My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00100
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00100
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:44:48 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:31:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
5/11/1960
Description
Minutes
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />MR. MOSES: "The last I recall came up when the Haw- <br />thorne Case was being considered and I think <br />at that time the Board asked the State Engi- <br />neer to request the advice of the Attorney <br />General as to whether or not Colorado should <br />intervene in the Hawthorne Case but I don't <br />recall whether it went any further than that." <br /> <br />MR. BARNARD, JR.: "I don't recall any such general resolu- <br />tion. I know when Mr. Chilson, or Colorado <br />and Wyoming were both participating, or <br />jointly participating, in the hearings from <br />the standpoint of observors. We haven't done <br />that since that time and I am sure that the <br />matter will be reviewed anyway. But I do <br />feel that such a suggestion from this Board <br />would be in order and would be important in <br />bringing this about as rapidly as possible. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I've gone through the thing very quickly. <br />I had to borrow this from the Denver Post. <br />It's the only one I know of in town. I sup- <br />pose others have copies. It's 370 pages long, <br />just the draft itself, so it's going to take <br />some time and some concentrated effort to get <br />the chore done. Just how it will be worked <br />out I think will be a matter practically <br />between Larry, Ray and Duke. This is speci- <br />fically relating to the draft report which <br />just came out a couple of days ago." <br /> <br />MR. NELSON: "I would assume that this recommendation <br />would involve the Bbard/s attorney partici- <br />pating in the review." <br /> <br />1m. BARNARD, JR.: nOh, certainly." <br /> <br />r~. NELSON: "Does anyone else have any statements or <br />questions?" <br /> <br />MR. L. WILLIAMS: "What does our attorney think?" <br /> <br />MR. MOSES: <br /> <br />"I think it's highly important. We are <br />not a part to the case at the present time <br />and that's the only part of it I have had an <br />opportunity to read. It would appear that <br />the decision is along the lines that Colorado <br />would have liked the decision to be. I think <br />probably the Upper Colorado River Commission <br />attorney will review this and that probably <br />also the legal committee on the Commission <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.