My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD01223
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
FLOOD01223
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 12:58:21 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 9:51:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Community
State of Colorado
Stream Name
South Platte
Title
Upper Platte River Basin Study 1979-83
Date
1/1/1979
Floodplain - Doc Type
Flood Mitigation/Flood Warning/Watershed Restoration
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
279
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 />,.$'-"\\1 <br />.$' ..'" ~.., II, <br />:; ~~"~ <br />f( SEAL U <br />, " ~i!I <br />t"~"",,,," <br />'\\.\.'-~ <br />W. H. MILLER <br />Secretary-Manager <br /> <br /><;Boara 01 quater eommiobobiol1.erob <br /> <br />1600 West Twelfth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80254 Phone 623-2500 <br /> <br />MARGUERITE S. PUGSLEY, President D. DALE SHAFFER, ht Vice-President <br />CHARLES F. BRANNAN JOHN A. YELENICK JAMES B. KENNEY, JR. <br /> <br />May 5, 1982 <br /> <br /> <br />David Walker <br />Deputy Director <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />828 State Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Walker: <br /> <br />Transmitted are the Denver Water Department's comments on the <br />draft report 'Water Use and Management in the Upper Platte River <br />Basin' prepared by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. <br /> <br />In the short period provided to review this report, it is diffi- <br />cult to completely analyze and evaluate the validity of this <br />intensive study. In addition, a valid review would require <br />inspection of all three segments of the technical studies as <br />performed by the U.S. Fish and wildlife Service, the U.S. Geologi- <br />cal Survey, and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Therefore, at <br />this ttme, we will reserve any opinions or comments on the overall <br />,~'.'~ & <br />valLdLty of thLs study effort. <br /> <br />Some general comments do come to mind after reviewing the draft <br />prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation. These comments pertain to <br />some of the included data and to the demand requirements for metro <br />Denver. <br /> <br />First, there is a question with respect to the information <br />provided in the tables on existing and future reservoir projects.. <br />We are not sure that this information is actually used in the <br />study analysis. For example, presented in the po't"'mtial projects <br />table are the estimated project costs for various potential <br />projects. It is not clear as to whether or not this information <br />is applied in the overall analysis. If it is not, then it is not <br />clear why the information is presented. <br /> <br />Second, there is some uncertainty with respect to the projected <br />demand for the Denver metro area. It is not clear in the study <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.