Laserfiche WebLink
former Colorado Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Love Kourlis, were appointed to the water court <br />committee. <br />ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN <br />JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR PERMANENT POOL - KESSEE DITCH WATER <br />RIGHT: Kansas is reviewing a request by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) to use water <br />rights from the Kessee Ditch to help maintain the permanent pool in John Martin Reservoir. This issue <br />has been before ARCA since 2005 and CDOW's option on acquire the water expires March 31, 2008. <br />Kansas has pledged to meet with state officials in January given that time is running out on CDOW's <br />deal. CDOW has already put $700,000 into engineering. CDOW has been working in partnership with <br />the Lower Arkansas Water Management Association (LAWMA) on the project. An interruptible supply <br />plan would provide farmers supplemental water to operate wells in dry years, while supplying a pool for <br />wildlife purposes at John Martin in nine years out of 12. Commissioner Matt Heimerich, who represents <br />Colorado water users above John Martin on ARCA and chairs the engineering committee, pressured <br />Kansas to make a more concerted effort to address matter. <br />PREFERRED STORAGE OPTIONS PLAN (PSOP): Pitkin County and the City of Aspen <br />presented concerns with PSOP to the Colorado River BRT on Dec. 17 in Glenwood Springs. Staff asked <br />for and received a written summary of those concerns particularly as related to allegations about the <br />project failing to meet dear-eed ISF and/or bypass obligations: "transmountain diversions in the Upper <br />Roaring Fork River already preclude our ability to consistently meet minimum decreed instream flows for <br />the Roaring Fork River" and that "minimum stream flows have not been met 77% of the time as a result <br />of existing trans-mountain diversions in the Upper Roaring Fork River". The "Operating Principles <br />Ftyingpan-Arkansas Project", House Doc. 130, March 15, 1961, provide for certain bypass flows by <br />project diversion works to meet fish needs in the Roaring Fork basin. In addition a 1978 agreement, to <br />which the CWCB is a party, addresses minimum flows and bypass requirements. Staff is currently <br />researching those documents and also coordinating with USBR and SECWCD to obtain operation and <br />flow data that will allow further analysis of the Pitkin County claims. <br />ARKANSAS RIVER COMPACT ADMINISTRATION (ARCA): The 2007 ARCA Annual <br />Meeting was held in Lamar on Tuesday December 11, 2007 with Committees meeting on the afternoon of <br />Dec. 10. Randy Seahohn represented the CWCB Du-ector as one of Colorado's three representatives. <br />Colorado was able to secure Kansas' commitment to review aParks/DOW proposal to use LAWMA <br />water sources for augmentation of the John Martin Reservoir permanent fishery pool with further <br />consultation and an additional committee meeting planned for January. We also provided Kansas with <br />information about Colorado's proposed irrigation efficiency rules for the Arkansas Basin and TriState <br />Generation's proposed change of Amity Canal water rights to support development of an electric <br />generating plant in the Holly area. In addition there were reports on the City of Lamar's request for an <br />M&I storage account at John Martin Reservoir and the new transit loss methodology developed by Russ <br />Livingston for the reach of river below John Martin. ARCA adopted two recommendations from the <br />Special Engineering Committee related to John Martin accounting and directed that a recompilation of the <br />1980 Operating Plan be prepared for later adoption to incorporate the various changes based on that <br />committee's work and further agreed to continue the committee for another year. <br />FOUNTAIN CREEK TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE UPDATE: Work continues <br />by the U.S. Corps of Engineers Albuquerque District for the Fountain Creek Technical Advisory <br />Committee (TAC). The Corps is currently involved in the Project Evaluation Stage. During this stage, a <br />list of 46 projects identified during the Project Formulation Stage are being ranked and evaluated based <br />on a quantitative scoring system developed by the Technical Advisory Committee. This scoring, which <br />~10~ <br />