My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes Dec 2006 CBRT _2_
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
Backfile
>
Minutes Dec 2006 CBRT _2_
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 4:16:50 PM
Creation date
7/10/2007 1:46:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Basin Roundtables
Basin Roundtable
Colorado
Title
Minutes
Date
12/18/2006
Basin Roundtables - Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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 />Engineers and Surveyors, 118 West 6th Street, Glenwood Springs to develop a grant <br />request. <br /> <br />Discussion of grant requests. <br /> <br />The remainder of the meeting was devoted to discussing the following grant requests. The CBRT has 27 <br />voting members, and 2/3 or 18 votes are required to approve funding requests. CBR T funding requests <br />are for the $1 million SB 179 money available to the CBRT, and Statewide funding requests are for the <br />$5.5 million doled out by the CWCB each year. A table with approved grant requests is at the end of <br />these minutes. <br /> <br />1. Y ampa- White energy needs assessment - Dan Birch, Colorado River Water Conservation <br />District. <br /> <br />a. $300,000 is requested from the Statewide SB 179 account to determine a needs <br />assessment for energy development. Energy development will impact the Colorado River <br />basin as well, so Dan requested the CBR T' s to support the grant request. <br /> <br />b. Energy development for natural gas, coalbed methane, and oil shale will pose three <br />demands on water: <br /> <br />1. Direct use of water to extract energy resources. <br />11. Indirect: Increased workers increase demands on municipal water needs. <br />lll. Additional hydroelectric energy is needed to produce the energy. This will lead to <br />increased demands for water storage. <br /> <br />c. Tom Clark, Greg Trainor, Mark Fuller and Mike Wajeck formed an energy- needs <br />assessment committee to follow up on this topic. <br /> <br />d. Arn Menconi recommended that the request be submitted to the CBR T for a vote, Phil <br />Overeynder seconded, and it was approved unanimously. The funding request was later <br />approved by the CBRT with 25 votes <br /> <br />2. Palisade whitewater park - Pete Atkinson, Whitewater West, Grand Junction <br /> <br />a. SWSI projects Mesa County's population will double, and that the whitewater park will <br />have 10,000 recreation user days annually. This will generate $345,000 business <br />annually for Grand Junction assuming each user spends $34.50; this is half of the $79 that <br />Golden estimates each user of the Clear Creek whitewater park spends in Golden. <br /> <br />b. The whitewater park will help cement the need to keep 100 cfs in the river. Greg Trainor <br />explained that a whitewater park decreased the likelihood that water used for recreation <br />would be diverted to other uses in the future. <br /> <br />c. Dick Proctor stated that the whitewater park would not put any more water in the river in <br />the 15 mile reach between the Price Stubbs roller dam and the confluence with the <br />Gunnison. <br /> <br />d. See the November 2006 minutes for more information regarding this proposal. It did not <br />pass, and received 5 votes for CBR T funding, and 10 votes for Statewide funding. <br /> <br />L\CWCB Imaging\Caleb\Minutes\Colorado\2006\Minutes Dec 2006 CBRT (2).doc <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />7/I< <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.