Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Merriman <br />May 71999 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />a slight reduction of flows in the Williams Fork, including those periods of time when <br /> <br /> <br />the natural streamflow is inadequate to fulfill the instream flow water rights, <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Depletions caused by operation of the Drive House Well may slightly impact <br />instream flow on the main stem Williams Fork, together with a segment on the South <br />Fork Williams Fork, A summary of the estimated maximum stream depletion through <br />December 2000 is enclosed as Table 3. The maximum impact will be 0.33 acre-foot <br />during August 1999. equivalent to 3,3 gpm or 0.005 cfs. Table 4 is a summary of the <br />pumping impact on each affected reach of instream flow water right along the South <br />Fork and the main stem Williams Fork. On a percentage basis, the maximum impact of <br />2,3 gpm will be equal to 0.1 percent (one tenth of one percent) on the South Fork <br />Williams Fork. Because there is more water in the river at downstream locations, the <br />impact declines to .01 percent (two hundredths of one percent) at downstream <br />locations. This impact is obviously less than the CWCB's .one percent" de minimis <br />threshold, <br /> <br />In discussions with the State Engineer's staff (Kimberly Willson and Craig Lis), <br />they are satisfied with the proposed terms and conditions of the Substitute Water <br />Supply Plan, subject to approval by the eWCB with respect to the instream flow matter. <br />Climax urgently needs such approval so that its water supply for the Drive House <br />Building can be assured. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />------------ <br />------------ <br /> <br />e <br />