Ark _Rndtble_minutes_6_14_06

• Basin Roundtable: Arkansas
• Title: Minutes
• Date: 6/14/2006
• Basin Roundtables - Doc Type: Minutes

Arkansas Basin Roundtable
Meeting of June 14, 2006

Meeting Notes

The meeting notes attempt to follow the agenda.

1. Chairman Hamel was excused for his absence due to a prior commitment. Vice Chairman
Jon a than Fox convened the meeting at 12:30. The mi nutes of the meeting of May 10, 2006 were
approved as submitted . 36 voting members of the 5 2 seated members of the Roundtable were
present , establishing a quorum.

2. Mr. Danielson reported on activities of the Interbasin Compact Committee (IBCC). A co py of
Senate Bill 179 was provided along with some memorandum concerning the development of
criteria for distribution of the funds. The IBCC has developed draft by - laws which were available
for members to review.

3. Mr. Rick Brown of the CWCB provided a briefing on the Arkansas River Component of the
SWSI study. Mr. Ralf Topper of the Colorado Geological Survey described SB 193, which calls
for an analysis of underground storage opportunities in the S. Platte and Arkansas River basins.
Mr. Topper is so liciting input from the Arkansas, S. Platte and Metro roundtables.

4. Vice - Chairman Fox request volunteers to participate on a subcommittee to begin a needs
assessment. Mr. Dennis Smith questioned whether formation of subcommittees at this time was
appr opriate .

5. The roundtable members counted off by five’s and broke into small group to discuss Mr.
Brown’s presentation. Participants were asked to discuss what was confirmed, what was new and
what is needed going forward based on SWSI work to date. Rep orting out:

Group 1 : More studies are needed for municipal conservation, particularly for smaller cities. More
site specific information on Ag efficiency, information on how and legality. In - stream flow needs. Efficiency
of restoration of restricted st orage and expansion of existing storage. Future storage sites. High Plains
aquifers not included in study. Impact of Kansas v. Colorado to agriculture, need for augmentation.
Group 2 : Alliances means water goes to cities. Growth is a serious issue. No rthern El Paso County
is thirsty. Tamarisk should be studied. Reuse and recycle. Water quality not in SWSI. Consider multi - party
projects, interruptible supply agreement and impact of future technology. Changes in Colorado Water Law.
Group 3 : M & I gap l ikely to be met by Ag transfers. Projects are storage and pipelines. Tamarisk is
a problem. El Paso and Elbert Counties are growing on non - renewable water sources. Need Fountain Creek
impacts studied. Reuse and water quality. Ray Petros’ idea. Underu tilized storage. Science of
phreatophytes. Recycle, reuse, conservation and recharge are important. Reintroduce water quality
legislation. Look at legislation on saved water. Examine Pecos River example of dealing with phreatophytes.
Group 4 : How t o get restricted storage back on line? Errors on Slide 16 of presentation, Eads, CO.
Double counting? Does SWSI look at new farming techniques?
Group 5 : Confirmed that the river is over - appropriated. Water quality important. Water
conservation. Da ta skewed needs to be updated. Look at underutilized storage. Do storage study. No
subcommittees. No water = no build.