Laserfiche WebLink
<br />332:1 <br /> <br />RECEIVED <br />MAY n f 1998 <br /> <br /><D <br /> <br />GEl <br /> <br />Consultants, Inc. <br /> <br />Colorado w- ,-, <br />Conservabon Board <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />6950 South Purom:lc Sueer <br />Suite 200 <br />Englewood, CO 801 12 <br />303,662'0100 <br />303'662'8757 F"" <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />Steve Arveschoug and SSC Members <br /> <br />.-- <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />Dick Westmore and Josh Reese <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />April 29, 1998 <br /> <br />RE: <br /> <br />Systematic ScreeninglEvaluation of Alternatives <br /> <br />At the April 22, 1998, SSC Meeting, we discussed the list of 32 alternatives being considered for <br />the SECWCD/Arkansas Basin Water and Storage Needs Assessment Project. We discussed the <br />initial screening of the 32 alternatives down to 13 alternatives for further evaluation, based on a <br />qualitative assessment performed by GEL This initial assessment was made without extensive input <br />from District staff or the SSe. Based on our discussions with the SSC relative to the 32 alternatives <br />and the qualitative screening, we decided (as a group) on the following course of action: <br /> <br />I, The list of I 3 alternatives has been modified to include gravel lakes storage as a single <br />alternative, This reduces the list from 32 to 31 alternatives. We also agreed to retain <br />the Upper Arkansas River (Hayden Ranch) storage opportunity in the mix of <br />alternatives, The recreation value of Williams Creek Reservoir has been recognized. <br />and this option moves into the list of higher ranking alternatives following the initial <br />screening, <br /> <br />2, A new comparative criteria (exchange potential) was added and several "scores" were <br />changed, based on input from the SSe. <br /> <br />3, The current list of alternatives will be retained until storage needs are fmalized, <br />However, GEl will focus its efforts on the alternatives identified in Tables I and 2 as <br />the higher ranking options, <br /> <br />4, A decision analysis process will be employed to perform a final screening of the <br />alternatives passing the first screening (Tables I and 2), A suggested decision <br />framework is provided in Figure I for review by the SSC, <br /> <br />5, GEl will further develop the alternatives and provide written documentation regarding <br />storage needs and reoperation potentials to the SSC by May 26, 1998, A draft of the <br />final screening approach will be included in the written materials, <br /> <br />974 [1\sQlEEN2 MMO <br /> <br />OffiCfS Nalionwide <br />