|
<br />.
<br />
<br />6) - () /'!c 1(. J (> David Harrison
<br />~' b 1/ '\ ,\ '7&'-/\ ~oses, Wittemyer, Harrison
<br />" ",;:,' _" _oeptember 18, 1995
<br />"...~,,' q ,-;/ < ,"""
<br />IV v. ':/\,.",",r.:c
<br />
<br />& \ioodruf 1
<br />
<br />,/
<br />
<br />THE AFTERMATH OF KANSAS V. COLORADO:
<br />REGULATION OF WELL PUMPING IN THE ARKANSAS VALLEY
<br />Lower Arkansas Water Manaqement Association ViewPoint
<br />
<br />By David L, Harrison
<br />
<br />Kansas v, Colorado Status Report
<br />
<br />On May 15, 1995 the Supreme Court handed down its opinion
<br />in the case of Kansas v, Colorado, 1995 WL 283477 (U,S,), At issue
<br />was how the Arkansas River Compact (C,R,S, ~ 37-69-101; or Kan,
<br />Stat, Ann, ~ 82A-520 or 63 Stat, 145, 1949) would be applied
<br />between the two states, The Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the
<br />Special Master that well pumping in Colorado has caused material
<br />depletion to the usable flow of the Arkansas River and that well
<br />pumping has to be regulated,
<br />
<br />The case had been bifurcated into two parts, the first on
<br />the basic question of liability and the second on the amount of
<br />damages and remedies, With the Supreme Court's ruling, the Special
<br />Master is now commencing further proceedings on the remedies phase,
<br />Following a status conference in late July, the Special Master
<br />entered an order setting the remedies phase for trial starting
<br />October 30 and continuing again in February of 1996, At issue will
<br />be the amount of depletions to the usable flow at the state line
<br />caused by Coloradq well pumping for the 1950-1985 period, and the
<br />specific changes to the water model being relied upon by the
<br />Special Master to make such quantification, In addition, a key
<br />issue in October will be the status of efforts by Colorado to
<br />comply with the Arkansas River Compact from this point forward,
<br />The Colorado State Engineer has been ordered to submit a report by
<br />September 29 setting forth in detail the actions being taken by
<br />Colorado to comply with the Compact, Thus, while regulation of
<br />well pumping in the Arkansas Valley has moved very slowly over the
<br />last 20 years, it is now rapidly springing into place under the
<br />intense scrutiny of the Special Master,
<br />
<br />State Enqineer's Proposed Rules and Requlations
<br />
<br />In response to developments in the Kansas case, the State
<br />Engineer has announced his intention to promulgate rules and
<br />regulations governing well pumping which would replace the existing
<br />regulations which have been in place since the early 1970's, Those
<br />old regulations allowed pumping for free three days out of seven
<br />and were aimed only at offsetting the impact on senior surface
<br />water rights in Colorado; they were not directed to replacing
<br />depletions occurring at the state line,
<br />
<br />After months of meetings with representatives of water
<br />users and local government leaders from the Arkansas Valley, the
<br />State Engineer has determined that it is now time to promulgate one
<br />
<br />"
<br />
|