Laserfiche WebLink
Stateline due to reservoir releases so that representative and appropriate parameters could <br />be identified that might lead to a "fact based" agreement between the water <br />administration officials as to how to determine transit losses. A description of Ley's <br />preliminary work was provided to Kansas's officials on May 23, 2003, and the <br />underlying data was provided later. <br />Subsequent discussions held on October 23r1 and November 20t`, 2003, have led to an <br />agreement in principle to reach a temporary agreement for Compact year 2004 by no later <br />than April 1, 2004, that will define a procedure for measuring releases of Kansas' Section <br />II account water at the Stateline based on both flow rate and volume criterion. There is a <br />commitment on the part of both States to rely heavily on the recommendations of their <br />hydrography staff members who have been assigned the task to develop proposals <br />collaboratively regarding how releases from the Kansas account should be evaluated and <br />credited. There has been no agreement concerning application of any agreed upon <br />methodology for Compact year 2004 to any previous year. <br />It is recommended that the efforts described above should continue to try to resolve this <br />technical issue. <br />Disposition of transfers to make up deficits #31 <br />A difference of interpretation of various portions of the 1980 Operating Plan by the States <br />has existed for some time. The respective positions of the States are adequately <br />described in the issues matrix. As previously discussed, both States determined that <br />transit losses on the release of Kansas' Section II account water occurred in Compact <br />year 2002. Since the transit losses were greater than the amount of water in the Kansas <br />transit loss account, Section III D of the 1980 Operating Plan directs that the deficit be <br />made up from the thirty -five percent charge on the next deliveries of "other water", <br />which did not occur until March 15, 2003. At that time, acting as the Operations <br />Secretary, I caused the accounting to conform to Colorado's understanding of Section III <br />D of the 1980 Operating Plan. Subsequently, through a letter dated August 26, 2003, <br />Kevin Salter offered an explanation that appears to reconcile the different interpretations. <br />This letter is included as Appendix 7. <br />It is recommended that the Operations Committee approve the explanation offered by Mr. <br />Salter, direct that an accounting entry be made to complete the transaction initiated with <br />the entry made March 15, 2003, and direct that any future accounting entries of this type <br />be made to conform to that suggested in Mr. Salter's letter. Further, it is recommended <br />that the Committee direct the Assistant Operations Secretary to draft a clarifying <br />resolution that the Committee may recommend to the Administration to memorialize the <br />Administration's intent in this matter for the future. <br />Use of the transit loss account #32 <br />Historically, water in the Kansas transit loss account, as referenced in Sections 11 E (4) <br />and III D of the 1980 Operating Plan, has been used by the Operations Secretary to <br />- 11 - <br />