Laserfiche WebLink
■ <br /> I <br /> Ichange is that you would propose? <br /> I Pope: Yes ... you have your proposed resolution in front of you ... if we ... and I don't <br /> believe this changes the substance, it's just a little clarification ... on line four <br /> where it says"if such transfers are agreed to ..." <br /> ITrujillo: Right. Proceed. <br /> I Pope: If we would insert in there the words "in advance"and then at the end of that same <br /> sentence, after it says"Kansas Chief Engineer"... <br /> ITrujillo: Yes. <br /> Pope: Insert the words"in writing" so the full phrase would then would say.."if such <br /> I transfers are agreed to in advance by the Colorado State Engineer and the Kansas <br /> Chief Engineer in writing" ... <br /> ITrujillo: Do you have any problem with that, Mr. Evans or Mr. Miller? Mr. Witte? <br /> IEvans: No ... this is Peter Evans ... we wouldn't object to a change like that. <br /> Miller: This is Mr. <br /> Miller. And the alternate sources that I mentioned earlier, that David <br /> I Pope just mentioned, was really the option of making a new appropriation under <br /> free river conditions, as Steve Witte described, and if Kansas was agreeable to <br /> that,I think ARCA has to approve that as a new source of water. Some of the <br /> other things we can do to get water into the permanent pool over the rest of this <br /> ,j year, some have already been approved by ARCA such as putting trans-mountain <br /> water into the permanent pool,that's an approved source already and there would <br /> I/ be no need for further ARCA action. We would need to account for that and <br /> explain it to Kansas, and I think my boss, Peter Evans, wants to see us do those <br /> things ahead of time in the spirit of what David just said,you know, in advance, in <br /> I writing,we can certainly notify Kansas,but that doesn't require formal ARCA <br /> action. We took that action back in 1980, I believe. So if the idea of making a <br /> new appropriation is still alive in anybody's mind, ARCA ought to take that up <br /> I today or we'll have to take that up in the future. I don't think that just the two <br /> engineers can agree to allow that to be a new source of water. At least not as I <br /> read the draft that I put together. I don't think it embraces new sources of water. <br /> ITrujillo: You want to respond to that, Mr. Pope? <br /> IPope: We may need some other advice on this question. I had not envisioned that it was <br /> necessary to go beyond the language that's in this resolution for implementing on a <br /> one-time basis that last paragraph of the '76 resolution, but if that's not the case, <br /> G:\ARCA\MBETINGS\1999LSP61499A revl.wpd <br /> I15 edited:December 13,2004;printed:December 13,2004 <br /> I <br />