My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01880
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD01880
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:08:21 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:04:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
4/1/1982
Description
CWCB Meeting
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.
/
102
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 />COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />823 State Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver. Colorado 80203 <br />Phone; n03) 866-3441 <br /> <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />o <br /> <br />RichardO. Lamm <br />Governor <br /> <br />M E M 0 RAN DUM <br /> <br />I. William McDonald <br />Director <br />David W. Walker <br />Deputy Director <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />Members, CWCB <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />Bill McDonald <br /> <br />DATE March 26, 1982 <br />II' <br />SUBJECT: Aqenda Item/9, April 1, 1982, Board Meeting-- <br />Meetinq--Dominguez Reservoir <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />As you will recall, the Board reviewed this proposed project <br />at its February meetina (see my January 28 memo for details). I <br />subsequently informed the Bureau of Reclamation of the_~oard' s <br />position in a letter dated February 22 to Clif~Barnett~ the \( <br />Rea ional Di rector (copy attached). --- /' <br /> <br />Mr. Barrett, in a letter dated March 5 (copy attached), has <br />responded. His letter expresses concern about proceeding with a <br />feasibility study of the M&I formulation of the project. This <br />matter is brought to your attention in order that you might <br />consider whether a response to Mr. Barrett is in order. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />Mr. Barrett's March 5 letter raises two main issues: (1) <br />whether commitments for the 221,200 acre-foot annual yield of the <br />reservoir are likely to be forthcoming, and (2) whether Colorado <br />is prepared to devote such a large increment of its remaining <br />compact entitlement to this project (an estimted 250,900 <br />acre-feet per year including reservoir evaporation). <br /> <br />with respect to the first item, reclamation law does not <br />require that letters of intent or commitments to purchase the <br />water supply of a potential project be forthcoming before the <br />Bureau can proceed to perform a feasibility study. Indeed, such <br />a requirement would be inconsistent with the purposes of <br /> <br />ed <br />ai/9 <br /> <br />Robert A. Jackson, Chairman. John R. Fetcher, VICe Chairman <br />eM. Fumeaux, Dale F. Grant, Richard W. Johnslon, Jr. Frederick V. Kroeger, David W. Robbins, Herbert H. vandemoer <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.