Laserfiche WebLink
<br />...i". '!.. MAR-16-1999 11:22 <br /> <br />P.01 <br /> <br />7. The NWS continues to refuse a true independent review; instead they did <br />hurry up in-house review which, to no one's surprise, simply confinned their <br />previously flawed study. This in-house "review" also did not address the full ran e <br />of issues that would be addressed in an independent revil:lw. The Federal Energy <br />Regulatory Commission (FERC) regularly requires such peer reviews as part of <br />it's licensing procedure for hydro power facilities at dams and the Colorado State <br />Engineer has a similar policy for reviews ofPMP studies, <br /> <br />, , <br />8. An independent peer review panel should consist of representatives of <br />FERC, the National Center for Atmospheric research, the Colorado State <br />Engineer, the Colorado State Climatologist, the Coloradl) Water Conservation <br />Board, the Colorado State Geologist, and independent meteorologists and <br />hydrologists. I would hope the DENVER POST agrees that any governmental <br />agency proposal. which the Army Corps estimates will cost from $50 to $250 <br />million of taxpayer money, must be based on data, such a,s the redesign of the <br />Cherry Creek Dam assumptions and procedures that are ,as accurate and carefully <br />reviewed as possible. <br /> <br />l' <br /> <br />.- <br /> <br />I would hope that the POST agrees that this Anny Corps of Engineers' proposal <br />to spend from $50 to $250 million of taxpayers money must be based on data. <br />assumptions and procedures that are as accurate and carefully reviewed as <br />possible, <br /> <br />Yours truly, ' <br /> <br />~:h~ <br /> <br />Don Morrison <br />Greenwood Village City Council <br />