Laserfiche WebLink
<br />uoaG89 <br /> <br />4. While the "removal of the Shoshone Call" alternative should not be removed as a feasible <br />alternative at Xcel's request, Xcel's position is a major institutional hurdle that must be <br />overcome if this is to be a viable option. <br /> <br />5. Report needs to be revised to state the FWS objective of providing additional peak flow <br />enhancement only in those years in which the current eROS activity is undertaken and the <br />triggers at the Palisade gage are realized. CFOPS is not undertaken to achieve an average <br />annual delivery of 20,000 acre-feet - but to provide an average of 20,000 acre-feet in the <br />years where the triggers at the Palisade gage were realized. <br /> <br />6. Environmental community will not support the Webster Hill alternative. <br /> <br />7. Some reviewers believe that time period and monthly model "paint a rosy picture" of what <br />can actually happen in the future. <br /> <br />8. Accounting of bypassed storable inflows and release of storage for peak flow support for <br />decreed piscatorial uses are two issues which will affect administration of CFOPS and should <br />be discussed and addressed. <br /> <br />9. StateMod does not match P A CSIM results on a monthly basis for Denver Water's reservoirs. <br /> <br />10. Study does not predict future flows or if a fill is likely to occur, which make it difficult to <br />apply results to real world - especially considering drought. <br /> <br />~ <br />~ <br /> <br />P:\Data \GEN\CWCB\19665\Report Phase 2\ Technical Memorandum No. 12\ TechMemo12,2.2S,03,doc <br /> <br />4 <br />