Laserfiche WebLink
IV. Establishment of Core Study Group <br />Malcolm Wilson presented that the list of entities currently identified to be part of <br />the study was a first attempt at including entities with either primary interests or <br />control of large reservoirs in the basin. The number of entities was limited with <br />the intent of forming a functional core group for the study, fully recognizing that <br />when particular operational alternatives are addressed other affected entities <br />may need to be included. inclusion of a few other entities was discussed <br />however it was felt that the current entities represented the large owner/ <br />operators and those with major interests and that other entities could be brought <br />in as necessary. <br />The draft MOU was discussed only briefly as many entities had not had time to <br />review it in depth prior to the meeting. There was some concern that, in light of <br />the earlier discussions about the objectives and scope of the study, there be <br />more emphasis in the MOU on; the focus being coordination and timing of <br />bypass water releases; the voluntary nature of the participation; and the <br />maintenance of existing yields. <br />There was a need felt for clarification of the amount of cost sharing anticipated in <br />the study. Malcolm Wilson explained that he envisioned greater participation in <br />this study as compared with the Grand Valley Water Management study where <br />the primary contributions of cost share participants were in meeting attendance <br />and in review of Reclamation efforts. The additional contribution is due to this <br />study requiring the participating entities to identify and evaluate alternatives for <br />reoperation of their own facilities in conjunction with others. <br />Concern was expressed that the amounts of contribution be shown in the MOU. <br />It was felt that the boards of various entities would need to see amounts of <br />contribution to be able to commit to participation. A suggestion was made to use <br />the MOU for the Grand Valley Water Management Study as a an example for <br />showing costs. Malcolm Wilson and Brent Uilenberg agreed to put together an <br />estimate of cost sharing participation. <br />A target date for a final draft of the MOU was set for May 1, 1995 in order to <br />have it ready for signature prior to the next CWCB Board Meeting. Individuals <br />were encouraged to review the current draft and send comments in to Malcolm <br />Wilson prior to the next meeting to give time for further discussion prior to the <br />final draft. <br />There was some discussion regarding the structure and methods of interaction of <br />the study group. It was agreed upon that, initially, meetings should be held on a <br />Rev: April 5, 1995 4 CR003105.MIN <br />