Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Question for Vertical Team: <br />· Can the CWCB proceed with the assumption that all storage space would be contracted with the federal <br />government as M&I, regardless of how the space is used in the future? <br /> <br />Statement C4: <br />· In the event that some storage space was hypothetically reallocated to Agriculture, the sponsor could <br />take a 65% break on the cost of storage for Agriculture (compared to M&I), and waive the Federal cost <br />share needed for mitigation costs. <br /> <br />Considerations: <br />· Local proponents do not want to delay issuance of water contracts by depending on Congress for <br />appropriations, but would be glad to receive whatever price breaks may be available on the space. <br />· For costs allocated to water supply, repayment ofthe assigned storage costs would occur over a period <br />of30 years with interest in accord with WSA58 as amended. <br />· Costs for "mitigation" such as recreation facility relocations, or any new construction, would be paid by <br />the non-federal sponsor for 100% of costs allocated to water supply, and 35% of costs allocated to Ag. <br />· Non-Federal entities would not pay for storage costs (when reallocated or otherwise assigned/dedicated <br />to) for Ag. <br /> <br />Questions for Vertical Team: <br />· Could the local sponsors hypothetically obtain a 65% break on the cost of storage for Ag use, thus <br />yielding a smaller payment to the federal government? <br />· If the cost reduction for storage space above is possible, could it be done in a way that allows the water <br />users to waive the federal cost share for environmental/recreation mitigation costs? <br /> <br />5 <br />