Laserfiche WebLink
44. The Compact Model is competent and admissible evidence to prove groundwater <br />depletions and anything else supported by the Compact Model's findings acid conclusions. The <br />Commission cannot dispute the Compact Model's findings and conclusions but the Commission <br />m ay i e eir weight atxd efteet on fe Plai" burdcn of proo <br />45. Colorado did not take the position or argue in the Compact Litigation that there was no <br />bydraulic connection between the groundwater wells and surface streams. See Kansas v, <br />Nebraska and Colorado, 119 S. Ct. at 2364: First Report of Special Afaster ( "First Report <br />Rather, Colorado argued that the Compact does restrict a compacting state's consumption of <br />alluvial groundwater to the extent that the consumption. depletes the stream flow in the River <br />Basin but the Compact does not restrict the pumping of the Ogallala Aquifer groundwater even if <br />the eMct of that consumption is to deplete stream flow in the River Basin. See First Report, pp. <br />41 -42. <br />46, The Special Master assumed the hydraulic connection betweerx groundwater pumping and <br />stream flow and also concluded that the hydraulic connection was well known by the early <br />1940s. This fact was significant in roinforcing the Special Master's conclusion that the Compact <br />negotiators did not ignore the effect of groundwater purnpiag oa stream flow. See First Report, <br />p. 23, citing Snab Creek Mining & Tunnel Co. 'v. Midway Irr. Co., 260 U.S. 596, 598 (1923), <br />Kansas v. Colorado, 2-06 U.S. 46, 114 -15 (1907); C.F. Tolman & Amy C. Stipp, Analysis of <br />Legal Concepts of ,Subflow and .Percolating Waters, 21 Or. L. Rev. 113, 115 -29 (1942). <br />47. The result was the Special Master's rejection of Colorado's argument and his conclusion <br />and finding that the "language of the Compact unambiguously governs the entire stream flow of <br />the Republican River Basin, which includes all groundwater that would become pant of the <br />stream flow in the Basin if undepleted by the activities of man." See First Report, p.44. <br />48. Article IV of the Compact, which explicitly makes reference to state laver, states in <br />poilinent part. " The use of the waters [allocated under the Compact] shall be subject to the laws <br />of the State for use in which the allocations are made." Furthermore, the Compact is a duly <br />adopted statute of all three compacting States, as well as federal law. See ,First Report, p. 29. <br />I. The SpeetaEl Master explained the purpose of the Compact Model. <br />49. The Compact Stipulation provided that " determination of stream flow depletions caused <br />by Well pumping and determination of Imported Wvter Supply Credit will be accomplished by <br />the RRCA Groundwater Model as used in the ,R.R.CA, Accounting Procedures." See Final <br />Settlement Stipulation, TV. C., p. 18. "Upon agreement by the States to the RRCA, Groundwater <br />Model, the States, through the RRCA, sha11 adopt the RRCA for purposes of Compact <br />accounting. ... the RRCA may modify the RRCA Groundwater Model or the associated <br />methodologies after discussion with the U.S. Geological Survey." See Final Settlement <br />Stipulation, ITT. C. 8. , p.20. <br />1107t 13 <br />