Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />. <br /> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Page 5 <br /> <br /> <br />Decision: Recent developments may have put domestic appropriations issues <br />temporarily on hold. At last report our congressional delegation is still prepared to press <br />for $21.6 million for A-LP in FY02. <br /> <br />Discussion: In 1986, Colorado entered into a settlement agreement, approved by Congress in <br />1988, that resolved the Ute Tribes' reserved rights claims in Water Division 7. Part of that <br />settlement is contingent upon construction of the Animas-La Plata Project. The settlement <br />provides that if the project is not completed by January 1,2000 - which of course it wasn't - the <br />Tribes have five years to commence litigation of their claims from the Animas and La Plata <br />rivers. In 1998, Secretary of the Interior Babbitt proposed what has been called Animas-La Plata <br />Ultra Lite -- a project limited to Indian and M&I uses. The State, tribes, water users, <br />congressional staff, and representatives of the Administration resolved their differences relating <br />to environmental sufficiency language, delinking from additional project facilities, and <br />repayment by non-Indians and the resulting legislation, sponsored and supported by both of <br />Colorado's senators and Representative McInnis, was enacted and signed into law. This was a <br />real team effort on Colorado's part; The Administration included $12 million for ALP <br />construction in the FY02 budget. Our delegation supports a figure of $21.6 million, which our <br />office has supported. Going into the summer recess, the energy and water appropriations <br />subcommittees in both houses were recommending $16 million, and the appropriations <br />process is still ongoing. Our office is assisting in amending the 1986 cost-sharing and <br />escrow fund agreements to conform to the reduced project. <br /> <br />9. ,Goldell Boat Chute,liti2ation, 98CW448, Division]. <br /> <br />""",,-. - ' p , <br />,Issue: '; ~,. 'Whether the Color;do Sllpreme COllrtsho~ld overturn the water court's <br />,.decision in, this case. the WaterQ()urtgr\\ntedG<!lden its entire requested J .' <br />" - - - - . <br />,appropriation for up tol OOOcfs~ .jl}.clllding}dghttiiUc and winter uses. <br /> <br />/': <br /> <br />Decision: <br /> <br />The CWCB's Notice of Appeal was filed on July 30,2001. <br /> <br />Discussion: The transcript is due on October 29, 2001. However, the court <br />transcriber has suggested that he might be unable to finish it by that date, in which <br />case, the court generally grants and extension of time as a matter of course. Once the <br />transcript is filed, the Opening Brief will be due 45 days later. <br /> <br />10. Sportsman's Ranch ("SPCUP") South Park Con.iunctive Use Pro.iect, 96CW14, <br />Division 1. <br /> <br />Issue: The application proposes a so-called conjunctive use project in South Park. <br />Applicant proposes to pump ground water to create a void in the aquifer, then divert surface <br />water into the aquifer for storage and later withdrawal. The City of Aurora contracted with the <br />Applicant for use of the withdrawn water. <br /> <br />Decision: On June 1,2001, the Water Court issued an Order Dismissing Application, <br />pursuant to C.R.C.P. 41 (b )(1). The Court found that the groundwater model offered by <br />