My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PRRIP Goverance Committee Agenda
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
2001-3000
>
PRRIP Goverance Committee Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:39:13 PM
Creation date
6/22/2009 1:21:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8461.750
Description
Governance Committee
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Author
PRRIP
Title
PRRIP Goverance Committee Agenda
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
process, identifying the issues for a presentation from each candidate, and request a writing <br />sample by Apri120. <br />Program Financial Management Entity <br />The States and DOI are working on authorizing an extension of the current NCF contract through <br />September 2007. The GC needs to decide how to proceed with a long-term FME for the <br />Program, if the GC decides to continue with the NCF, negotiations should begin soon to allow <br />plenty of time for contracts. John Lawson noted that the DOI can extend current agreement for 5 <br />years, but not indefinitely. Colorado may have some issues with simply extending the current <br />contract further into the Program beyond September, and Colorado is working on getting this <br />issue clarified. Colorado will report back at May 2 meeting. The GC agreed that they would like <br />to continue with the NCF using a contract extension if contracting rules and regulations within <br />the States and DOI will allow. <br />Funding Requests <br />• Approval of RFP and funding for Water Delivery Study - Mike Purcell reported that <br />the Subgroup developed an RFP to implement the study identified in the Program <br />document. The RFP explain the system and the constraints of the system. Phase I of <br />the study will be to look at the existing three state projects and the projects in the <br />Water Action Plan. If the desired flows can not achieved with these projects, then the <br />contractor will begin to consider other projects not currently identified. The <br />estimated budget for Phase I is $75,000. The GC approved announcing the RFP, <br />contractor selection using the current subgroup, and the budget up to $75,000. If all <br />contractor budgets are above $75,000 for Phase I, the issue will be brought back to <br />the GC. Any wark on Phase II will need further GC approval. The subgroup will <br />consist of Mike Purcell, Alan Berryman, Brian Dunnigan, Mike Drain, John Lawson, <br />and Mark Butler. <br />• Platte River Vegetation Mapping Proposal - Felipe Chavez-Ramirez provided an <br />update on a proposal from an existing cooperative effort in Nebraska that has started <br />mapping existing vegetative conditions in the region. Felipe noted that the AMWG <br />identified the need to map different vegetation types in Program study area and track <br />the changes during the Program. The proposal is to fund technicians to do the <br />remaining ground truthing in the Program area. Funds are needed in early summer <br />(May/June) to start the mapping. Funds would be directed to the Trust to hire <br />technicians and technicians would be supervised by FWS personnel. The GC <br />requested that the TAC review the proposal and make a recommendation to the GC at <br />the May 2 meeting. <br />• Database Management System Funding - Dale reviewed past discussions during the <br />Cooperative Agreement on funding the database management system start-up. <br />Options to create and maintain the Program's database are 1) go to bid (RFP) with an <br />independent contractor or 2) negotiate directly with a party like the USGS. Dale was <br />asked to draft a proposal with the pros and cons of the different options, have the <br />FAC review the proposal, and return to the GC with a recommendation. <br />Land Interest Holding Entity <br />This document is a draft based on one person's notes of the meeting. The official meeting minutes may be different <br />if corrections are made by the committee befare approval. Page 3 of 4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.