My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06521
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06521
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:23:09 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:41:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8111.831
Description
Arkansas River Compact Administration - Article VIII (H) Investigations
Basin
Arkansas
Date
1/1/1985
Author
David Pope
Title
Supplement Report to ARCA Regarding Article VIII (H)
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />, <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />At its second meeting on June 3, 1985, the Investiga- <br />tion Committee constituted pursuant to Article VIII .(H) <br />agreed to compile data and prepare a series of mass diagrams <br />as a preliminary assessment of changes in the regimen of the <br />Arkansas River. The diagrams were presented by each state <br />at the Committee's meeting on July 12, 1985, at which time <br />the ,Committee undertook initial discussions of the diagrams. <br />After considerable discussion it was agreed that each state <br />would prepare a report explaining its interpretation of the <br />data and the diagrams. <br />The reports were exchanged on September 6, 1985, in <br />anticipation of the Committee's fourth meeting on September <br />17, 1985, in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Instead of agreeing to <br />submit the reports to the Administration as descriptive of <br />the differing conclusions of the states, the Committee <br />undertook to identify the factual matters on which the <br />states agreed and to discuss the respective conclusions that <br />had been drawn by the states. Neither state was able to <br />persuade the other that it's conclusions regarding the <br />efficacy of certain diagrams and the changes in slope <br />reflected in certain other diagrams were the appropriate <br />conclusions to have reached. As a result, each state agreed <br />to prepare a second report to explicate and clarify the <br />conclusions presented in the first reports. <br />The differences in opinion as to the significance of <br />the mass diagrams derive from the Committee members' initial <br />disagreement over the scope of work contemplated by the <br /> <br />1I_~"I~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.