Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~. <br /> <br />"y--y' <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br /> <br />Department of Natural Resources <br /> <br />721 Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 866-3441 <br />FAX: (303) 866-4474 <br /> <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br /> <br />November 10, 1997 <br /> <br />James S. Lochhead <br />Executive Director, DNR <br /> <br />Daries C. Lile, PE. <br />Director, CWCB <br /> <br />Mr. Jack Yates <br />T own Administrator <br />Town of Palisade <br />P.O. Box 128 <br />Palisade, CO 81526 <br /> <br />Re: Cotton Wood Creek Pipeline Feasibility Study <br /> <br />Dear Jack: <br /> <br />I have reviewed the October 1997 draft of the Replacement of Cotton Wood Creek <br />Pipeline Feasibility Study by WestWater Engineering and have the following comments: <br /> <br />1. In the last paragraph on page ii of the Executive Summary, the report incorrectly <br />states that "the new loan request will replace the previous commitment." The new loan <br />request is for an additional authorization which will amount to about $182,000 <br />assuming 75 percent funding from the Construction Fund. <br /> <br />Ci) In the last full paragraph on page 111-11, the report states that the Utility Fund is <br />operated as an enterprise fund and goes on to define an enterprise fund. Part (a) of <br />the definition, however, doesn't appear to be appropriate for the Town's Utility Fund <br />since sales taxes are a major source of revenue for the fund. I do not understand part <br />(b) of the definition. <br /> <br />3. On pages IV -14 through IV -17, there is a fairly lengthy discussion of watershed yield <br />purely in terms of hydrology. The report fails to address the concept of system yield <br />which is the bottom line of the Hydrosphere report and modeling effort. System yield <br />is based on both physical and legal availability of water which includes hydrology, <br />water rights, and the configuration of the raw water system. <br /> <br />4. Table IV-5 on page IV-17 is misleading in that it compares demand with watershed <br />yield rather than system yield. If the table is revised, the estimated annual demand <br />figures should be compared with maximum system yield such as the 1,760 acre-feet <br />per year in the Hydrosphere report with an explanation of the conditions under which <br />that number was derived or with a different number based on a different set of <br />conditions which also need to be presented and discussed. <br />