Laserfiche WebLink
The Operations Secretary has consistently used inflow to the reservoir as the basis for <br />determining the quantity of water in accounts. Support for the use of inflows as the basis <br />for determining the amount of water in accounts can be found in Section II A and B of <br />the 1980 Operating Plan, which refer to inflows into John Martin Reservoir. Therefore, <br />the accounting by the Operations Secretary has allowed conservation storage to increase <br />at the rate of inflows to the conservation pool. However, once the permanent pool has <br />reached the maximum allowable invasion into the flood control storage, in order for <br />inflow to be stored in conservation storage, other accounts must spill, which spills have <br />been accounted for in the order prescribed by Section II G of the 1980 Operating Plan, <br />except as modified by Section 13 of the Resolution Concerning an Offset Account in <br />John Martin Reservoir for Colorado Well Pumping, approved March 17, 1997. A <br />simplified representation of the procedure historically used is included as Appendix 8. <br />The Flood Pool account used by the Operations Secretary is merely a special account of <br />convenience used to reconcile the difference between the total content of regular accounts <br />to the total reservoir content. <br />Section II F of the 1980 Operating Plan provides that: "Evaporation charges shall be <br />made against water stored in the accounts using formulas and procedures approved by <br />the Colorado Division Engineer and a re esentative of the Kansas Division of Water <br />Resources ... evaporation charges shall be prorated amongst conservation storage and the <br />accounts according to the amounts in them." [emphasis added] It is Kansas' position <br />that the procedure historically used by the Operations Secretary is not currently supported <br />by the provisions of the 1980 Operations Plan, and the representatives of the States have <br />not agreed upon a procedure. A comparative analysis of various procedures has <br />previously been provided to the Operations Committee and is included as Appendix 9. <br />It is recommended that the Operations Committee consider the policy implications at <br />issue when the reservoir content is above the maximum allowable level of invasion of the <br />flood control storage and attempt to influence the resolution of differences separating the <br />State's representatives on this issue and the procedure to assess evaporation charges <br />against water stored in accounts in such circumstances. <br />Upstream storage during John Martin Reservoir spill events #52 <br />The Operations Secretary's Reports for Compact years 1998, 1999, and 2000 document <br />occasions when storage was allowed to occur in post - Compact reservoirs in Colorado at <br />times when John Martin Reservoir was determined to be spilling. Kansas objects to <br />allowing such storage unless water in conservation storage is spilling. The positions of <br />the States are best documented by an exchange of letters between the Kansas Chief <br />Engineer and the Colorado State Engineer (Pope to Simpson dated January 9, 1998; <br />Simpson to Pope dated January 14, 1998; Pope to Simpson dated April 15, 1998; and <br />Simpson to Pope dated November 25, 1998), which are included in Appendix 10. <br />This issue is viewed primarily as a legal issue and as such is believed to be a matter best <br />referred to the Administrative and Legal Committee. <br />-16- <br />