Southeastern Colorado Water Activity Enterprise Minutes June 17 2004

Home Browse Search

SECWCD June 17, 2004 3 RECORD OF PROCEEDING WATER RESUME REPORT: Mr. Hamilton reported that District staff has not yet fully reviewed the May Division 5 r6 llnl �, and will report at the July meeting if there are any cases that require Board action. Mr_ Hamilton said there were two cases of interest that he reviewed in the Division 2 May r6sum6. Case 92CW6, Rocky Mountain Mennonite Camp on Four Mile Creek, is the Third amended application for surface and underground water rights and for approval of a plan of augmentation. One of the earlier amendments cited the use of Fry -Ark Project water as a source of augmentation. The applicant has now removed this reference and the District no longer has any interest in this case. Mr. Leonhardt said legal counsel expected to enter into a letter agreement with the Applicant, addressing the District's previous stipulation in this case. The second case of interest is case 04CW33 in Custer County (Flick). The applicant is claiming 1.0 cfs conditional from a spring near Hardscrabble Creek for the reduction of pond (abandoned gravel pit) surface area from 2.0 acres to 0.5 acres. Mr. Hamilton has spoken with the Division Engineer's Office about this case and recommends that the District take no action in this case at this time. FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE REPORT: Mr. Broderick reported that President Everett iti and joined ity of Aurora in Washington, D City C. oil Pueblo, City of Fountain, Colorado Springs June 16, to meet with the Colorado delegation to update them on the accomplishments and moving forward with the PSOP. The Board was agreements between all the parties involved in provided a copy of the report that was distributed to the Colorado delegation, which take the highlights and summaries of the negotiations of the IGA's. Senator Allard is going to lead on the PSOP legislation. Mr. Broderick said there are still three issues to be resolved: • Addressing concerns of the State of Kansas • Colorado River District issues • Long term contracts LEGAL REPORT: Mr. Leonhardt reported in the High Plains A&M and ISG cases, the Court ordered that the Applicants submit a revised Case Management Order, incorporating the Court-ordered a have deadlines with any changes to which the parties agree, by June 21, 2004. The App provided District legal counsel with a draft Case Management Order, and legal counsel have provided comments in response. Following the Board's direction last month, legal counsel retained Leo Eisel of Brown & Caldwell to serve as the District's lead expert in the case, in a joint effort with the LAVWCD. Legal counsel has obtained a copy of the engineering report that Sigh Plains submitted to the Fort Lyon Board of Directors for the November l200f hearing. v1W. amilto l and Dr. Eisel have begun reviewing that report and developing p a need to be conducted. The Court ordered that the 'e develop Case agreement as to the schedule for site visits by June 21, 2004. The Applicants changed that deadline to June 25. Mr. Leonhardt said Judge Maes has not ruled upon the motions regarding speculation and location of trial. As previously reported, the Fort Lyon filed a motion requesting the Court to hold the trial in Bent County. In its reply, the Fort Lyon amended its motion and requested that the Court hold the trial in Otero County. Holbrook then filed a separate motion, also requesting to hold the trial in Otero County. Based on the Board's previous direction, legal counsel filed a