CO 2010 Drought Mitigation & Response Plan SOW

Home Browse Search

o Analyze economic impacts (this may be difficult, pending on available data) • Monitoring procedures for drought/water scarcity • Plan for ongoing education • Encourage development of drought ordinances (suggest make optional ?) • Public review • Schedule /plan to adopt and implement the plan • Plan updates and revision process and schedule In the development of the guidance document AMEC will draw upon its experience with municipal water supply planning. In 2003 AMEC was retained by the City of Boulder to develop a Drought Mitigation Plan that incorporated a stakeholder process to 1) model and asses the vulnerability of the City's water supply system, 2) develop drought recognition considerations, triggers and a response strategy, and 3) evaluate how policy, water rate structure changes, long -term water supply strategies, public education, and conservation planning may be used in conjunction with drought mitigation planning. This planning effort incorporated the six CWCB mitigation plan elements outlined in CWCB's Guidelines for the Office to Review and Evaluate Drought Mitigation Plans Submitted by Covered Entities and Other State or Local Governmental Entities. The third part of this task is related to task 2 - data collection platform /NIDIS coordination. This will involve coordinating with other consultants so that the state or local entities can link to, or connect directly into, existing web -based monitoring systems. AMEC will facilitate communications on this topic between the state and key personnel at NIDIS, National Drought Mitigation Center, Colorado State University (Colorado Climate center), Utah State University, and other organizations. AMEC has teamed with Riverside for this element of Task 6, who will recommend what a fully functioning data collection platform /decision support system would entail, including: (i) the data requirements of the system; (ii) the architectural design of the system with details on how it might be connected to, or adapted for, use within the state's CDSS framework; (iii) the potential to extend innovative systems such as the 'Dynamic Drought Index for Basins (in North and South Carolina)' to Colorado's physiographic and climatic setting; (iv) opportunities to embed elements of drought risk assessment within a web - based drought decision support tool, particularly opportunities to utilize enhanced or new drought indices developed as part of the modernization of the state drought plan; The above recommendations will be synthesized in a technical memorandum for consideration by the CWCB in future drought planning initiatives in Colorado. amecO 17