Laserfiche WebLink
<br />8 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />8. Kansas v. Nebraska, United States Supreme Court, No. 126, Ori2inal. <br /> <br />Issue: Have Nebraska, Colorado, and Kansas wells violated the Republican River . <br />Compact? <br /> <br />Decision: The Special Master ruled on some preliminary motions agreeing with Colorado <br />that the determinations of the Compact Administratiqn from 1959-1994 are conclusive and <br />binding on the states. This ruling significantly reduc~s issues at trial, as well as the amount of <br />damages for which Colorado could be liable. The SIiecial Master also found that the Compact <br />does not entitle one stale to consume any water allocated to another State. This decision is <br />narrowly ,tailored around the Republican River Compact and distinguishes other compacts. <br />Further, the Master found that a complaining state need not show injury to obtain prospective <br />injunctive relief from the Court. <br /> <br />Discussion: Kansas filed an original action against Nebraska in the U.S. Supreme Court in <br />1998, alleging that Nebraska had violated' the Republican River Compact by allowing post- <br />compact wells to consume more water than allowed imder the Compact. Nebraska filed a motion <br />to dismiss, claiming that no groundwater was allocat~d under the Compact. Kansas argued that <br />the Compact includes both alluvial and Ogallala Aquifer groundwater. Colorado's position was <br />that the Compact includes alluvial, but not Ogallala, 'groundwater. On January 28th, Special <br />Master McKusick issued a report recommending to t~e Court that the Compact restricts the <br />compacting states' consumption of all ground water i- alluvial and Ogallala - that depletes <br />stream flow in the Republican River Basin. The Supreme Court simply denied Nebraska's <br />motion to dismiss, without ruling on the alluvial/Og~llala distinction. However, the Court's . <br />ruling will have the practical effect of allowing a tria'! on the impacts of all groundwater <br />pumping. Determining Ogallala impacts will require: a complex technical trial with extensive <br />modeling. Working closely with this office, the State Engineer has chosen and is in the process <br />of contracting with experts in the fields of surface w~ter hydrology. groundwater modeling, land <br />use practices, and GIS services. , <br /> <br />On July 31st, Nebraska filed a cross-claim against C~lorado, alleging overpumping and Compact <br />violations. In our counterclaims against Nebraska aAd cross-claim against Kansas, we alleged <br />both downstream states are violating the Compact aJd injuring Colorado by their overpumping. <br />The Special Master has set a very aggressive trial pr~paration schedule, with trial set to begin <br />March 16,2003. The Master also assessed 1/3 of his fees and costs against Colorado. The'case <br />could substantially affect Republican River basin and Ogallala Aquifer water users in Colorado. <br />We now proceed to the discovery portion on the liti~ation. We will be filing initial disclosure <br />statements and reviewing over 3400 linear feet of dQcuments identified by the United States. <br />The Special Master has submitted his latest bill in the amount $159,383.19. Colorado's share <br />amounts to a little over $53,000.00. ! <br /> <br />All states are now in the process of early discovellY and bave begun reviewing federal <br />documents related to tbe Republican River basin~ The Special Master is bolding.a pretrial <br />conference in Denver on May 30th. He plans to fc)cus on any claims for the years 1959- <br />1994. Nebraska bas already stated tbat it bas no;claims against Colorado for tbat period of <br />time. <br /> <br />. <br />