Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />confluence with Bear Creek. However, if the Town diverts from <br />storage as it proposes, there would not be a direct reduction in <br />stream flow or loss of dilution water. This positive effect on <br />water quality will occur the vast majority of time under the Town's <br />proposed use of Bridal Veil watet'. <br /> <br />SMVC Comment (1/14/98 letterl: <br /> <br />A measuring device designed to determine the streamflow <br />of the San Miguel River should be constructed at a location above <br />the confluence with Bear Creek. <br /> <br />Town's ReSDonse: <br /> <br />The Town will install a streamflow measuring device on <br />the San Miguel River at a location above its confluence with Bear <br />Creek. <br /> <br />SMVC'S Comment (1/14/98 letterl: <br /> <br />A "floor" on the minilllUltl streamflow in the affected reach <br />should be considered by t.he CWCB. <br /> <br />Town'lI ReSDonse: <br /> <br />The Town has addressed this issue by limiting its allowed <br />diversions under the mitigation plan to 1.0 cfs. This amount is <br />that which is minimally necessary to insure the health, safety and <br />well being of the Town's population during a defined emergency <br />condition. The mitigation measures outlined in the plan were <br />developed to specifically offset any possible adverse effect <br />associated with the Town's eme:t"gency withdrawal of water from <br />Bridal Veil creek. <br /> <br />SMVC'S Comment (1/14/98 letter): <br /> <br />The Town's consultants concluded that the reliable yield <br />of Mill Creek was inadequate for expansion based upon a study that <br />assumed a one year in 50 dry year event. This is too conservative <br />and the basin yield should be reevaluated using less conservativ~ <br />assumptions. <br /> <br />Town;. ResDonse: <br /> <br />It is prudent and an accepted engineering standard to <br />plan for and develop municipal water supplies with sufficient <br />reliability t'O withstand a one year in 50 drought condition. <br />Moreover, a new study using less conservative planning assumptions <br />(~year in 20 for example) would not appreciably change the <br />projected winter base flow and therefore would not alter the <br />conclusion that Mill Creek streamflows are inadequate to meet <br />future commitments. A new, additional source of supply other than <br /> <br />i <br /> <br />r""T ...TT. .J <br /> <br />"""'~ t"tl oelO ~_ ....l":\t"-~ ,-, ,_"~., ,.... .-""!C1"lt1 '-1-1 J........T oe 0':" It.n..I,. <br />