />CANCELED
<br />CHANGE OF WATER RIGHT
<br />LARGE CAPACITY PERMITS,
<br />LARGE CAPACITY PERMITS (NEW & REPLACEMENT)
<br />(INCLUES DETERMINATIONS OF WATER RIGHT)
<br />LARGE CAPACITY PERMITS, NEW
<br />unk
<br />AUGUST 1, 2016 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2016
<br />105.00
<br />107.00
<br />111.00
<br />111.00
<br />34.00
<br />26.00
<br />11.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />1.00
<br />5.00
<br />3.00
<br />45.00
<br />31.00
<br />5.00
<br />29.00
<br />7.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />1.00
<br />0.00
<br />6.00
<br />5.00
<br />1.00
<br />1.00
<br />0.00
<br />1.00
<br />0.00
<br />2.00
<br />0.00
<br />19.00
<br />11.00
<br />1.00
<br />2.00
<br />3.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />2.00
<br />3.00
<br />15.00
<br />11.00
<br />1.00
<br />7.00
<br />4.00
<br />0.00
<br />1.00
<br />1.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />17.00
<br />15.00
<br />2.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />3.00
<br />3.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />0.00
<br />139.00
<br />102.00
<br />21.00
<br />39.00
<br />14.00
<br />0.00
<br />1.00
<br />2.00
<br />11.00
<br />6.00
<br />139.00
<br />123.00
<br />40.00
<br />16.00
<br />16.00
<br />5.00
<br />0.00
<br />11.00
<br />6.00
<br />6.00
<br />4.00
<br />0.00
<br />
<br />SEO_ImplementingAgent.pdf
<br /> 1313 Sherman Street, Room 821, Denver, CO 80203 P 303.866.3581 F 303.866.3589 www.water.state.co.us Ground Water Commission 1313 Sherman Street, Room 821 Denver, CO 80203
<br /> November 8, 2016 To: Ground Water Commissioners From: GWC Staff Re: The Office of the State Engineer’s role as an implementing agency under SB-181 of 1989 In response to discussions
<br /> during the Ground Water Commission’s August 19, 2016 meeting, and the State Engineer’s statement that the Commission would be provided information on the role of the Office of the State
<br /> Engineer (SEO) is an implementing agency under Senate Bill-181 of 1989, Staff provides the following. SB-181 of 1989 added subsections 202(7) and (8) to Section 25-8-202, C.R.S. 1.
<br /> Subsection 202(7) identifies implementing agencies as: a. The office of mind land reclamation; b. The state engineer; c. The oil and gas conservation commission; and d. The state
<br /> agency responsible for activities related to the federal “Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976”, as amended (i.e. the Hazardous Material and Waste Management Division located
<br /> in the State Health Department) 2. The bill refers to water quality responsibilities and jurisdictions of the implementing agencies. The State Engineer’s “Senate Bill 89-181 Rules”,
<br /> dated February 4, 1992, identify the following statutes as giving the State Engineer water quality responsibilities. a. 37-80-120 (involving substituted supplies of water outside of
<br /> Designated Basins) b. 37-90-137(2) (involving conditioning of non-exempt well permits outside of Designated Basins) c. 37-91-101 (involving regulation of construction of wells) d.
<br /> 37-91-104(1) and (2) (involving regulation of construction of wells) e. 37-91-110 (involving regulation of construction of wells) f. 37-92-305(5) (involving sources of substituted
<br /> water in plans for augmentation outside of Designated Basins) 3. Pursuant to Subsection 202(7)(a): a. The Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC) shall be solely responsible for the
<br /> adoption of water quality standards and classifications. b. Implementing agencies shall implement the WQCC’s classifications and standards through the implementing agencies’ programs,
<br /> by rule-making, after consultation with the Water Quality Control Division (WQCD) and the WQCC during their rule-making SEO’s role as an implementing agency under SB-181 of 1989 Page
<br /> 2 November 8, 2016 processes. The SEO did implement the requirements of subsection 25-8-202(7) in promulgating the “Senate Bill 89-181 Rules”. c. Neither the WQCC nor the WQCD shall
<br /> regulate activities subject to the jurisdiction of the implementing agencies (e.g. the SEO) unless the WQCC finds regulation is necessary under specifically listed circumstances.
<br /> As a result of the SEO being an implementing agency, on August 30, 1990 a Memorandum of Agreement was entered into between the “Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Control
<br /> Commission (WQCC), Water Quality Control Division (WQCD), the Colorado Department of Natural Recourses (DNR) and the Office of the State Engineer (SEO)”. In that Memorandum of Agreement:
<br /> 1. The SEO recognized the WQCC’s responsibilities as given in SB-181. 2. The SEO recognized its responsibilities as given in SB-181. 3. The SEO agreed to respond to any notice from
<br /> the WQCC or WQCD where the WQCC or WQCD finds it may be necessary to regulate activities subject to the SEO’s jurisdiction, and meet and attempt to resolve the concern. 4. The SEO agreed
<br /> to notify the WQCC and WQCD prior to the SEO’s adoption of any water quality related regulation, and allow their participation in any meeting or hearings where such proposals are discussed.
<br /> SEO consultations to the WQCC pursuant to subsection 25-8-104(2)(d), C.R.S. 1. Pursuant to subsection 25-8-104(2)(d) the SEO is to provide consultation to the WQCC and WQCD before
<br /> the WQCC or WQCC make any decision or adopt any rule or policy which has the potential to cause material injury to water rights. This is the type of consultation the SEO provided for
<br /> Cherokee’s application to the WQCC to change the water quality standards in the alluvial aquifer of Upper Black Squirrel Creek Basin. Such consultations are not a result of the SEO
<br /> being an implementing agency. The SEO’s involvement with “On-site Wastewater Treatment Systems” (a.k.a. individual sewage disposal systems, which includes septic and leaching field
<br /> systems) 1. On-site Wastewater Treatment Systems are subject to Sections 25-10-101 through 113, C.R.S. 2. The WQCC has regulations covering On-site Wastewater Treatment Systems (Regulation
<br /> #43, 5 CCR 1002-43), effective June 30, 2013, promulgated pursuant to Section 25-10-104(1). 3. Permits for On-site Wastewater Treatment Systems are issued by local health agencies (e.g.
<br /> counties). The local health agencies must adopt rules that comply with the WQCC’s rules. Enforcement action against non-compliant septic and leaching field systems are conducted by
<br /> the local health agencies. 4. Statues give the SEO no water quality responsibility or jurisdiction related to exempt or small capacity well permitting, and so being an implementing
<br /> agency gives the SEO no role in ensuring On-site Wastewater Treatment Systems supplied by such wells are in compliance with their permits or local or WQCC standards. SEO’s role as an
<br /> implementing agency under SB-181 of 1989 Page 3 November 8, 2016 Discussion on the effects of the GWC possibly becoming an implementing agency. 1. Making the GWC an implementing
<br /> agency would only relate to any water quality responsibilities and jurisdictions the GWC has been given by statute. Currently the following statutes give the GWC water quality responsibilities.
<br /> a. 37-90-107(5) (involving evaluation of applications for large capacity permits) 2. Should the GWC be made an implementing agency: a. It would have implementing agency responsibility
<br /> and jurisdiction related to issuance of large capacity permits under subsection 37-90-107(5). It is not immediately clear what affect having such responsibility and jurisdiction would
<br /> have on issuance of large capacity permits, as the GWC currently utilizes the WQCC’s classifications and standards in any water quality matters that would come before it involving issuance
<br /> of large capacity permits, and it appears it would use the same standards as an implementing agency. b. It would have to implement the WQCC’s classifications and standards through rulemaking,
<br /> after consultation with the WQCC and WQCD during its rule-making processes. c. While the GWC’s Designated Basin Rules have a water quality standard regarding replacement plans (Rule
<br /> 5.6.1.D), the statute addressing replacement plans, Section 37-90-107.5, C.R.S, does not convey any water quality responsibility or jurisdiction. i. Therefore, absent the General
<br /> Assembly adding and/or changing statutory requirements, it appears there would be no change in how the GWC evaluates or administers water quality matters in replacement plans. The GWC
<br /> would continue to utilize the WQCC classifications and standards for replacement plans as it is doing now. ii. While the GWC approves replacement plans that utilize wastewater from
<br /> septic and leaching field systems (the water from which may be supplied by large capacity wells; small capacity wells are not be an allowed source of replacement water), such approvals
<br /> require the septic system to be in compliance with local and state standards. If the septic system is not in compliance the GWC would say the plan may not operate, but would not take
<br /> action to enforce the system to be in compliance. Any such enforcement would have to be initiated by the local agency. d. Absent the General Assembly adding and/or changing statutory
<br /> requirements, there would be no change to the State Engineer’s issuance of small capacity well permits, or creation of a role by the SEO or GWC in ensuring On-site Wastewater Treatment
<br /> Systems are in compliance with their permits or local or WQCC standards e. Should the General Assembly add and/or change the GWC’s statutory requirements regarding water quality responsibilities
<br /> and jurisdictions in other ways, there may be other effects of the GWC becoming an implementing agency. ###
<br />StaffReport2016Nov.docx
<br />Ground Water Commission
<br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 821
<br />Denver, CO 80203
<br />November 18, 2016 Meeting
<br />MEMORANDUM
<br />TO:Dick Wolfe, Executive Director – Ground Water Commission
<br />FROM:Keith Vander Horst, Designated Basins Team Leader
<br />SUBJECT:Staff Activity Report for August 1, 2016 through October 31, 2016
<br />Various activities performed during the last quarter are briefly described below.
<br />New and Replacement Applications
<br />Table 1 provides a breakdown, by basin, of permitting activity for the last quarter. Permit activities are summarized as follows.
<br />Small capacity:
<br />139 small capacity new and replacement well permit applications were received
<br />123 small capacity new and replacement well permits were issued
<br />Large Capacity:
<br />40 large capacity new and replacement well permit applications, and Determination of Water Right applications, were received
<br />16 large capacity new and replacement well permits and Determinations of Water Rights were issued
<br />Table 2 provides details on the individual pending large capacity new and replacement permit applications and Determination of Water Right applications.
<br />Change Applications
<br />Table 1 also gives a breakdown, by basin, of change of water right application activities for the last quarter:
<br />11 new change applications were received
<br />6 change applications were approved
<br />Table 3 provides details on the individual pending change of water right applications.
<br />Final Permit Summary
<br />Below is a summary of the status of permits subject to Final Permitting as of October 31, 2016. The</ numbers do not include permits that are not subject to Final Permitting, such as
<br /> for Denver Basin bedrock aquifer permits. Conditional permits counted in the table below that have not been issued Final Permits consist of either recently issued conditional permits
<br /> for which the <well owner still has opportunity to use the well and prove up the conditional right and be issued a Final Permit, or older conditional permits that are still pending
<br /> evaluation and/or issuance of a Final Permit.
<br />Final Permit Status as of October 31, 2016
<br />Basin
<br />Total Number of Permits
<br />Number of Final Permits Issued
<br />Number of Pending Conditional Permits
<br />Northern High Plains
<br />4096
<br />4096
<br />0
<br />Southern High Plains
<br />1245
<br />1192
<br />53
<br />Lost Creek
<br />372
<br />372
<br />0
<br />Kiowa-Bijou
<br />872
<br />868
<br />4
<br />Upper Big Sandy
<br />121
<br />121
<br />0
<br />Upper Black Squirrel Creek
<br />163
<br />156
<br />7
<br />Upper Crow Creek
<br />115
<br />105
<br />10
<br />Camp Creek
<br />51
<br />48
<br />3
<br />Total
<br />7036
<br />6956
<br />77
<br />Objections/Hearings
<br />Below is a list of pending cases. Details on these cases are contained in the Attorney General’s and Hearing Officer's reports. The Staff took part in meetings, pre-hearing conferences,
<br /> preparation of pre-hearing statements, and otherwise worked on resolving these cases.
<br />Pending with the Commission
<br />Axton, Brett, 15GW05 (Arapahoe and Denver aquifer rights)
<br />Axton, Brett, 15GW06 (pond-wells and a replacement plan)
<br />Cherokee Metro Dist. & Meridian Service Metro Dist., 08GW71 (replacement plan)
<br />Cherokee Metro Dist., 08GW78 (change of use of alluvial well)
<br />Cherokee Metro Dist., 09GW15 (change of use of alluvial wells)
<br />Cherokee Metro Dist., 15GW15, (complaint on administration of wells)
<br />Einsphar, Gaylin, 15GW10 (reduction in acres and annual appropriation)
<br />Garner/Case/Seaton Realty/Cherokee MD, 15GW08 (change of use of alluvial well)
<br />Kiowa, Town of, 16GW02 (Final Permit)
<br />Meridian Service Metro Dist., 09GW11 (change of use of Denver Basin rights)
<br />Meridian Service Metro Dist., 15GW14 (replacement plan, alluvial drains)
<br />Strasburg, Town of, 16GW01 (Final Permit)
<br />Woodmen Hills, 03GW20, (new alluvial rights and a replacement plan)
<br />Under appeal
<br />Front Range Resources, 13GW07 (replacement plan in Lost Creek)
<br />Gallegos, 03GW06, (Request for de-designation in Upper Crow Creek)
<br />Completed during the last quarter
<br />None
<br />Enforcement Items and Actions
<br />For the period of August - November staff has responded to 17 complaints involving the perceived unpermitted use of wells and designated groundwater. Show cause letters and subsequent
<br /> field inspections have been used to verify well permit compliance on those not listed here.
<br />The matters described below have been determined to be violations occurring last quarter:
<br />NORTHERN HIGH PLAINS
<br />Plains GWMD
<br />Buol Farms was found be using small capacity commercial wells without totalizing flow meters. They have agreed to have meters installed by December 1, 2016 and begin providing us with
<br /> monthly meter readings. Meter installation will be verified by our office in December.
<br />UPPER BIG SANDY
<br />Upper Big Sandy GWMD
<br />Albert Kobilan was found to be irrigating expanded acres without GWC approval. Mr. Kobilan has indicated that he will apply to expand the irrigated acres. Our office is requiring the
<br /> application be received by our office by December 31, 2016.
<br /> Other
<br />Susan Linder has been hired to fill the vacant Engineering/Physical Science Assistant data entry and support position.
<br />###
<br />
<br />
<br />Staff Activity ReportPage 2
<br />November 18, 2016
<br />StaffReport2016Nov.pdf
<br />
<br />Workshop.docx NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE
<br />
<br />NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE
<br />COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION
<br />10:00 a.m., Friday, November 18, 2016
<br />Town of Castle Rock Council Chambers
<br />100 Wilcox, 2nd Floor, Castle Rock, CO 80104
<br />A G E N D A - DRAFT
<br />Determine quorum
<br />Review and approval of agenda items
<br />Approval of Minutes for Meeting of August 19, 2016
<br />Report of the Executive Director by State Engineer Dick Wolfe
<br />Commissioners’ Reports
<br />Hearing on the appeal from the Initial Decision of the Hearing Officer in the matter of an application by Gayln Einsphar for a reduction in permitted acres and annual appropriation for
<br /> permits nos. 13530-FP & 16927-FP, Case no. 15-GW-10
<br />Staff Report by Keith Vander Horst.
<br />Report of the Attorney General by Jennifer Mele. This is a background briefing on legal issues in the written report.< The Board may refer any item< contained or discussed under this
<br /> topic to Agenda Item No. 15 for discussion in Executive Session.
<br />District Reports:
<br />Marks Butte, Frenchman, Sand Hills and Central Yuma GWMDs by Nate Midcap
<br />W-Y GWMD by Jack Dowell
<br />Arikaree GWMD by Rod Mason
<br />Plains GWMD by Brandi Baquera
<br />East Cheyenne GWMD by Carolyn Talbert
<br />Southern High Plains GWMD by Blake Gourley
<br />North KiowaBijou GWMD by Robert Loose
<br />Upper Black Squirrel Creek GWMD by Tracy Doran
<br />Upper Big Sandy GWMD by Tracy Doran
<br />Lost Creek GWMD by Thomas Sauter
<br />Upper Crow Creek Basin by Dan Loyd
<br />Republican River Water Conservation District by Deb Daniel
<br />Old Business
<br />Proposal to amend Rule 5.2.9 to determine that the alluvial aquifer, and all of the Fan and White River aquifers, in the Upper Crow Creek Basin are over appropriated
<br />Proposal to amend Rule 5.6 regarding replacement plans, and Rule 5.8 regarding artificial recharge, storage, and recovery plans
<br />The Office of the State Engineer’s role as an implementing agency under SB-181 of 1989
<br />New Business
<br />Request for Authorization to Proceed with Rulemaking: Amendments to 2 CCR 402-3, Rules of Procedure for All Hearings Before the Colorado Ground Water Commission
<br />Public Comments
<br />Executive Session (if needed or called for)
<br /> Adjournment
<br />Lunch time workshop for Commissioners: Orientation and overview of legal and technical aspects of the Ground Water Commission
<br />
<br />
<br />NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE
<br />COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION
<br />November 18, 2016
|