Laserfiche WebLink
<br />5347 <br /> <br />( <br /> <br />protection, land subsidence potential and recharge capacity. The consultant will conduct a <br />feasibility analysis for each of the following operating scenarios: <br /> <br />( <br />\ <br />" <br /> <br />A. Going /t Alone -- Study Participants operate their existing water supply systems <br />individually, with no cooperative/unified regional management effort. <br />B. Partial Cooperative Approach -- Some Study Participants (the Management Team <br />will identify the members based on input from Study Participants or a hypothetical <br />case will be considered ifno subgroup is readily identifiable by the Management <br />Team) would be willing to operate their existing systems in a unified fashion. <br />This approach would consider sharing of their groundwater resources or other <br />available water resources under emergencylshort term scenarios only, as well as <br />average year sharing to meet demands, The remainder of the Study Participants <br />would select not to participate in these partial cooperative actions. The consultant <br />will also study an approach where groundwater could be developed from aquifers <br />outside the existing service boundaries and transferred to meet the needs of the <br />identified subgroup. <br />C. Regional Cooperative Management Approach -- The major Study Participants <br />would be willing under agreed upon circumstances to cooperatively manage their <br />existing water supply systems and future water resources as an integrated regional <br />water system. A hypothetical case will be considered where a regional authority <br />could be responsible for accessing the groundwater resource underlying a regional <br />service area and facilitating the cooperative management of resources. Impacts on <br />water right decrees and rate structures will be assessed to establish the feasibility <br />of these arrangements. <br /> <br />The Study Board will define the target levels for conservation and non-potable reuse <br />based on the available sources of water and practices used by other utilities in the Denver <br />metropolitan area. Also, the consultant will assume that all uncommitted Denver Basin <br />groundwater is potentially available to be managed for the benefit of Study Participants, <br />including during the analysis of Alternative A, to the extent that it can be accessed as a <br />future water supply. <br /> <br />The study wi!! include all costs associated wiib infrastructure needs lor the alternatives up <br />to a master meter interface point described by the Study Board. It is not the intent of this <br />evaluation to consider local distribution and storage systems required to service <br />individual accounts. The following is a partial list of other items to be defined by the <br />consultant for the different operating approaches: <br /> <br />. an "adjusted demand projection" for those alternatives that include a regional <br />supply system. This could be a reduced demand projection determined by the <br />difference of the amount each study participant plans on saving from conservation <br />and reuse and the amount each participant would save or reuse if all Study <br />Participants met the target levels of conservation and non-potable reuse; <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />dcwra scope of work 12/01/99 <br /> <br />5 <br />