Laserfiche WebLink
<br />AG Report2005-05-20.docATTORNEY GENERAL’S REPORT <br /> <br />Cases involving the Colorado Ground Water Commission <br />May 20, 2005 <br /> <br />The listing below summarizes all matters in which the Office of the Attorney General currently represents the Colorado Ground Water Commission. <br /> <br />Reinaldo gallegos, et al. Case No. 03CV1335 Designated Basin: Upper Crow Management District: Before: Hon. Roger A. Klein, Weld County District Court Attorney: Pat Kowaleski <br />Subject: The Gallegos family requested a hearing to determine whether administration and curtailment is required of the wells and junior surface water rights along Crow Creek to satisfy <br /> the Gallegos Family’s senior surface water right. At its August, 2003 meeting the Commission affirmed its Hearing Officer and concluded that the Commission has no jurisdiction over <br /> surface rights, and is not required to administer the basin based on the priority system. <br /> <br />On September 26, 2003 the Gallegos family appealed the Commission’s decision to District Court, and also brought an additional action against the State Engineer in his capacity as the <br /> administrator of surface rights. Assistant Attorney General Alexandra Davis is handling the latter litigation. <br /> <br />In the Commission litigation, we filed a Motion with the Court, asking that the Court notify and join all well permit holders who might be adversely affected if the Court were to call <br /> out permit holders, based on the Gallegos’ decreed surface right. <br /> <br />In a decision which we received on February 11, 2004, the Court agreed with us that junior well permit holders might be adversely affected, and therefore required them to be joined in <br /> the litigation. <br /> <br />Status: The Plaintiffs amended their complaint to include junior well permit holders. They served those parties, who have retained attorneys and filed responses to the complaint. The <br /> case against the State Engineer is being held in abeyance, pending a decision in the case against the Commission. A five-day trial is scheduled to begin on April 17, 2006. The Plaintiffs <br /> have filed a Motion asking the Court to rule, as a matter of law, that their surface rights are entitled to protection from pumping in the designated basins. The Commission has filed <br /> a response, asserting that this issue should be decided only after the facts have been established at trial. The Court has not yet decided the Motion. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />PEORIA CROSSING, LLC. Case No. 02-GW-18 Designated Basin: Kiowa-Bijou Management District: North Kiowa Bijou Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Ginny Brannon <br />Subject: Peoria Crossing filed an application for determination of water right to allow <br />appropriation of designated ground water from the Laramie-Fox Hills aquifer underlying its 241.36 acre property. Peoria Crossing filed an appeal challenging the Staff’s calculation <br /> of a cylinder of appropriation for an existing well owned by LaFarge West, Inc., and the resulting decrease in the amount of allocation determined for the aquifer underlying Peoria <br /> Crossing’s property. <br /> <br />Status: A hearing was held on October, 22, 2002. Peoria Crossing, LaFarge West and the Staff <br />participated in the hearing. On December 2, 2002, the Hearing Officer issued his initial decision and found: (1) a cylinder of appropriation is not a water right, but rather a measure <br /> of the beneficial use that is the actual water right for a pre-213 well; (2) although LaFarge’s well was permitted and completed prior to implementation of the 1965 Act, the 1965 Act <br /> and modified prior appropriation doctrine apply to the determination of the final extent of LaFarge’s water right; (3) Staff’s calculation of the cylinder of appropriation for LaFarge’s <br /> well is incorrect; and (4) LaFarge does not yet have a final permit, and in order to proceed with the proper determination of the amount of water available to the Applicant, Staff must <br /> proceed with final permitting and notice of LaFarge’s water right in a separate proceeding. The Hearing Officer ordered that this matter is held in abeyance until Staff completes final <br /> permitting for LaFarge’s well, and ordered Staff to initiate final permitting within a reasonable time frame. Staff published the notice of intent to issue final permit on July 31, <br /> and August 7, 2003. LaFarge West filed a Motion to Vacate Order, which was subsequently withdrawn. On September 11, 2003, the Hearing Officer issued an order stating that the Initial <br /> Decision of the Hearing Officer is the Final Decision of the Commission. <br /> <br />Lafarge and Staff have now settled the Lafarge case and, on January 11, 2005, the Hearing Officer directed Staff to proceed with publication of the Lafarge well permit. This will now <br /> allow for the re-examination of the amount of ground water underlying Peoria Crossing’s property. No new developments. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />WAYNE E. and frances g. booker Case No. 04-CV-2800 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Before: Hon. David Gilbert, El Paso County District <br /> Court Attorney: Pat Kowaleski <br />Subject: Objections by the District, Cherokee Metropolitan District, and Schubert Ranches to <br />applications to relocate the wells with Permit Nos. R-16265-FP, R-16271-FP, R-16272-FP, 27560-FP, and 27585-FP <br /> <br />Status: The Applicants appealed the Staff’s evaluation of their application and requested a <br />hearing before the Commission to obtain a variance from Commission Rules. The setting of a hearing before the Hearing Officer was postponed until after the variance request hearing. <br /> The Commission denied the variance request at its February 21, 2003 meeting. A hearing in this matter was held on September 9, 2003. On September 17, 2003, the Hearing Officer issued <br /> his Initial Decision and found as follows: (1) The applications are for changes of water right pursuant to section 37-90-111(1)(g), C.R.S. and Commission Rule 7; (2) According to Commission <br /> Rule 7.3.2, there is no water available to move to the new well locations requested by the Applicant; (3) The Applicants’ request to be excluded from the requirement of including years <br /> of non-use in their historic use analysis “for good cause” pursuant to Commission Rule 7.10.1 is denied; and (4) Because there is no water available to move, the applications are denied. <br /> The Applicants filed Exceptions to the Hearing Officer’s Initial Decision, and by order dated June 15, 2004, the Commission upheld the Initial Decision. On July 15, 2004 the Applicants <br /> appealed the Commission’s decision to the El Paso County District Court, and a 5-day trial has been scheduled to begin on November 28, 2005. No new developments. <br /> <br /> <br />appeal of rules adopted by the upper black squirrel creek ground water management district Case No. 03-GW-14 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management District: Upper <br /> Black Squirrel Creek Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Ginny Brannon <br />Subject: Cherokee, Meridian Ranch, Meridian Service, Paint Brush Hills and Woodmen <br />Hills Metropolitan Districts filed an appeal to the adoption of Rule Nos. 3, 17, 18, and 19 by the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Status: A prehearing conference was held on November 5, 2003. The Hearing Officer <br />determined that the Commission had no jurisdiction to hear appeals of rules regarding small capacity wells, and therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal of proposed District <br /> Rule 3. The parties agreed that the remaining issues could be decided on the briefs, and therefore the hearing set for March, 2004 was vacated. <br /> <br />In April 2004 the Hearing Officer issued Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Initial Decision of the Hearing Officer, whereby he ruled that, as a matter of law, the District exceeded <br /> its statutory and decisional law authority, and therefore Rules 17, 18 and 19 were null and void. On May 6, 2004 the District timely filed a request to reverse or modify the Initial <br /> Decision. On that same date the District also timely filed a Designation of the Record. Briefs were due to the Commission on August 6, 2004. <br /> <br />This case was argued before the Commission at the August 20, 2004 Commission meeting. On September 30, 2004 the Commission reversed the Hearing Officer’s ruling that the District had <br /> exceeded its statutory and decisional law authority in enacting Rules 17, 18 and 19, and remanded to the Hearing Officer for further proceedings. The Commission directed the Hearing <br /> Officer to determine whether the rules, as adopted by the District, are: 1) reasonable; 2) constitute a taking without just compensation in violation of the United States and Colorado <br /> Constitutions; and, 3) violate the Equal Protection Clause of the United States and Colorado Constitutions. Oral arguments were conducted before the Hearing Officer on December 16, <br /> 2004. <br /> <br />On February 4, 2005, the Hearing Officer issued an Order in which he determined that the Rules do not violate the takings or equal protection provisions of the United States or Colorado <br /> Constitutions and are reasonable as they apply to non-Denver Basin wells within the District. The Hearing Officer further determined, however, that the Rules are not applicable to <br /> wells in the Denver Basin because they are contrary to the mandate of the legislature that require withdrawal amounts based on an aquifer life of 100 years. <br /> <br />The Staff agrees with the Hearing Officer’s determination that the Rules do not violate the taking or equal protection provisions of the United States or Colorado Constitutions as well <br /> as his finding that the Rules are reasonable as they apply to alluvial (non-Denver Basin aquifer) wells within the District. The Staff, however, does not concur with the Hearing Officer’s <br /> determination that the Rules are inapplicable to wells that withdraw Denver Basin aquifer water within the District. <br /> <br />The District appealed and this case will be heard before the Ground Water Commission on May 20. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />appeal of rules adopted by the upper black squirrel creek ground water management district Case No. [Unassigned] Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management District: <br /> Upper Black Squirrel Creek Before: El Paso County District Court Attorney: Pat Kowaleski <br />Subject: Cherokee, Meridian Ranch, Meridian Service, Paint Brush Hills and Woodmen <br />Hills Metropolitan Districts filed an appeal to the adoption of Rule Nos. 3, 17, 18, and 19 by the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District. <br /> <br />Status: This is the same matter referred to in the previous item. After the Commission issued its Remand Order, the Applicants, on October 29, 2004, filed an appeal with the District <br /> Court in El Paso County. The Commission filed a Motion to Dismiss the District Court action on the grounds that the Commission has not yet completed its review, and the matter is therefore <br /> not ripe for an appeal to District Court. The District Court has put the matter on hold until the Hearing Officer and the Commission act on the remand to the Hearing Officer. <br /> <br /> <br />Hunker, et al. v. Upper Black SquirRel and Ground Water Commission Case No. 04-CV-4205 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Before: El <br /> Paso County District Court Attorney: Pat Kowaleski <br />Subject: Timothy Hunker and several Metropolitan Districts that are regulated by the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District, (the “District”) have filed an action <br /> in El Paso County District Court asserting that the five Divisions within the District need to be reapportioned. The background is that in 1968 a petition was filed with the Ground <br /> Water Commission to establish the District. Pursuant to the statute, § 37-90-121(1)(b) C.R.S., the Divisions within the district were to be “as nearly equal in size as may be practicable, <br /> and considering the population thereof,…” <br />Pursuant to statute the Commission set a public hearing to consider creation of the District, and, after that hearing, the District was formed. The Plaintiffs assert that the Divisions <br /> within the District are no longer “nearly equal.” They assert, as an example, that of the 11,104 taxpaying electors in the District, one division has 3631 electors while another has <br /> only 473. The Plaintiffs assert that this is a “violation of the principal of ‘one man-one vote.’” <br />The lawsuit says that the Commission, while not having authority to oversee the redistricting, is a necessary party to the litigation because the Commission approved the original divisions <br /> within the District. The specific assertion involving the Commission is contained at Par. 6 of the Complaint: <br />“6. The Colorado Ground Water Commission (‘the Commission’) oversees the designated groundwater basins in the State of Colorado and is the administrative body to which certain matters <br /> concerning the designated basins are appealed to. The Commission authorized the designation of the Basin, the formation of the Black Squirrel, and approved the division of the Black <br /> Squirrel into the five (5) election divisions and therefore, is a necessary party to this action; however, this Court, and not the Commission, has jurisdiction to oversee the redistricting <br /> of the Black Squirrel.” <br />Status: The lawsuit was served on Wednesday, October 20 and the plaintiffs have recently agreed that the Commission plays no part in the redistricting, and can be dropped as a party <br /> to the lawsuit. <br /> <br /> <br />lafarge west, inc. Case No. 03-GW-15 Designated Basin: Kiowa-Bijou Management District: North Kiowa-Bijou Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Ginny Brannon <br />Subject: LaFarge West filed an objection to the approval of its final permit. LaFarge objected to the utilization of 11.3 acre-feet as the measure of beneficial use and requested 31 <br /> acre-feet be utilized as the appropriate measure. <br /> <br />Status: A hearing was held on February 2, 2004. LaFarge and the Staff participated in the hearing. On December 23, 2004, the Staff for the Ground Water Commission and Lafarge West <br /> entered into a stipulation in which they agreed that the well would be permitted for 14.1 acre-feet as the measure of beneficial use. On January 11, 2005, the Hearing Officer ordered <br /> Staff to proceed with publication of Well Permit No. 9502-F as agreed by the parties. The final permit has been issued and this case is now closed. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />APPEALS OF ADOPTION OF RULE 20 BY THE UPPER BLACK SQUIRREL CREEK GROUND WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Case No. 04-GW-02 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper <br /> Black Squirrel Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Ginny Brannon <br />Subject: On June 1, 2004, the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Groundwater Management District adopted a Rule (“Rule 20”). Rule 20 concerns the procedural and substantive methods by which <br /> the District proposes to enforce priorities amongst well owners within the District. In July 2004, the Cherokee Metropolitan District and Wayne and Frances G. Booker filed appeals. <br /> The primary issue is whether Rule 20’s technical and study analysis provisions sufficiently adhere to the tenets of a modified prior appropriation doctrine. The Hearing Officer issued <br /> an Order on February 4, 2005, in which he found that the standard of review is de novo. <br /> <br />Status: On February 23, 2005, the Hearing Officer issued a Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Initial Decision of the Hearing Office in which he determined that Rule 20 adequately <br /> addresses the statutory requirements it must consider when making determinations of unreasonable injury and follows the tenets of the modified prior appropriation system. Accordingly, <br /> Rule 20 is reasonable within the context of the statutory requirements. On May 2, 2005, the Ground Water Commission issued a Decision determining that, because no appeal was filed <br /> within the time allowed by statute, the Hearing Officer’s Decision is the Decision of the Ground Water Commission and constitutes final agency action. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />James bilello Case No. 05-GW-07 Designated Basin: Lost Creek Management District: Lost Creek Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Ginny Brannon <br />Subject: James Bilello applied for a Determination of Water Rights to appropriate ground water from the Denver, Upper & Lower Arapahoe, and Laramie-Fox Hills Aquifers underlying an 80-acre <br /> tract of land. The City of Aurora, Paul Sack and John Sack submitted objections. <br /> <br />Status: A prehearing conference will be held before the Hearing Officer on June 22. <br /> <br /> <br />Ellicott springs resources, LLC Case No. 05-GW-01 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: <br /> Ginny Brannon <br />Subject: The Commission issued a final permit to Ellicott Springs Resources that allows an annual withdrawal of 850 acre-feet of water for the irrigation of 280 acres. The Upper Black <br /> Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District objected on January 4, 2005 based on the contentions that the well has been abandoned by non-use and the approval will result in an adverse <br /> effect on vested rights in the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Designated Basin. <br /> <br />Status: A hearing is scheduled before the Hearing Officer on July 13, 2005. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />paint brush hills metro district Case No. 05-GW-02, 03, 04 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer <br /> Attorney: Ginny Brannon <br />Subject: In these consolidated cases, Paint Brush Hills: 1) applied for a replacement plan to allow the withdrawal of designated ground water from the Dawson aquifer (05GW02); and, <br /> 2) submitted two applications for changes of water rights to change permitted beneficial uses (05GW03, 05GW04). The Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District objected <br /> to all three applications contending that approval will result in an adverse effect on vested rights in the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Designated Basin. <br /> <br />Status: A hearing is scheduled before the Hearing Officer on July 19, 2005. <br /> <br />WOODMAN HILLS METRO DISTRICT Case No. 03-GW-20 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: <br /> Ginny Brannon <br />Subject: Woodmen Hills Metro District submitted three applications to appropriate ground water from the alluvial aquifer of the Black Squirrel Creek or its tributaries, through the <br /> use of three surface ponds and for approval of a replacement plan. The Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District objected contending that approval will result in an <br /> adverse effect on vested rights in the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Designated Basin. <br /> <br />Status: Efforts to reach a stipulation have failed and a hearing is scheduled before the Hearing Officer on August 15-17, 2005. <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />AgendaMay05.doc <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 7:00 a.m. Tour of Parker Water & Sanitation District’s Reservoir Site <br /> <br />Determine quorum <br /> <br />Review and approval of agenda items <br /> <br />Approval of Minutes for Meeting of February 25, 2005 <br /> <br />Report of the Executive Director by Hal Simpson <br /> <br />Geo-Water Study for the Upper Big Sandy Designated Ground Water Basin by Thomas Cavanaugh, ASCG Incorporated <br /> <br />Hearing on the appeal of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision of the Hearing Officer on Remand (Case No. 03-GW-14) in the matter of an appeal to district rules adopted <br /> by the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District by Andrew Jones, Attorney for the District <br /> <br />Continuation of the rulemaking hearing to allow the recognition of the permanent surrender through water conservation programs of the ability to develop future water rights and/or the <br /> ability to irrigate a given tract of land by Suzanne Sellers <br /> <br />Staff Report by Suzanne Sellers <br /> <br />Report of the Attorney General by Ginny Brannon <br /> <br />Report of the Hearing Officer by Jody Grantham <br /> <br />Ground Water Management District and Conservation District Reports: <br /> a. Marks Butte f. Arikaree k. Upper Black Squirrel <br /> b. Frenchman g. Plains l. Upper Big Sandy <br /> c. Sand Hills h. East Cheyenne m. Lost Creek <br /> d. Central Yuma i. Southern High Plains n. Republican River Water <br /> e. W-Y j. North KiowaBijou Conservation District <br /> <br />Old Business <br /> <br />New Business <br />Location of August 19, 2005 Commission Meeting <br /> <br />Adjournment <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE <br />COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION <br />May 20, 2005 <br /> <br />Revised A G E N D A (cont.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE <br />COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION <br /> <br />10:00 a.m., Friday, May 20, 2005 <br /> <br />Parker Water & Sanitation District <br />North Reclamation Facility Administration Building <br />18100 E. Woodman Drive (NW corner of E-470 and Parker Road) <br />Parker, CO 80138 <br />Phone: 303-841-4627 <br /> <br />A G E N D A <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />AgendaMay05Amended.doc <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 7:00 a.m. Tour of Parker Water & Sanitation District’s Reservoir Site <br /> <br />Determine quorum <br /> <br />Review and approval of agenda items <br /> <br />Approval of Minutes for Meeting of February 25, 2005 <br /> <br />Report of the Executive Director by Hal Simpson <br /> <br />Geo-Water Study for the Upper Big Sandy Designated Ground Water Basin by Thomas Cavanaugh, ASCG Incorporated <br /> <br />Hearing on the appeal of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision of the Hearing Officer on Remand (Case No. 03-GW-14) in the matter of an appeal to district rules adopted <br /> by the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District by Andrew Jones, Attorney for the District <br /> <br />Continuation of the rulemaking hearing to allow the recognition of the permanent surrender through water conservation programs of the ability to develop future water rights and/or the <br /> ability to irrigate a given tract of land by Suzanne Sellers <br /> <br />Staff Report by Suzanne Sellers <br /> <br />Report of the Attorney General by Ginny Brannon <br /> <br />Report of the Hearing Officer by Jody Grantham <br /> <br />Ground Water Management District and Conservation District Reports: <br /> a. Marks Butte f. Arikaree k. Upper Black Squirrel <br /> b. Frenchman g. Plains l. Upper Big Sandy <br /> c. Sand Hills h. East Cheyenne m. Lost Creek <br /> d. Central Yuma i. Southern High Plains n. Republican River Water <br /> e. W-Y j. North KiowaBijou Conservation District <br /> <br />Old Business <br /> <br />New Business <br />Location of August 19, 2005 Commission Meeting <br /> <br />Commission in Executive Session (12:00-1:00) concerning potential litigation: Demand from Pioneer Irrigation District <br /> <br />Adjournment <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE <br />COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION <br />May 20, 2005 <br /> <br />Revised A G E N D A (cont.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE <br />COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION <br /> <br />10:00 a.m., Friday, May 20, 2005 <br /> <br />Parker Water & Sanitation District <br />North Reclamation Facility Administration Building <br />18100 E. Woodman Drive (NW corner of E-470 and Parker Road) <br />Parker, CO 80138 <br />Phone: 303-841-4627 <br /> <br />AMENDED A G E N D A <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />FinalNoticeRuleChangesMay05.docNOTICE OF PUBLIC RULEMAKING HEARING BEFORE THE <br />COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION <br /> <br />SUBJECT MATTER, STATEMENT OF BASIS, PURPOSE AND SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORITY <br /> <br />The Colorado Ground Water Commission (Commission) pursuant to Section 37-90-111(1)(h), C.R.S. is considering a proposed addition to the rules and regulations titled “MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL <br /> OF DESIGNATED GROUND WATER”, 2 CCR 410-1. These rules apply to designated ground water within the designated ground water basins in Colorado. The Commission to date has designated <br /> a total of eight ground water basins, all of which are located in Eastern Colorado. The basins are: Camp Creek, Kiowa-Bijou, Lost Creek, Northern High Plains, Southern High Plains, <br /> Upper Big Sandy, Upper Black Squirrel Creek, and Upper Crow Creek. The proposed addition to the rules are attached herewith. <br /> <br />The purpose of the proposed addition to the rules is as follows: <br /> <br />Rule 5.12 <br /> <br />To facilitate entities such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) or the Republican River Water Conservation District (RRWCD) to implement water conservation programs. <br /> Adoption of this rule will allow the recognition of the permanent surrender of the ability to develop future water rights on a given tract of land through a water conservation program. <br /> Adoption of this rule will also allow the recognition of the permanent surrender of the ability to irrigate a given tract of land through a water conservation program. By recognizing <br /> the permanent surrender of any future water rights or the permanent surrender of the ability to irrigate certain lands through these programs, this will enable water right holders to <br /> qualify for the NRCS’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the RRWCD’s proposed water conservation program and potential programs offered by other entities in the future. <br /> This rule will only apply to water conservation programs that have been approved by the Commission. This approval authority will allow the Commission to review these water conservation <br /> programs to ensure that they are consistent with the objectives of the Commission. <br /> <br />Currently, a water rights holder can permanently abandon their existing water right and this proposed rule will prohibit any future water right development or irrigation on given tracts <br /> of land. The intent of this rule combined with the existing ability to abandon current water rights is to encourage the conservation of groundwater by permanently prohibiting the withdraw <br /> of ground water and irrigation on given tracts of land. <br /> <br />The Commission solicits input on this proposed addition to the rules in order to achieve the above-stated purpose by the most effective means. Any comments you may have which have a <br /> bearing on the proposed rule would be appreciated by the Commission and should be directed to the Executive Director at his address at the end of this notice. <br /> <br />HEARING SCHEDULE: <br /> <br /> DATE: Friday, February 25, 2005 <br /> TIME: 10:00 am <br /> LOCATION: Room 318, 1313 Sherman St., Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br />Oral testimony at the hearing will be limited to the proposed rule enclosed herein, and any interested parties must provide written materials on or before Friday, January 28, 2005. <br /> Direct testimony should primarily draw attention to previously submitted written evidence. At the hearing, the Commission may question parties about their written submittals. Introduction <br /> of written materials by parties at the hearing generally will not be permitted. Parties are prohibited from oral presentation of written material not submitted to the Commission by <br /> the January 28, 2005 deadline. <br /> <br />PARTY STATUS: <br /> <br />Although it is not necessary to obtain party status in order to testify or comment on the proposed addition to the rules, those persons or entities requesting party status must file <br /> a written request for such status. These requests are due in the office of the Commission on or before: <br /> <br /> DATE: Friday, January 28, 2005 <br /> TIME: 5:00 p.m. <br /> <br />DATED this _________ day of December 2004 at Denver, Colorado. <br /> <br /> <br /> Colorado Ground Water Commission <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> ______________________________ <br /> HAL D. SIMPSON <br /> Executive Director <br /> 1313 Sherman Street # 818 <br /> Denver, CO 80203 <br />