My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00868
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD00868
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:54:50 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:45:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/12/1955
Description
Minutes
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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 />10 <br />",,19 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"Mutz has spent the entire period <br />working on the San Luis Valley Survey. <br /> <br />"Gildersleeve, in addition to general <br />supervision of engineering studies, <br />attended the Missouri Basin Inter-Agency <br />Committee meeting at Yankton, South <br />Dakota, and spent considerable time on the <br />San Luis Valley survey report and on a Wa- <br />gon Wheel Gap restudy; also, on the Ar- <br />kansas-White-Red Basins Inter-Agency Com- <br />mittee reports. <br /> <br />"From July 13 to the 23d, Crawford, <br />at the invitation of the Metropolitan <br />. Water District of Southern California, <br />accompanied Special Master Haight's party <br />on its inspection of Imperial Valley, <br />Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Irrigation <br />Projects and the Metropolitan Water Dis- <br />trict system," <br /> <br />4, Outline of Work to be done in the Near Future <br /> <br />MR, CRAWFORD: <br /> <br />"Mr, Peterson has spoken to you <br />he may bring up in the future, <br />tentative two-year plan:" <br /> <br />about something <br />I have here a <br /> <br />Two Year Plan <br /> <br />1, Check the Gunnison River Projects having a benefit-cost <br />ratio of less than 1,0 for possible revisions which would <br />bring them above 1,0, <br /> <br />a, Tomichi Creek <br />b, Cochetopa Creek <br />c, Pine Creek <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Study those projects for possible revision, which while <br />having a benefit-cost ratio of greater than 1.0 have an- <br />nual costs greater than ,repayment ability, <br /> <br />a, Cebolla Creek <br />b, Goddard Mesa <br />c, Gateview <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.