My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SPDSS_GW_PRC_Mtg_Minutes_20051118
CWCB
>
Decision Support Systems
>
DayForward
>
SPDSS_GW_PRC_Mtg_Minutes_20051118
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/26/2011 8:53:31 AM
Creation date
6/12/2008 9:41:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Decision Support Systems
Title
SPDSS Phase I & II Groundwater Peer Review Meeting Minutes
Description
Meeting Minutes from 11/18/2005
Decision Support - Doc Type
Peer Review
Date
11/18/2005
DSS Category
Groundwater
DSS
South Platte
Basin
South Platte
Contract/PO #
C153953
Grant Type
Non-Reimbursable
Bill Number
SB01-157, HB02-1152, SB03-110, HB04-1221, SB05-084, HB06-1313, SB07-122
Prepared By
Brown & Caldwell
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
The sources of data are cited. <br />15. As you have seen from my published hydrographs I am a great believer in showing all your <br />data. I recommend in the future, show every hydrograph. I further recommend you do as I do and <br />fit a least squares curve to the data and note the resultant best fit decline rate. <br />Our contract scope calls for presenting a total of 40 hydrographs from the Denver Basin <br />bedrock aquifers. We have selected wells that have a long period of record and are distributed <br />throughout each aquifer to represent the general water levels trends in the bedrock aquifers. <br />However, we agree with your comment and have modified our Phase 3 Task 44.2 Technical <br />Memorandum to included a larger data set to show changes in water levels over time. <br />16. I recommend you use a single scale for your hydrographs. It is confusing to the viewer when <br />you change vertical scales. <br />This is a good suggestion. However, because of the often large differences in water level <br />fluctuations throughout the Denver Basin, we decided to use different vertical scales to more <br />clearly show variation in the data at individual wells. <br />17. The variability in well decline that you discuss briefly on page 13 is largely because the <br />aquifers are under variable stress across the basin. This shows up in your maps with dots. Here I <br />think you should be more explicit and map out areas where the levels are falling at say over 25 <br />feet per year as the series of isolated dots is hard for a viewer to interpret. <br />Agreed; the Phase 3 Technical Memorandum includes a new section (Section 3.2) that shows <br />water level declines observed throughout each aquifer. <br />18. On figure 21 which covers an area greater than my figure 16 in the Mt Geologist has many <br />fewer data points in the Douglas County area. Do you have a protocol for not using some of the <br />State Engineer's data? <br />Yes; this figure uses data from springtime measurements and only for wells that were measured <br />in both time periods identified. The text in Section 1.5 has been expanded and a note has been <br />added to the figure to more clearly describe this. <br />19. I can read this chapter and come a way without a full understanding of the water level decline <br />data. I encourage you to consider making maps like the USGS has showing amounts of decline <br />over given time-spans. <br />The text in Sections 3.2 (results) and 4 (conclusions) have been expanded to more fully describe <br />water level declines. In addition, the Phase 3 Task 44.2 Technical Memorandum has been <br />expanded to include a section on water level trends (Section 3.2), based on the methods of <br />analysis described in Section 1.5 of that memo. <br />(B) Comments from Jon Ford, Leonard Rice Consulting Engineers. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.