Laserfiche WebLink
exercises to test response procedures. AMEC has found this method is the best way to <br />validate, or discover deficiencies, in any response plan. If desired, AMEC could design <br />and conduct a "Table Top" exercise of the plan, that would include an after action report <br />and improvement plan. The exercise would be an add -on to this scope of work. AMEC <br />will provide a separate scope and cost for this if the CWCB is interested in this value - <br />added service. <br />3.3.4 A time line of when the taskforces are activated <br />AMEC understands, through our staff's past development of the updated Drought Plan, <br />that establishing a time line of when the Impact Task Forces are activated will vary <br />depending on the nature and severity of the drought. Currently the activation is based <br />on a combination of water supply indicators (SWSI, Palmer, and SPI) and the <br />recommendations of the Water Availability Task Force (the one task force that is always <br />activated on a quarterly basis, or more frequently as conditions dictate, is the State's <br />drought monitoring advisory board). The update to the plan will assess the validity of <br />these trigger thresholds (were they low enough to create timely response in 2002, or are <br />they too low and over - responsive ?). This should also incorporate other methods and <br />tools for drought monitoring, such as NIDIS and NOAA drought monitoring and drought <br />forecasting tools, and the NDMC Drought Impact Reporter. <br />3.3.5 A timeline of communication measures (i.e. drought declaration from the Governors' office <br />follows declaration from the Water Availability Task force) <br />AMEC will facilitate the process of developing the mitigation and response strategy. <br />AMEC feels that this is best developed as part of a collaborative planning process, and <br />will steer the Planning Team in its development. Communication timelines and <br />procedures will be built into the exercise noted previously. <br />3.5.4 Discuss how Colorado water law, using the System of Prior Appropriations, allocates water, <br />especially in times of shortage, and the role that this system plays in a comprehensive state drought <br />plan. <br />On average Colorado experiences a multi -year drought approximately every 20 years. <br />The pressure of repeated droughts, exacerbated by a burgeoning population, requires <br />that drought mitigation and response plans fully understand and are functionally tailored <br />to the current system of water rights while at the same time recognizing the value that <br />individuals and communities place on water. Citizens who do not fully understand water <br />rights may have strong values and opinions about where water should and should not <br />be used during shortages. Some communities with limited water resources are planning <br />for growth periods by purchasing excess or surplus water from water rights holders, <br />including farmers, but this trend has some potentially catastrophic outcomes in periods <br />of drought. For example, in 2002 the 'surplus' water simply was not there. In drought <br />periods water conservation can thus be critical even for communities with senior water <br />rights. <br />Our team brings individuals uniquely qualified to revise and enhance areas of the <br />Drought Mitigation and Response Plan that are both tightly coupled and more loosely <br />connected to the binding principles of Colorado's System of Prior Appropriations. We <br />will assess the current and future context of water demand and supply within a water <br />rights framework, and flesh out the role that this system plays in a contemporary, <br />comprehensive state drought plan. <br />amecO 11 <br />