DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION 5 STATE OF COLORADO Gar?eld County Courthouse 109 8th Street Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601?3303 CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE SOUTHEASTERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT FOR FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE ON CONDITIONAL WATER RIGHTS OF THE FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT, IN THE ROARING FORK AND FRYINGPAN RIVERS AND THEIR TRIBUTARIES IN EAGLE AND PITKIN COUNTIES, COLORADO Attorneys for Applicant, Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District BURNS, FIGA WILL, P.C. Stephen H. Leonhardt, #15122 6400 S. Fiddlers Green Circle, Suite 1000 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 Phone: 303-796-2626 Fax: 303-796-2777 Email: Attorneys for United States James .1. DuBois, Esq., #13206 US. Department of Justice Environmental Natural Resources Division 999 18th Street, South Terrace Suite 370 Denver, CO 80202 CIT Eh. Anvil OQ on11 K.1Q DR ?4m: HV A Volv LAY HVJ. CASE NUMBER: 2009CW40 COURT USE ONLY Case No. 09CW40 (01CW265) (W-829) Div. Ctrm: STIPULATION OF APPLICANT WITH THE UNITED STATES Applicant, the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District (?Southeastern?), and Opposer the United States of America, USDA. Forest Service (?United States?), hereby stipulate as follows: 1. The United States consents to the entry of a ruling and decree in this case no less restrictive than Southeastern?s proposed ruling and decree dated April 18, 2011, attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 2 2. Southeastern acknowledges that some of the conditionally decreed diversion points described in its previous decrees and in Exhibit 1 hereto (those for Lime Creek, Slim?s Gulch and its Unnamed Tributary, and Last Chance Creek) are located within the Holy Cross Wilderness Area, and two others (those for South Side Intercept of Last Chance and North Side Intercept of North Fork of Fryingpan River) are for facilities that were designed to cross land that is now part of the Holy Cross Wilderness Area. 3. The USDA. Forest Service asserts that under the Wilderness Act of 1964, the United States Forest Service cannot authorize development of the conditional water rights in this Case No. 09CW40 for which proposed structures (as previously decreed) are located in or cross lands within the Holy Cross Wilderness because they lie within a congressionally designated wilderness. Only the President has authority to approve water developments within the Holy Cross Wilderness. l6 U.S.C. ?1133(d)(4). For this reason, the U.S.D.A. Forest Service believes that Southeastern cannot demonstrate that it can and will complete the development of these six points of diversion and water rights within a reasonable period of time. Southeastern asserts that the conditional rights identi?ed herein are parts of an overall project, construction of which parts has been ?held in abeyance? (as found by the Water Court in its 1979 decree in Case No. W-879- 76); that said conditional rights are valid existing rights for a congressionally authorized project that predate the 1980 congressional designation of the Holy Cross Wilderness; and that Southeastern has continued its diligent efforts in development and operation of the Fryingpan- Arkansas Project (?Project?) and its conditional water rights. Southeastern disagrees as to the effect of the Wilderness Act of 1964 on Southeastern?s ability to perfect its conditional water rights located in the Holy Cross Wilderness Area. Nothing herein is intended to resolve any issues regarding access to or use of Wilderness lands within the Holy Cross Wilderness. 4. The United States agrees to allow Southeastern a six-year diligence period in which to assess the feasibility of the potential for moving its conditional water rights off of Wilderness lands or other alternatives for realizing the authorized yield of the Fryingpan- Arkansas Project. The parties agree that neither this Stipulation nor entry of a Decree in this matter waives the United States? right to assert in any future diligence case the lack of land use authorization or inability to complete the appropriation of those water rights lying within the Holy Cross Wilderness within a reasonable time. 5. During the next six-year diligence period immediately following entry of a decree for diligence in this case, Southeastern will proceed as follows regarding its remaining conditional water rights, including but not limited to those identi?ed in paragraph 2 above: A. Southeastern will undertake a study of the extent to which historical Fryingpan-Arkansas Project (?Project?) diversions have fallen short of the authorized yield of 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 3 such diversions, (2) Southeastem?s remaining conditional water rights, and (3) alternatives for realizing the authorized yield of the Project. These alternatives may, in the discretion of Southeastern and its consultant for such study, include changing some or all of the conditional rights identi?ed in paragraph 2 above to diversion points outside the Holy Cross Wilderness Area, andfor improvements to existing Project facilities. During the course of this study, Southeastern will communicate periodically regarding the study with the United States Bureau of Reclamation and Forest Service. B. Based on the outcome of this study, Southeastern will decide by the time of its next diligence ?ling on these conditional water rights (six years after entry of a decree for diligence in this case) how it will further proceed with development of its conditional water rights a, whether to request continuation of the conditional rights as decreed, changes in any of the conditionally decreed diversion points, or abandonment of any of the decreed conditional- tights. 6. The United States shall not participate further in this case, except to verify compliance with this Stipulation. SO STIPULATED this 9'7 day of Algal; 2011. IGNACIA S. MORENO BURNS, FIG Assistant Attorney General WILL, P.C. -. teph?En H. Leonhardt, Esq. U. f. Department of Justice Attorneys for Applicant, Southeastern Er vironmental and Natural Resources Division Colorado Water Conservancy District Natural Resources Section 999 18th Street South Terrace - Suite 370 Denver, CO 80202 Attorneys for Opposer United States of America 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 3 such diversions, (2) Southeastem?s remaining conditional water rights, and (3) alternatives for realizing the authorized yield of the Project. These alternatives may, in the discretion of Southeastern and its consultant for such study, include changing some or all of the conditional rights identi?ed in paragraph 2 above to diversion points outside the Holy Cross Wilderness Area, and/or improvements to existing Project facilities. During the course of this study, Southeastern will communicate periodically regarding the study with the United States Bureau of Reclamation and Forest Service. B. Based on the outcome of this study, Southeastern will decide by the time of its next diligence ?ling on these conditional water rights (six years after entry of a decree for diligence in this case) how it will further proceed with development of its conditional water rights whether to request continuation of the conditional rights as decreed, changes in any of the conditionally decreed diversion points, or abandonment of any of the decreed conditional rights. 6. The United States shall not participate further in this case, except to verify compliance with this Stipulation. SO STIPULATED this 27th day of April, 2011. IGNACIA S. MORENO, BURNS, FIGA WILL, P.C. Assistant Attorney General (Original Signature on ile {Original Signature on tie at Bums, Figa Wm, P. C.) at Bums, Fign Wilt, P. C.) By: Is! James J. DuBois By: 2?s! Stephen H. Leonhardt James J. DuBois Stephen H. Leonhardt, Esq. US. Department of Justice Environmental and Natural Resources Division Natural Resources Section Attorneys for Opposer United States of America Attorneys for Applicant, Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District DRAFT April 18, 20]] DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION 5 STATE OF COLORADO Gar?eld County Courthouse 109 8th Street Glenwood Springs, Co. 81601-3303 CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE SOUTHEASTERN COLORADO WATER COURT USE ONLY CONSERVANCY DISTRICT FOR FINDING 0F REASONABLE DILIGENCE ON CONDITIONAL WATER RIGHTS OF THE RYINGPAN- ARKANSAS PROJECT, IN THE ROARING FORK AND RYINGPAN RIVERS AND THEIR TRIBUTARIES Case No. 09CW40 (01CW265) IN EAGLE AND PITKIN COUNTIES, COLORADO Div. Ctrm: FINDINGS OF FACT, RULING 0F REFEREE AND DECREE This matter came before the Water Referee upon the Application of Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District for Finding of Reasonable Diligence. The Referee, having considered the Application and the exhibits ?led herein, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, hereby enters the following findings and ruling in accordance with C.R.S. 37-92-3030): FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Application. The Application herein was filed April 30, 2009, with the Water Clerk, Water Division 5. The Application was referred to the Water Referee, and was amended on May 15, 2009. The Applicant is Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District (?Southeastern?). The Applicant?s address is 31317 United Avenue, Pueblo, Colorado 81001. 2. Publication and Statements of Opposition. The Application was duly published according to statute in the Resume of April 2009 applications ?led in Water Division No. 5. The Water Referee found, by order entered May 21, 2009, that no publication was required for the May 2009 amendment to the Application. Statements of Opposition were timely ?led by the US. Forest Service, the City of Aspen, and Trout Unlimited, and the time for filing such statements has now expired. Exhibit 1 to Stipulation of Applicant with the United States 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 2 3. Stipulations. Southeastern entered into Stipulations with the United States and Trout Unlimited. These stipulations have been approved by the Water Referee and are hereby incorporated by reference in this Ruling and Decree. 4. Notice and Jurisdiction. Timely and suf?cient notice of the Application and these proceedings has been given as required by law. The land and ground water involved herein are not included within the boundaries of any designated ground water basin. The Water Referee and the Water Court have jurisdiction over the Application and the subject matter of these proceedings, and over all who have standing to appear as parties, whether they have appeared or not. 5. Purpose of Application. The Fryingpan-Arkansas Project is a multi-purpose federal water supply project, which diverts water from the Fryingpan River and Roaring Fork River basins to the Arkansas River basin. This Application is for a ?nding of reasonable diligence on the remaining conditional water rights of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project in the Roaring Fork and Fryingpan Rivers and their tributaries (See Collection System Map, attached hereto as Exhibit These conditional water rights are a part of the Project?s West Slope Collection System, and are decreed for diversion through the Boustead Tunnel for beneficial use within the boundaries of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District. 6. Summary of Consultation. The Division Engineer for Water Division 5 ?led a summary of consultation with the Water Referee on July 22, 2009. Southeastern served the Summary of Consultation on the opposers. The Water Referee has considered the Summary of Consultation. 7. The names of the decreed West Slope Collection System structures involved in the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, and the decreed amount of water for each structure, are as follows: SOUTH SIDE COLLECTION SYSTEM Remaining Conditionally Name of Tributary Total Decreed Amount (cfs) Decreed Amount Hunter Creek Sub-system No Name Creek and 95 (85 previously decreed 10 Unnamed Tributary absolute) Midway (South Fork Hunter Creek and Unnamed Tributary) Hunter Creek Sawyer Lake Creek - Chapman Gulch Sub-System Sawyer Lake Creek Chapman Gulch South Fork Fryingpan River Sub-system South Fork Fryingpan River Fryingpan River Sub-system Fryingpan River and Marten Creek 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District 35 (fully decreed absolute) 140 (fully decreed absolute) 40 (fully decreed absolute) 300 (fully decreed absolute) 250 (fully decreed absolute) 400 (395 previously decreed absolute) NORTH SIDE COLLECTION SYSTEM North Fork Sub?system Lime Creek* Unnamed Tributary to Slim?s Gulch* Slim?s Gulch* Last Chance Creek* South Side Intercept of Last Chance Creek* 50 85 I35 Page 3 50 85 85 135 10 Carter Creek North Side Intercept of North Fork of Fryingpan River* North Fork (Savage Lakes Creek) Mormon Creek Sub-system Mormon Creek South Side Intercept of North Fork of ryingpan River* Cunningham Creek Sub- system North Cunningham Creek North Cunningham Intercept* Middle Cunningham Creek and South Cunningham Creek Unnamed Tributary to South Fork Cunningham Creek Canal* South Cunningham Creek Ivanhoe Creek Sub-svstem Ivanhoe Creek Ivanhoe Creek Intercept* 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District 100 (87 previously decreed absolute) 10 30 (fully decreed absolute) 60 (fully decreed absolute) 15 30 (fully decreed absolute) 15 50 (fully decreed absolute) 30 20 (fully decreed absolute) 150 (fully decreed absolute30' Page 4 Lily Pad Creek Granite Creek Fryingpan Intercept Canal* BOUSTEAD TUNNEL [yingpan-Arkansas Divide Tunnel All tunnels from North Side and South Side Collection Systems 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 5 35 (fully decreed absolute) 0 50 (fully decreed absolute) 0 10 IO 900 (fully decreed absolute) 0 (and additional fully absolute amount under more junior enlargement right decreed in Case Nos. 83CW352 and 02CW324) *Structures marked with an asterisk are not yet built The Fryingpan-Arkansas Project is a multi- -purpose unit containing features in twelve counties in Colorado. The collection system in Western Colorado is located 1n Water District No. 38 of Water Division 5, in Eagle and Pitkin Counties. 8. Conditional Water Rights: A. Original Case No.: The conditional decree for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project was entered as a supplemental decree in Civil Action No. 4613 on August 3,1959,nuncpro tune June 20, 1953, in the District Court In and for the County of Gar?eld, State of Colorado, in the proceedings captioned ?In the Matter of the Supplemental Adjudication of the Priority of Appropriation of Water for All Bene?cial Purposes in Water District No. 38 in the State of Colorado; Robert L. Bridges, Executor of the Estate of Tucker McClure, Deceased, and M. Stanley Pings, Petitioners.? B. Decree date: June 20, 1958. 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 6 C. Date of appropriation: July 29, 1957. D. Decreed uses: Irrigation, manufacturing, domestic, municipal, power, and other bene?cial use purposes. E. Legal description: The legal descriptions of the decreed points of diversion for each of the structures involved in this Application are set forth in Appendix A attached hereto. 9. The sources of water for the various parts of the Project are those indicated in paragraph 7 above, and all of those sources' tributaries, all tributary to the Roaring Fork River. 10. The amounts of water which were conditionally decreed are indicated in paragraph 7 above. Some have previously been made partially or fully absolute, as indicated in paragraph 7 above. To the extent any conditionally decreed amounts have not been made fully absolute, the remaining conditional amounts are stated in paragraph 7 above. 11. Supplemental Information. The District Court for Water Division No. S, in Case No. W-829-76, on November 27, 1979, confirmed and approved the Referee?s ?nding of due diligence for the ryingpan-Arkansas Project (Project No. 511), and changed the conditional decree to reflect the changes in the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project as it has been built. The District Court for Water Division No. 5 in Case No. 01CW265 (on April 8, 2003), in Case No. 95CW53 (on October 3, 1995), in Case No. 88CW245 (on March 7, 1989), in Case No. 84CW195 (on June 15, 1985) and in Case No. 80CW267 (on December 7, 1982), con?rmed and approved the Referee?s ?ndings of due diligence and issued absolute and partial absolute decrees for the Fryingpan?Arkansas Project. 12. Southeastern has submitted a detailed outline of the work performed and expenditures made, showing that work in connection with the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project and its parts has been prosecuted with reasonable diligence. The West Slope structures have been operated to divert water to the East Slope reservoirs of the Fryingpan?Arkansas Project and thereafter for decreed beneficial uses. Southeastern has contractual agreements for planning, construction, operation, maintenance and repayment of the ryingpan-Arkansas Project with the United States Bureau of Reclamation. Consequently, the acts of the Bureau of Reclamation evidence diligence with respect to the District?s water rights. Fryingpan?Arkansas Project activities include operation, maintenance and improvement of the collection system. Operation is subject to the terms of Water Division 5 and Division 2 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 7 Decrees, the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project Operating Principles, and the Congressional authorizing legislation. Current diversions and recordkeeping are integral to future development of the system?s conditional rights. Operation of, diversions by, and development of the collection system are affected by storage space in the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project reservoirs in Water Division 2. Throughout the diligence period, the Boustead Tunnel and sixteen other West Slope diversion structures were in operation and maintenance status. From April 2003 through March 2009, the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project expended approximately $22,800,000 on East Slope and West Slope Project operation and maintenance costs, including approximately $3,680,000 on the South Side Collection system, $4,150,000 on the North Side Collection system, $1,200,000 on Ruedi Dam and Reservoir, and $1,180,000 on the Boustead Tunnel. Southeastern was allocated and has paid approximately $12,540,000 of these total Project Operation and maintenance costs, of which approximately 58% was attributable to irrigation purposes and 42% was attributable to municipal and industrial purposes. During the diligence period, the Bureau of Reclamation has worked to install an expanded remote control system and to replace gate operators at the diversion sites in the collection system. The gate operator units have been replaced as needed and new fiber optic control units have been installed, allowing for increased monitoring and quicker response times. The Bureau also has begun planning for renovations to the Nast Tunnel. The Nast Tunnel collects all diversions from the North Side Collection System. To date, the Bureau has expended approximately $30,000 on pre-engineering costs, and activities and expenditures continue for the renovations to the Nast Tunnel. Gauges were previously installed at Lime and Last Chance Creeks, and operation and maintenance of those gauges has continued in connection with development of the conditionally decreed diversions from those streams. During the diligence period, the Bureau of Reclamation has been gathering information from these gauges. In 2008, the Bureau replaced the paper chart recorders at the Lime and Last Chance Creek gauges with digital stage discharge recorders. For Water Year 2009, the Bureau has entered into a cooperative agreement with the United States Geological Survey to operate Lime and Last Chance Creek gauges and to maintain these gauges to meet USGS standards. Throughout the diligence period, the Bureau has incurred more than $3,591 in expenses to operate, maintain and monitor the Lime and Last Chance Creek gauges. In addition to the gauges at Lime and Last Chance Creek, during the diligence period the Bureau contracted with the USGS to install and maintain a new gauge on Hunter Creek to assist in the administration of stream flow conditions on Project diversions from No Name, Midway, and Hunter Creeks, and incurred approximately $33,900 in expenses related to its agreement with the USGS for the installation and maintenance of the new gauge on Hunter 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 8 Creek. These activities and expenditures of Reclamation were pursuant to contract with Southeastern, including Southeastern?s allocation of costs as described above. Southeastern has expended during the diligence period more than $347,000 for engineering and more than $3 million for legal fees, primarily to protect the District?s West and East Slope water decrees and for further Project development. Southeastern has appeared as a party in various water rights proceedings involving water rights along the Colorado River and Roaring Fork and Fryingpan Rivers and their tributaries in order to protect Southeastern?s various decreed rights in the ryingpan-Arkansas Project. In addition, Southeastern has taken part in various legislative, administrative and judicial proceedings to protect Southeastern?s rights in the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, including its absolute and conditional collection system water rights. During the diligence period Southeastern perfected its related conditional water right for the Boustead Tunnel Enlargement, which was originally decreed in 1985 in Case No. 83CW352 (Water Div. 5). In 2002, Southeastern ?led a diligence application in Case No. 02CW324 (Water Div. 5) to make absolute the remaining conditional portion of its Boustead Tunnel Enlargement water right. After Southeastern entered into agreements and a stipulation with the other parties to Case No. 02CW324, the Water Court for Division 5 issued its ?nal decree in 2005, ?nding that Southeastern had perfected its remaining conditional water right for the Boustead Tunnel Enlargement as decreed in Case No. 83CW352. Southeastern and the Bureau of Reclamation have continued participating in and monitoring activities in relation to endangered ?sh on the Colorado River and the critical habitat designated for these ?sh. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service issued its Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Upper Colorado River above the con?uence with the Gunnison River on December 20, 1999, which required, among other things, that a certain quantity of water be delivered to the 15-Mile Reach of the Colorado River to ensure the protection of certain endangered species of ?sh. Throughout the diligence period, Southeastern and the Bureau have worked with other water users in the Colorado River basin toward acquiring such a water supply and to determine what water storage facilities will release water to meet the requirements established by the Fish and Wildlife Service. While the construction of certain conditionally decreed Project features has not yet been started, there is no intent to abandon these features. As recognized in the Decree in Case No. W- 829-76, construction of these diversions has been ?held in abeyance? pending actual operation of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project for a suf?cient period of time to determine whether or not construction of these features will become necessary. The construction, operation and maintenance of parts of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project are reasonable diligence for other parts 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 9 of the Project. As this Court has previously determined, the parts of the ryingpan-Arkansas Project collection system make up one unit of an overall, integrated water supply project, and the continued development, operation and maintenance of the collection system and project demonstrates diligence for each of the remaining features and conditional water rights associated with this project. See, Decrees in Case Nos. 95CW53 at 7 117 (October 3, 89CW076 at 4117 (March 1, 1990). Southeastern, acting through its Water Activity Enterprise, has also worked extensively toward the completion of the Arkansas Valley Conduit. The Conduit is a proposed East Slope feature of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project that was originally contemplated in the Project?s authorizing legislation to divert from Pueblo Dam, providing water to municipalities and water providers in the Arkansas River Valley. Southeastern has worked to coordinate a feasibility study for the Conduit and to promote federal and state legislation to fund the Conduit; securing a CWCB loan authorization in 2007. During the diligence period, Southeastern, acting through its Water Activity Enterprise, also has ?led and diligently pursued adjudication of exchange applications in Water Division 2, including Case No. OICWISI for exchange of certain return flows from Fryingpan-Arkansas Project water into Pueblo Reservoir for use within the Southeastern District. Such exchanges help to ?secure the greatest bene?t from the use and reuse of imported project waters within project boundaries in the State of Colorado,? as provided in the Operating Principles and contemplated in? the above-referenced decrees for Southeastern?s water rights. Southeastern has entered into settlement stipulations with most of the opposers in Case. No. OICWISI. Southeastern?s activities on this matter demonstrate reasonable diligence with respect to the District?s water rights for the Project. 13. The Referee ?nds that Southeastern has demonstrated reasonable diligence, Lg, a steady application of effort to complete the appropriation in a reasonably expedient and efficient manner under all the facts and circumstances, as required by C.R.S. 14. For purposes of the diligence period addressed in this Ruling and Decree, Southeastern has demonstrated its non-speculative intent and ability to deve 0p and use the water rights conditionally decreed and continued herein, and has shown that the requested water can and will be diverted and bene?cially used, and that the conditional water rights can and will be completed with diligence and within a reasonable period of time, given the size and scope of the project, all in compliance with C.R.S. and Nothing in this ?nding waives or diminishes any right of the United States, Trout Unlimited or Southeastern pursuant to their above?referenced stipulations in this matter. 2009CW4D Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 10 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 15. The Water Court and Referee have jurisdiction over this proceeding pursuant to C.R.S. 37-92?203 and 37-92?302 through 3792-305. The procedures of these sections have been complied with, and full and adequate notice of Applicant?s claims has been given in the manner required by law. No additional notice is required. 16. The Application herein is one contemplated by law, and this Court and Referee have exclusive jurisdiction over this proceeding pursuant to C.R.S. 37?92?203. RULING AND DEGREE 17. The foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are incorporated into this Ruling of the Referee and Decree of the Water Court. 18. As to the Application for a Finding of Reasonable Diligence in the development of the conditional water rights listed in this Ruling of Referee, the Applicant has submitted a detailed outline of the work performed and the expenditures made by the Applicant and by the Bureau of Reclamation toward the development of the conditional water rights, as described in paragraph 12 above. 19. The Referee does ?nd that the Applicant has exercised reasonable diligence in the development of all remaining conditional water rights and, therefore, concludes that the conditional water rights be continued in full force and effect. 20. The conditional water rights continued herein are subject to and should be read consistently with the Decree in Case No. W-829-76, Water Division No. 5, which is incorporated herein by reference. Di?gence Requirement. Application for a Finding of Reasonable Diligence shall be ?led in the month and year set forth below, and six (6) years following entry of any decree determining reasonable diligence thereafter, so long as the Applicant desires to maintain these conditional water rights or until a determination has been made that these conditional water rights have become absolute water rights by reason of the completion of the appropriation. 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 11 22. A copy of this ruling shall be ?led with the Division Engineer and the State Engineer. 23. This Ruling shall be ?led with the Water Court, subject to judicial review as provided in C.R.S. 37-92-304. Entered and ?led with the Water Clerk this day of 201 1. DATED: 2011 BY THE REFEREE: Water Referee, Water Division No. State of Colorado No protest was ?led in this matter. The foregoing Findings of Fact and Ruling of Referee are con?rmed and approved, and are made the Judgment and Decree of this Court, and the next Application for Finding of Reasonable Diligence shall be due in the month of 2017. DATED: 201 BY THE COURT: Water Court Judge, Water Division No. 5 State of Colorado - ww%?f - If? North? est corner of Section 24, Township ?7 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian 3% ?g Southwest corner ?Of Smith): 7, if), Township 3 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian llI??Iz?mln" ?(in I P: . . 31::37? rim}; .1 fir-4F" ?ti {fagI?IiexxRiver and Marten Creek COLORADO Lemhmb 2009CW40 Water Division 5 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Exhibit 1. Map Numbers Correspond to Appendix A I ?3 1 I'm? ,4 ?Wt-raw I It? 7/ 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District APPENDIX A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF DECREED POINTS OF DIVERSION SOUTH SIDE COLLECTION SYSTEM Map Name of Tributary No. Hunter Creek Sub-system Decreed Legal Description of Point of Diversion 1. No Name Creek and Unnamed Tributary On No Name Creek – a point whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, bears N. 2°03’55” E. for a distance of 64,855.96 feet; and in addition, by conveyance ditch from dike on unnamed tributary – a point whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, bears N. 1°44’05” E. for a distance of 64,859.11 feet. Fryingpan River Sub-system 2. Fryingpan River and Marten Creek On Fryingpan River and Marten Creek – a point whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, bears N. 50°07’52” W. for a distance of 66,623.39 feet. NORTH SIDE COLLECTION SYSTEM North Fork Sub-system Decreed Legal Description of Point of Diversion 3. Lime Creek* On Lime Creek, a tributary to the Fryingpan River, whence the Northwest corner of Section 24, Township 7 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 82°54’ West for a distance of 7,482 feet. 4. Unnamed Tributary to Slim’s Gulch* On an unnamed tributary to Slim’s Gulch, a tributary to Lime Creek, at a point whence the Northwest corner of Section 24, Township 7 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 43°42’ West a distance of 5,270 feet. 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 2 APPENDIX A NORTH SIDE COLLECTION SYSTEM (Continued) Map Name of Tributary No. North Fork Sub-system Decreed Legal Description of Point of Diversion 5. Slim’s Gulch* On Slim’s Gulch, whence the Northwest corner of Section 24, Township 7 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 15°26’ West a distance of 10,488 feet. 6. Last Chance Creek* On Last Chance Creek, a tributary to the North Fork of the Fryingpan River, whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears South 73°25’ West for a distance of 35,840 feet. 7. South Side Intercept of Last Chance Creek* On an unnamed tributary to Last Chance Creek, a tributary to the Fryingpan River, whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 83°52’ West a distance of 24,844 feet. 8. Carter Creek On Carter Creek – a point whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, bears S. 87°53’31” W. for a distance of 47,278.77 feet. 9. North Side Intercept of North Fork of Fryingpan River* On an unnamed tributary to the North Fork of the Fryingpan River, whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 81°53’ West a distance of 35,675 feet. Mormon Creek Sub-system 10. South Side Intercept of North Fork of Fryingpan River* On an unnamed tributary to the North Fork of the Fryingpan River, whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 84°28’ West a distance of 40,299 feet. 2009CW40 Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Page 3 APPENDIX A NORTH SIDE COLLECTION SYSTEM (Continued) Map Name of Tributary No. Cunningham Creek Sub-system Decreed Legal Description of Point of Diversion 11. North Cunningham Intercept* On an unnamed tributary to Cunningham Creek, a tributary to the Fryingpan River, whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West of Sixth Principal Meridian, bears North 77°28’ West a distance of 40,651 feet. 12. Unnamed Tributary to South Fork Cunningham Creek Canal* On an unnamed tributary to the North Fork of the Fryingpan River, at a point whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 67°31’ West a distance of 33,566 feet. Ivanhoe Creek Sub-system 13. Ivanhoe Creek Intercept* On an unnamed tributary to the Fryingpan River, at a point whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 67°17’ West, a distance of 33,512 feet. 14. Fryingpan Intercept Canal* On an unnamed tributary to the Fryingpan River, at a point whence the Southwest corner of Section 7, Township 8 South, Range 83 West, Sixth Principal Meridian bears North 50°49’ West a distance of 49,713 feet. *Structures marked with an asterisk are not yet built. The decreed locations for these structures are found in the Supplemental Decree entered August 3, 1959 (nunc pro tunc June 20, 1958) in Civil Action No. 4613, Garfield County District Court. The decreed locations for the other listed structures are found in the Decree in Case No. W-829-76 (Water Division No. 5).