Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ," . I <br /> and the requirement to test low winter flows from I <br /> Navajo Reservoir. <br />April 26, 1996 Reclamation files the Final Supplement to the 1980 I <br /> FEIS with the EPA. <br />June 19, 1996 The Southern Ute Indian Tribe, Ute Mountain Ute I <br /> Tribe, and Animas-La Plata Water Conservancy <br /> District file suit against EP A, claiming it is violating I <br /> its trust responsibility with the Tribes in obstructing <br /> the timely implementation of the Colorado Ute Indian <br /> Water Rights Settlement Act and associated Project I <br /> construction. <br />August 1996 The Southern Ute Indian Tribe and the Ute Mountain I <br /> Ute Tribe meet with Secretary Babbitt requesting he <br /> name a personal representative to a consensus process <br /> to be sponsored by Colorado Governor Roy Romer. I <br />August 1996 The Ute Mount,<lin Ute Tribe, Southern Ute Indian <br /> Tribe, and other project proponents petition the I <br /> Department of the Interior to allow the Ute Mountain <br /> Ute Tribe, through its contractor, to analyze ALP <br /> development options. I <br />October 1996 Secretary Babbitt and Governor Romer establish a <br /> forum (the Romer/Schoettler Process) to resolve ALP I <br /> controversies among project supporters and opponents. <br />October 9, 1996 First Romer/Schoettler Process meeting. Governor I <br /> Romer, Lt. Governor Schoettler, and Secretary of the <br /> Interior Bruce Babbitt bring all sides together to <br /> attempt to resolve the ALP controversy. Represented I <br /> at the meeting were the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, Ute <br /> Mountain Ute Tribe, proj ect proponents, proj ect I <br /> opponents, Department ofthe Interior, EP A, and <br /> representatives ofthe States of Colorado and New <br /> Mexico (a total of seven groups). Each group presented I <br /> its issues, discussed a "Stand Still" agreement <br /> (activities to be put on hold during the process) and <br /> brainstormed an initial project criteria list. I <br />October 28, 1996 Second Romer/Schoettler meeting held. Participants <br /> agreed to generate lists of criteria to evaluate the I <br /> projects, lists of options to constructing the ALP and/or <br /> any part of the ALP, and list of questions needing <br /> I <br /> 1-7 <br /> I <br />