My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
29 (3)
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
29 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:38:11 PM
Creation date
8/22/2008 8:48:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
5/21/2008
Description
IWMD Section - Alternative Agricultural Water Transfer Methods - Arkansas and South Platte Basins Competitive Grant Program
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
It is not clear how many of the tasks identified in the scope of work are different <br />and separate from the tasks being funded by the Water Supply Reserve Account <br />Fund in the amount of $150,000. <br />The applicant does not adequately address who exactly would be willing to <br />transfer a portion of their water to M&I uses. In the eligibility requirements (#3), <br />the group(s) of agricultural users that are or may be willing to transfer a portion of <br />their water as well as the identified entities where the water could or would be put <br />to the new use must be identified. <br />• It is stated that consultation of Division 1 Engineers Office will be critical <br />regarding the quantification of consumptive use. Administrative issues with <br />transferring consumptive use and the subsequent monitoring of the irrigated lands <br />was not adequately addressed in this proposal. <br />• How will the water actually be delivered to the municipalities? What would be <br />the projected costs of a pump/pipeline? Where would the water be stored- <br />presumably Rueter-Hess? What is the exchange potential for the given amount of <br />water? <br />• If water is pumped from the Lower South Platte River, then water quality issues <br />should be addressed. <br />• Projects should at a minimum conceptually describe the technical, institutional <br />and legal elements of a water transfer (eligibility requirement #4). <br />• The budget should be detailed by tasks (and subtasks). <br />• The budget should correspond to the task (and subtask) identified in the scope of <br />work. <br />• Need itemized budget for all direct cost. <br />• Need explanation of indirect costs. Please ensure that the indirect cost relate to <br />this project. <br />Recommen atlon: <br />Considering the goals of the grant program and that the application did not meet several <br />of the eligibility requirements in the criteria and guidelines, staff recommend that funding <br />not be approved at this time for the Lower South Platte Irrigation Research and <br />Demonstration Project. <br />The applicant is encouraged to develop a proj ect that is more directed at the goal of the <br />grant program, that is advancing alternative transfer methods form the literature to actual <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.