WSP11938

• File Number: 8111.750
• Description: ARCA
• Basin: Arkansas
• Date: 12/8/2003
• Author: ARCA Operations Sec.
• Title: Special Report of the Operations Secretary Concerning Processes to Resolve Administrative Issues, the Status of Issues, and a Proposal to Alternate the Offices of Operations Sec. and Assistant Ops Sec
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

minimize transit losses on releases of Kansas account water, as measured at the Stateline,
by releasing water from the account concurrently with releases of Section II account
water requested by Kansas, There does not seem to be any controversy between the
States regarding use of the water in the Kansas transit loss account in this manner;
however, it has been noted that there is no specific authorization in the 1980 Operating
Plan that authorizes the use of water in this manner.

I therefore recorrnnend, as an interim measure, that the Operations Committee as a matter
of policy, direct that water in the Kansas transit loss account continue to be used in this
manner as the most practical means of ensuring delivery of releases of Kansas account
water, Further, I recorrnnend that the Corrnnittee consider incorporating into the
clarifying resolution previously recorrnnended in Issue #31, specific authorization for the
use of water in the Kansas transit loss account in this manner to avoid the possibility that
it might become an issue at some point in the future,

Non-reDortinl! of Section II C (1) detenninations #41

It is Kansas's position that a daily accounting of certain information that has not
historically been included as part of the annual Operations Secretary's Report should be
included in the report, Specifically, Kansas wants the report to include information
describing operational detenninations made by the Operations Secretary related to the
provisions of Section II C (1), and in particular the last sentence of that section, which
pertains to the by pass of inflows, without temporary storage, during times when
conservation storage has been completely released into accounts, Colorado's position has
been that this type of information should be routinely provided to Kansas, but that neither
the 1980 Operating Plan nor the Administration's By-laws require this type of
information to be reported The Operations Corrnnittee has not provided any direction to
resolve the issue; however, the basic data is being provided to Kansas throughout the
year, thus providing both an opportunity and an obligation to raise concerns in a timely
manner. Therefore, because the Assistant Operations Secretary has compiled and
submitted the data in time for publication and has made a corrnnitment to share
responsibility for answering questions that may be raised related to the information, I
decided to include this type of information as part of the 2003 Report, This represents a
tentative resolution of the issue; however, the Operations Corrnnittee may want to
determine for itself w!lether or not such information should continue to be made a part of
the Operations Secretary's Report in the future,

Interruption oftransfers from conservation storal!e to accounts #42 & 43

Article V F of the Arkansas River Compact states, in relevant part: "[W]hen there is
water in the conservation pool the water users upstream from John Martin reservoir shall
not be affected by the decrees to the ditches in Colorado water district 67." In this way,
the operation of the conservation pool in John Martin Reservoir benefits water users in
Colorado upstream from the reservoir, as provided in Article IV C (3) of the Compact,
Article V F thus recognizes that at times when there is water in the conservation pool,

- 12 -