My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09067
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09067
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:50:57 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:26:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8030
Description
Section D General Correspondence-Other Organizations
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
7/1/1972
Author
USWRC
Title
US Water Resources Council - Proposed Principles and Standards - Summary Analysis
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
195
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 />~J d.J J . <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />I \" <br /> <br /> <br />rt~ It <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />I <br />r <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Public Hearing, March 20, 1972, Washington, D. C. <br /> <br />Because of the large public response to the proposed <br />Principles and Standards, it was deemed desirable to prepare an <br />objective summary/analysis of the responses received. At the <br />request of the Council of Representatives of the Water Resources <br />Council, an Inter-Departmental Work Group was formed to pre- <br />pare the Summary/Analysis of the public response to the Council's <br />proposals. <br /> <br />To accomplish this task, the members of the Work Group <br />met for the first time on March 27, 1972, and began to review the <br />public record. The Work Group members read each communica- <br />tion, identified issues, and recorded by State the first page <br />number of each response under appropriate issue headings in a <br />matrix. This matrix is presented as Appendix 1. After identify- <br />ing the various issues in the public record and recording their <br />respective frequencies, each issue was treated as follows: (l) <br />the issue was keyed back into the public record through the matrix, <br />and (2) the substantive arguments and ideas presented in the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.