My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00051
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00051
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:43:38 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:31:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/24/2001
Description
CF Section - En-bloc Non-Reimbursable Investments Recommendations - Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District - Arkansas Valley Pipeline Feasibility Study
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.
/
5
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
<br /> <br />25 <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />In 1999, a scope of work and budget for a detailed update of project feasibility was <br />presented to the District. Also, a survey of Lower Basin water providers was undertaken <br />by the District to assess interest in an Arkansas Valley Pipeline project and to identify the <br />critical water supply and water quality issues that the project would help to alleviate. The <br />District decided not to proceed with further study at that time while work was progressing <br />on the District's Preferred Storage Options Plan. ! <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Since 'early 2000, interest in the feasibility of aTj Arkansas Valley Pipeline project has <br />increased among water providers in the Valley! due primarily to concems about the <br />quality of existing water supplies and the abili\y of smaller water providers to meet <br />federal drinking water standards. It appears that a~ many as 20 public and private entities <br />may be willing to participate in the study, If t~e pipeline appears to be feasible, the <br />participating entities intend to form an auth6rity for financing, construction and <br />management of the project. <br /> <br />GEl Consultants of Englewood has prepared a preliminary Scope of Work. The Scope of <br />Work proposes a two-step process beginning with: reconnaissance investigations and, <br />assuming the reconnaissance results are favorable; a detailed feasibility analysis. <br /> <br />A preliminary cost estimate for the study is $20q,000. Local participation in study costs <br />will come from each of the study participants;! most have indicated a willingness to <br />provide one dollar per capita of service area population. The District has indicated it . <br />would provide $20,000 for the study and is requesting a grant from the Construction <br />Fund for SO percent of the total study costs. <br /> <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />Staff believes that the proposed study would be v~ry beneficial in assessing the feasibility <br />of a project that could help to alleviate serious waler supply problems for a number of <br />Arkansas Valley communities below Pueblo Reservoir. Staff recommends a Construction <br />Fund grant of $100,000 to the Southeastem Colo~ado Water Activity Enterprise for a <br />reconnaissance and feasibility study of the Arkansas Valley Pipeline. <br />, <br /> <br />Attachments <br /> <br />Cc: Steve Arveschoug, SECWCD <br />Joe Kelley, Water Works Committee <br />Linda Bassi, AGO <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.