Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 25
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 25-8-104 (2026)

Interpretation and construction of water quality provisions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) No provision of this article shall be interpreted so as to supersede, abrogate, or impair rights to divert water and apply water to beneficial uses in accordance with the provisions of sections 5 and 6 of article XVI of the constitution of the state of Colorado, compacts entered into by the state of Colorado, or the provisions of articles 80 to 93 of title 37, C.R.S., or Colorado court determinations with respect to the determination and administration of water rights. Nothing in this article shall be construed, enforced, or applied so as to cause or result in material injury to water rights. The general assembly recognizes that this article may lead to dischargers choosing consumptive types of treatment techniques in order to meet water quality requirements. Under such circumstances, the discharger must comply with all of the applicable provisions of articles 80 to 93 of title 37, C.R.S., and shall be obliged to remedy any material injury to water rights to the extent required under the provisions of articles 80 to 93 of title 37, C.R.S. The question of whether such material injury to water rights exists and the remedy therefor shall be determined by the water court. This section shall not be interpreted so as to prevent the issuance of a permit pursuant to sections 25-8-501 to 25-8-503 which is necessary to protect public health. Nothing in this article shall be construed to allow the commission or the division to require minimum streamflows or minimum water levels in any lakes or impoundments.

(2) The following criteria, in addition to those otherwise prescribed by law, shall apply to any policy, rule-making, adjudicatory, administrative, or executive decision of the water quality control commission or to any judicial decision related thereto:

(a) All state waters shall be presumed to be available for beneficial uses under and in accordance with the constitution and laws of the state; and a water right includes the right to divert as defined in section 37-92-103 (7), C.R.S., the waters of the state for application to beneficial use.

(b) The commission or division shall not require an instream flow for any purpose.

(c) Mixing zones in state waters shall be allowed in accordance with other provisions of this article in calculating the necessary degree of source pollutant control, so long as water rights are not materially injured.

(d) The commission and division shall consult with the state engineer and the water conservation board or their designees before making any decision or adopting any rule or policy which has the potential to cause material injury to water rights.

(e) Underground water may be extracted from state waters in order to treat or remove pollutants from the water extracted; except that any material injury to water rights resulting therefrom shall be remedied as required by law.

(3) The state engineer shall issue well permits pursuant to section 37-90-137 (2), C.R.S., necessary to accomplish the purposes of paragraph (e) of subsection (2) of this section. Well construction shall be in accordance with article 91 of title 37, C.R.S.

Source: L. 81: Entire article R&RE, p. 1313, § 1, effective July 1. L. 89: Entire section amended, p. 1171, § 1, effective June 8.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1989–2005 · leading case: City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 782 P.2d 753 (Colo. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 782 P.2d 753 (Colo. 1989). · cites it 12× “Section 25-8-104 provides that the Colorado Water Quality Control Act shall not be interpreted to supersede, abrogate or impair rights to divert water and apply water to beneficial uses in accordance with certain provisions of the Colorado Constitution, various compacts entered…”
Concerning the Application for Plan for Augmentation of the City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 44 P.3d 1019 (Colo. 2002). · cites it 12× “Section 25-8-104 also provides: Nothing in this article shall be construed, enforced, or applied so as to cause or result in material injury to water rights.”
City of Thornton v. Bijou Irrigation Co., 926 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1996). · cites it 4× “§ 25-8-104(1), 11A C.R.S. (1989). Water quality regulation that affects water rights without causing material injury or impairment is not necessarily prohibited.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners of Arapahoe v. United States, 891 P.2d 952 (Colo. 1995). “§ 25-8-104(1), 11A C.R.S. (1989). The Water Quality Control Act establishes that the General Assembly considered the need to protect the quality of the water of the state! but the legislation did not reach the degree of protection sought by the cross-appellants.”
Colorado Wild, Inc. v. United States Forest Serv., 122 F. Supp. 2d 1190 (D. Colo. 2000). · cites it 2× “See Colo.Rev.Stat. § 25-8-104(1) (“No provision of this article shall be interpreted so as to supersede, abrogate, or impair rights to divert water and apply water to beneficial uses in accordance with [Colorado law].”
Town of Carbondale v. GSS Props., LLC, 140 P.3d 53 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005). “2d at 242 (“[I]t does not follow that merely because the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission has ‘final authority’ in the administration of water pollution prevention, § 25-8-104(2), ... any permit issued ... pursuant to the ordinance would thereby be invalid.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 25-8-104(1) — 4 cases
Concerning the Application for Plan for Augmentation of the City & Cnty. of Denver Ex Rel. Bd. of Water Commissioners v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 44 P.3d 1019 (Colo. 2002). “Section 25-8-104 also provides: Nothing in this article shall be construed, enforced, or applied so as to cause or result in material injury to water rights.”
City of Thornton v. Bijou Irrigation Co., 926 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1996). “§ 25-8-104(1), 11A C.R.S. (1989). Water quality regulation that affects water rights without causing material injury or impairment is not necessarily prohibited.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners of Arapahoe v. United States, 891 P.2d 952 (Colo. 1995). “§ 25-8-104(1), 11A C.R.S. (1989). The Water Quality Control Act establishes that the General Assembly considered the need to protect the quality of the water of the state! but the legislation did not reach the degree of protection sought by the cross-appellants.”
Colorado Wild, Inc. v. United States Forest Serv., 122 F. Supp. 2d 1190 (D. Colo. 2000). “See Colo.Rev.Stat. § 25-8-104(1) (“No provision of this article shall be interpreted so as to supersede, abrogate, or impair rights to divert water and apply water to beneficial uses in accordance with [Colorado law].”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 25-8-104(2) — 1 case
Town of Carbondale v. GSS Props., LLC, 140 P.3d 53 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005). “2d at 242 (“[I]t does not follow that merely because the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission has ‘final authority’ in the administration of water pollution prevention, § 25-8-104(2), ... any permit issued ... pursuant to the ordinance would thereby be invalid.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.