Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />i <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br /> <br />Page 5 <br /> <br /> <br />that they could recover for Nebraska's overuse whether or not they received their full <br />apportionmeut, <br /> <br />The long-awaited USGS Republican basin ground water model is now almost a year <br />late, The USGS released the predevelopment model in October, but did not release the <br />derivation ofthe underlying data and other key items that go iuto developing and <br />understanding the model. They also did not release the post-development model (the one <br />that might answer the question about well depletions that are at the heart ofthis lawsuit) <br />because it was still not calibrated. Supposedly that part of the model will be ready in <br />January, <br /> <br />There have been three settlement meetings among all three states and the federal <br />government in October and November, but no substantive progress. Everyone thought we <br />needed a fadHtator, both because the issues are going to be very, very difficult and to give <br />our settlement talks additional credibility with the Special Master. Nebraska, Kansas, and <br />the federal government were all highly impressed with the firm that did the previous <br />Kansas-Nebraska mediation on the Republican, CDRAssociates in Boulder, Colorado. <br />The State Engineer's office will contract with the mediator. We have scheduled another <br />settlement meeting for December 6 and 7 in Denver, <br /> <br />The Master has scheduled several crucial compact issues for briefing in January. If <br />Nebraska and Kansas reach settlement on the 1959 to 1994 period in the next month, the <br />briefs may be postponed. The issues involve: (1) whether Nebraska and Colorado have a <br />Compact obligation to make Kansas' entire main stem allocation available at Guide Rock, <br />Nebraska; (2) whether to recover damages a complaining state must show both overuse by <br />another state and receipt by the complaining state ofIess than its allocation; (3) whether <br />water use under the Compact should be measured on a statewide or a sub-basin by sub- <br />basin basis; and (4) whether overuse by Kansas in sub-basins upstream of Nebraska should <br />be set off against any shortage that Kansas suffered downstream of Nebraska in that year. <br /> <br />8. Animas-La Plata Pro.iect. <br /> <br />Issue: Now that legislation authorizing the construction of the down-sized Animas-La <br />Plata Project has been enacted into law, the next task is to assure that Congress appropriates <br />sufficient funds to keep development on track. <br /> <br />Discussion: Wendy Weiss has worked with the project proponents, the Colorado Water <br />and Power Development Authority, and other parties to amend the 1986 cost-sharing and <br />escrow fund agreements to conform to the reduced project. On November 15 Senator <br />Campbell informed Ken Salazar that the anticipated funding for construction is stilI on <br />track for this year. <br />