Laserfiche WebLink
^ ? s <br />9. Program Flexibility. Amendment language was negotiated that made <br />impact on target the flow the approval criteria. We could still stand to shore <br />this up by creating a paper trail that reflects Nebraska's assurances that an <br />amendment will not allow the parties to reopen potential injury issues <br />conceded by approving Tab 3 A and 3B. <br />10. Program administration, compliance and monitoring issues. We <br />agreed to allow the GC to approve our accounting forms and agreed to <br />coordinate Tamarack I operations with the EA manager (we preserved <br />enough operational independence to prevent a FWS diversion at Tamarack). <br />11. CA Extension issues. This also revolves around bridge issues and <br />although the bridge is pretty much done, the issue of whether the GC has a <br />say in approving the bridge is unresolved at this time. <br />12. Exit strategy. The refusal to get Nebraska to corrunit to reinitiate at <br />McConaughy is a problem, that is probably not solvable and falls into the <br />category of risk evaluation (not likely that the program will fail once <br />commenced and if so this is not a problem). E. 3 of the water section sets <br />some standards for those not covered by the program, but there is no great <br />detail here which again could be a problem for Colorado water users that opt <br />out. <br />I think that the agreement we have negotiated is consistent with the following <br />principles we enunciated at the beginning of the mediated negotiation: <br />1. Colorado seeks to fully utilize its compact entitlements and retain complete <br />sovereignty over administration of water uses in Colorado. <br />2. Colorado seeks to use its compact entitlements in a manner that will not result in <br />jeopardy findings by the FWS. <br />3. Colorado seeks regulatory certainty for its water users so that participation in the <br />Program will result in predictable outcomes for Colorado water users that need to consult <br />pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA. <br />4. Colorado seeks to limit the cost to its taxpayers of participating in the program. <br />5. Colorado seeks to avoid creation of a sacrifice zone through dry-up of irrigated <br />agriculture along the lower South Platte for ESA compliance purposes. <br />6. Colorado seeks to use all accretions to the South Platte River caused by imported and <br />non-tributary water in Colorado.