Laserfiche WebLink
<br />It <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />5. Trout Unlimited v. Department of Aericulture. <br /> <br />Briefing on our appeal to the Tenth Circuit is now complete. We continue to work <br />closely with The Water Supply and Storage Co. and Greeley in this matter. In the District <br />Court, the Court denied our motion to stay. We and the water users are still considering <br />whether to ask the Tenth Circuit to reconsider the stay. If granted, a stay would stop the <br />Forest Service from going forward with its reconsideration of the reservoir's permit and <br />would maintain the Joint Operation Plan on the Cache la Poudre while the appeal is pending. <br /> <br /> <br />6. Green Mountain Reservoir/Heenev landslide case. <br /> <br />On August 7,2003, the Colorado River Water Conservation District and several other <br />west-slope entities filed a petition against the Bureau of Reclamation in U.S. District Court <br />for Colorado to enforce the provisions of the Blue River Decree. The west slope petitioners <br />are seeking changes of Bureau of Reclamation policy concerning the interrelationships of the <br />replacement pool and power pool in Green Mountain Reservoir. The Division of Water <br />Resources has intervened in this litigation. The Court has not yet ruled on the United State's <br />motion to limit judicial review, but has revised the litigation schedule to conclude any <br />discovery by this December and to file briefs in February of2006. The parties have been <br />attempting to negotiate a settlement for nearly a year. Progress has been made, but there is <br />no final agreement, nor any guarantee that a final agreement will be reached. <br /> <br />7. South Platte Three-State Cooperative Aereement. <br /> <br />The Governance Committee Negotiating Team met October 3l and November l, 2005. <br />The schedule for the Final EIS (FEIS), Biological Opinion (BO) and Record of Decision <br />(ROD) is in danger of slipping again. The ROD was expected in late January or early <br />February 2006, but the FEIS is now a month behind schedule. The Governor will be asked <br />to sign the Program Document after the ROD is issued. Because the Cooperative Agreement <br />(CA) and all bridge measures expire December 3l, 2005, the Governance Committee <br />approved a CA extension for the Governor's signature. The Governor needs to sign the <br />extension document by the end of December. The states reached a compromise with the <br />Forest Service on the depletive effect of overgrown forests, including language that says such <br />effects will be considered during determination of the goals and criteria for the second <br />increment of the Program. <br /> <br />The Governance Committee thought they had agreement on all issues involving the form <br />of the Congressional authorization legislation including the contribution from all of the <br />parties ($157 million cash for feds, $127 million cash equivalent and $30 million cash from <br />the states). The main issue was how to characterize the program cost and the cost share by <br />the states ("Fair Share"). At the last minute environmental organizations contended that the <br />states had overvalued their cash equivalent contribution for water by $50 million dollars. A <br />Bureau of Reclamation review of the environmental claims concluded that their analysis was <br />flawed because it determined the state's water contribution by "present value" but did not <br />apply the same methodology to lower the overall program costs. The reevaluation may result <br /> <br />3 <br />