Laserfiche WebLink
<br />thc agrccment. Finally. whcn thc governor signs the agrccmcnt we strongly rccommcnd that <br />hc attachcs a full copy ofthc program documcnts that c.\ist at that time, SO any modification e <br />of those documcnts must follow thc program documcnt proccdures. <br /> <br />The Governancc COlllmittcc Ncgotiating Tcamlllet in Denvcr Dccclllber 6 and 7 and <br />discussed a number of issues. The cOlllpletion schedule has slippcd once again. with thc <br />Final E1S now expectcd in latc Fcbruary, the Biological Opinion on March 28: thc Record of <br />Dccision in late April, and the Govcrnors' signatures in mid-May. The Governors approved <br />an cxtension of the Cooperative Agrecmcnt through Octobcr 1,2006. Ofthc outstanding <br />issucs. the vegctation management issues have been rcsolved to thc satisfaction of the Forest <br />Servicc and thc Gc. On thc "Fair Sharc" issue, (whethcr the Statcs havc contributed enough <br />to the program), the BOR cconomist has valued the states' contributions at a value vcry closc <br />to what the statcs had. Thc cnvironmcntal intcrests were to Ict the other program participants <br />know whether thcy agree that the valuation method uscd by BOR is reasonable: thcy havc <br />not done so yet. On the issuc of Section 7 consultations during the program, FWS has <br />approved the Colorado drafts ofa tcmplate for the Biological Assessment and a Recovcry <br />Agreement that will apply to any Colorado project in need of section 7 consultation. FWS <br />nccds to draft a tcmplate Biological Opinion for our approval before we consider the issue <br />settled and thcy have committed to do so in the next month. Colorado lockcd these forms <br />into the program document by making them attachments to the Colorado depletion plan. <br />One final major disputed issue remains that could cause Nebraska to pull out of the program <br />issuc: as a mattcr of policy BOR is rcfusing to pay the Districts power interferencc for <br />bypassing EA water from the Districts' power gcncrators. The partics are now attempting to _ <br />ncgotiate ways to gct around the ruling by structuring the paymcnts a something other than _ <br />powcr interfercncc. <br /> <br />A program implementation workshop is planned for January 18 and the next GC meeting <br />is scheduled for Fcbruary I and 2. <br /> <br />8. Rio Grande Well Controversy. <br /> <br />Trial will bcgin January 30. The judge dcnicd all motions for summary judgment, <br />preferring to have all facts in front of him prior to ruling on any legal issues. The Protcstors <br />attempt cd to designate modeler Michael McDonald as a "stlr-rebuttal" witness. The Court <br />granted the majority of our motion in limine to exclude Mr. McDonald, allowing him to <br />tcstify on only a singlc narrow issue, and only if the Protestors provide him for deposition by <br />Jan. 20. The supporters ofthc Rules may then name a sur-sur-rebuttal to opposc Mr. <br />McDonald. Thc Court also denied thc Protestors' motion to excludc our model runs <br />pcrformed after thc rulcs were promulgated as those runs were made to rcfute the Protestors' <br />statcmcnts in thcir expert reports. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />4 <br />