Colorado - Roaring Fork Watershed Plan Phase II_Orig Submittal Water Activity Summary

Home Browse Search

Supply Initiative and other appropriate sources and in cooperation with the on-going Statewide Water Supply Initiative, develop a basin-wide consumptive and nonconsumptive water supply needs assessment, conduct an analysis of available unappropriated waters within the basin, and propose projects or methods, both structural and nonstructural, for meeting those needs and utilizing those unappropriated waters where Basin Roundtables shall actively seek the input and advice of affected local governments, appropriate. water providers, and other interested stakeholders and persons in establishing its needs assessment….” Staff interprets this provision to mean ALL affected local governments, water providers, and other interested stakeholders and persons. As currently written the scope and tasks appear to focus only on some inbasin participants and the applicant must address this issue. Staff believes that by including ALL water rights holders/water providers etc. in a collaborative, cooperative, and consensus process (NOT regulatory/legislative actions) of evaluating and identifying strategies then many of the issues identified above can begin to be addressed. It should also be noted that the CWCB has not received a copy of the Phase I report so it is difficult to understand the direction the initial project took in regard to conformance with Sections 37-75-102 and 37-75- 104(2)(c) CRS and is difficult to fully evaluate this application without seeing the product of the initial WSRA grant. Issues/Additional Needs: ? The application does not fully address the requirements for summarizing the overview of the water activity (see Part B.4 of the application) ? On page 4 of the application the applicant needs to be more specific about threshold criterion 2. Specifically, the applicant should address how the statement that the findings and recommendations need to be adopted and enforced by local governments and water management agencies in order to be implemented conforms to the issues identified in the above discussion section. Also, wouldn’t recommendations that are developed by a consensus, collaborative and cooperative approach be more st in line with the intent of the WSRA and the Water for the 21 Century Act? ? The Goals and Objectives examples appear to only include some inbasin local government and stakeholders. Please revise to address issues raised in the above discussion section. ? The examples of findings and recommendations need to be revised to articulate how they advance the purposes of the WSRA (i.e. either identifying a consumptive or nonconsumptive need or proposing a project or method to meet this need). ? In regard to the Scope of Work please provide more detail for each task outlining how the task will be complete, what methods will be used to complete the tasks. ? Task 1 appears to only focus on some local inbasin interests. Revise to address issues raised regarding Section 37-75-104(2)(c) CRS. ? Under Task 1 there is mention of including “opinions”. While staff appreciates that gathering opinions are an important part of a planning process it is essential that resource management actions be based on sound science and not on opinion. Please explain how the characterization of resource issues and critical resource decisions will be done in a manner that is scientifically based, and consistent with applicable laws and water rights. ? The Task 2 deliverable is unclear. Please provide additional detail and clarification as to what “adds information” means. ? As mentioned above please describe how Tasks 4 and 5 conform to Section 37-75-104(2)(c). ? The budget does not provide the level of detail required by the application. Please see example budget format for requirements. 6