My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Basin Issues February 1998
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
Basin Issues February 1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/3/2013 4:35:10 PM
Creation date
7/30/2012 1:15:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Basin Issues February 1998. Various colorado basins, issues, data, budgets and meetings.
State
CO
Date
2/1/1998
Title
Basin Issues February 1998
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
94
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Draft Decision of the Special Master. On June 5, 1997, the Special Master issued a 145 -page <br />draft report to the U. S. Supreme Court addressing various issues that have been litigated since the <br />May, 1995, decision. A hearing to present oral arguments on the draft report's recommendations was <br />held on July 14, 1997. The Special Master issued a second report in September 1997. The Special <br />Masters recommendations were as follows: <br />1. That depletions to usable stateline flow for the 1986 -94 period were determined to be 91,565 AF. <br />Gq � <br />(The states stipulated to depletions for the 1950 -85 period in the amount of 328,505 AF.) <br />z�© <br />"l <br />2. That evidence be received on a suitable remedy for post- Compact violations whether such <br />remedy be in water or in money. w <br />3. That Colorado's efforts to bring the state into compliance with the Compact have so far been ..o g� rY <br />sufficient to preclude injunctive relief or to require changes to Colorado's Measurement Rules or <br />Use Rules, and that Colorado's efforts continue to be monitored through the remaining trial <br />proceedings. <br />4. That if a suitable remedy in this case should include money damages, those damages should be <br />based upon Kansas' loss and not on Colorado's gain. <br />5. That the 11th Amendment does not preclude damages to the State of Kansas from being based, <br />Ir <br />in part, on losses incurred by its individual water users. <br />v `1 <br />6. That the unliquidated nature of Kansas' claim for damages does not bar the award of <br />interest, and that the interest depend X( <br />'� °�J <br />�'" A I � � <br />prejudgment possible award of prejudgment will upon <br />Id <br />�; <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.