My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08428
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08428
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:48:09 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:58:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8149.911
Description
Miscellaneous Small Projects and Project Studies - SE Needs Assessment/PSOP
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
10/18/2001
Author
Various
Title
2001 - General Managers Report - 10-18-2001 - 11-15-2001
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Southeastern District ReP-Qrt <br /> <br />Policy Issues and Activities <br /> <br />City of Aurora Transfer Case and Contracting-The Aurora City <br />Council voted to approve the Otero County IGA and the District/Aurora IGA. <br />We're now working on the process of getting signatures on the IGA, Attached for <br />your information is the Otero County/Aurora IGA. <br /> <br />District staff and legal counsel continue to work with other objectors in the <br />AuroralRocky Ford transfer and exchange cases toward resolution of the <br />outstanding issues. November 7 we will meet with Aurora to receive information <br />on their water reuse efforts. <br /> <br />AlsO, objectors in the cases are meeting November 6 to consider a <br />proposed decree in the transfer and exchange cases. Bob Hamilton is working <br />with District legal counsel on the settlement of these cases. We have until <br />December 15 to reach a stipulation in the transfer case, and February 15 in the <br />exchange case. <br /> <br />Update: Reclamation's Assessment of Security Costs-The Bureau of <br />Reclamation is now considering whether or not local districts should be <br />responsible for a portion of the added security costs that have been incurred <br />since the September 11, 2001 attacks on America. The unofficial Reclamation <br />position is that local districts should not be held financially responsible for these <br />added costs. However, other players in the administration may have different <br />opinions. In the case of the Fry-Ark, these added security costs have exceeded <br />$100,000 to date, and are expected to continue indefinitely. 1'1/ keep you posted. <br /> <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.