Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />A portion of this meeting was devoted to a discussion of the concept of alternating the <br />office and associated duties of Operations Secretary between the states, While there <br />seems to be some consensus that the prospect of the implementation of this idea may <br />facilitate resolution of issues, however, it is also obvious that such resolution is a <br />prerequisite in order to prevent either extreme vacillations of operational and accounting <br />practices from one administration to the ne:l.1, or dictating acts against conscience, Never <br />the less, it was decided that the best way to proceed would be to schedule a meeting <br />involving, at minimum, the personal participation of both the Operations Secretary and <br />the Assistant Operations Secretary and as many of their staff as may seem appropriate <br />and where a significant portion of the agenda is devoted to exploring the concept. It is <br />believed that the purposes of this meeting will be facilitated if the Assistant Operations <br />Secretary, as a Kansas official and representative of the state that proposed evaluation of <br />the feasibility of the idea would prepare a brief concept paper outlining the potential <br />benefits that might be derived from the proposed arrangement so that Colorado officials <br />might have something concrete to consider and make response to, The Operations <br />Secretary committed to write to the Assistant Operations Secretary to make this request <br />and propose alternative meeting dates, <br /> <br />In a letter to Thomas R, PointOD, a co-member of the ARCA Engineering Committee, dated <br />August 19,2003, the Kansas Chief Engineer urged e:l.1Jedient disposition of matrix issue 4Al by <br />recommending confirmation of the practice of assessing evaporation to all accounts, including the <br />Permanent Pool, based on a pro rata distribution in relation to the volume of water in each <br />account. This suggestion was made without acknowledgement of the additional loss to the <br />Permanent Pool associated with that methodology, which has been estimated to be between 300 <br />to 1000 acre-feet per year and determined by the Operations Secretary to have been 508 acre-feet <br />for CY 1998, Neither has any consideration been given to resolve matrix issue 4A2 regarding <br />alternative sources of water that may be authorized to be used by Colorado to replace such <br />additional losses, <br /> <br />On August 19, 2003, the Operations Secretary provided the electronic files containing data and <br />analysis that formed the basis for Mr, Ley's conclusions included in his paper provided to Kansas <br />for the purpose of facilitating discussions concerning a procedure that may be agreed upon by the <br />state's administrative officials in determining transit losses as is their responsibility under Section <br />11 (E)(4) of the 1980 Operating Plan resolution, This pertains to matrix issue 4C1. <br /> <br />By letter dated August 26,2003, Mr, Salter presented an interpretation of the 1980 Operating <br />Plan that he believes obviates the need for Kansas to prepare a clarifying resolution thought to be <br />necessary in formulating the description of matrix issue 4C2, While this paradigm shift is <br />certainly worth considering and may indeed be the key to resolving how delivery deficits ought to <br />be handled, the main focus of our energy needs to be on how the states should determine if <br />deficits have occurred", the crux of the matter is matrix issue 4C I, <br /> <br />By email.alsodatedAugust26.Mr. Salter advised of his plans to have comments pertaining to <br />the Ley r~port prepared before our next meeting (not yet scheduled), which should advance <br />matrix issue 4C I discussions to define a mutually acceptable procedure for determining transit <br />losses and delivery deficits that may occur in connection with Kansas Section II releases, <br /> <br />Additionally, in the same email.Mr. Salter stated his intentions to provide a letter within the next <br />couple of weeks providing his comments concerning the 5/02 draft resolution offered by <br />Colorado as a possible means of resolving matrix issues 481&2. <br />