Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.' <br /> <br />In considering specific permit applications, the COE is the agency <br /> <br />responsible for evaluating components of the supporting justification. <br /> <br />This would conceivably include safety factors, which may be a part of <br /> <br />the applicant's rationale for the need for a project. Hence, the COE <br /> <br />reserves the right to consider safety factors as proposed by local <br /> <br />utilities in their permit applications. <br /> <br />SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL REVIEW <br /> <br /> <br />The detailed technical review conducted by the COE following the <br /> <br />public comment period for draft Technical Appendix 2, Future Water <br /> <br /> <br />Demands, has resulted in the following decisions concerning completion <br /> <br />of the Task 2 analysis and report: <br /> <br />The COE has reviewed the 1984 DRCOG policy projections for <br />population and related factors. After modifying these projections to <br />eliminate elements that are considered incompatible with assumptions <br />made for the EIS, it was found that modified projections through the <br />year 2010 are very close to those used in the draft Task 2 report. It <br />was therefore considered unnecessary to adopt the new population <br />projections, because the effect on future water demand would not be <br />s ignif icant. <br /> <br />The COE has reviewed the Series 1 growth projections and has <br />developed, on a preliminary basis, new growth projections assuming a <br />5,000 person per year inmigration in the year 2035. Use of this <br />extension in conjunction with the modified 1984 DRCOG policy projec- <br />tions would result in a population forecast for the year 2035 which is <br />not substantially different from that used in draft Technical Appendix <br />2. <br /> <br />25 <br />