WSP04401 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

/' r ( ( 5 . He said he was confident that the committee's reference was to "any proposed plan for re-regulation" 01' the native waters of the river in which Kansas would be entitled to share. He admitted the language of. the committee comments was not concise or clear. He promised to advise the Kansas committee of the situ- ation to have them revise their statement so as not to imply objection to the importation project itself. Anticipating a change of language in a redrafted cOID.'Ilent of the Kansas special advisory committee to approve the Fryingpan-Arkansas Fdver Project, the Committee reviev/ed and adopted the following recommendation to. be sub- mitted to the Arkansas River Compact Adninistration at its meeting on Tuesd<o/, July 24 as the basis for the Administration's comments on the proposed Frying- pan-Arkansas Project. "The Arkansas lUver Compact Administration submits these com- ments and recommendations to the Governors of Colorado and Kansas re- specting the proposed Initial Development. Gunnison-Arkansas Project, Roaring Fork Diversion. COlorado, namely: "1. The Administration understands that the project plan proposes: . "(a) The importation by appropriate project v:orks of approxi- mately 70,000 acre-feet of water a year from the Colo- rado River basin to the Arkansas River basin for sUPlole- mental irrigation and domestic water supplies in Colo- rado and for the production of hydroelectric energy. 11 (b) In connection with such importation of water and its regulation in the Arkansas hiver Valley by project Horks, the re-regulation of native waters of the Arkansas hiver (the term 'native waters', as herein used, being thoSQ waters covered and defined by Art. III-B of the Arkan- sas River Compa.ct). "2. The interstate r,ater relations of Colorado and Kansas llith respect to the Arkansas River do not justify any objection to the proposed project develo>rr.ent for the importation of Colorado P~ver water (described in sub-paragraph (a) above). . "3. The re-regulation of native waters of the Arkansas ldver (native waters being as above mentioned) concerns the Arkansas River Com- pact Administration and both Colorado and Kansas in complying with the provisions of the Arkansas River Compact and maintaining the benefits and obligations of the two states under that Compact. To that end, it is recommended to the Governors of Colorado and Kansas, and expressed as a policy of the Arkansas River Compact Administration, that the Initial Development, Gunnison-Arkansas Project, hoaring Fork Diversion, Colorado, as set forth in Pro- ject Planning j~port No. 7-8a. 49-1 of the Bureau of Reclamation, be approved; provided. however. that there shall be no re-regu- lation of native waters of the Arkansas River as proposed in such report until a plan of operation, rules. regulations, procedures, and agreements in furtherance thereof, including any pertinent