My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD01632
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
FLOOD01632
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/23/2009 10:40:29 AM
Creation date
10/4/2006 10:11:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Community
State of Colorado
Title
Water Efficiency Programs
Date
11/7/1991
Prepared For
State of Colorado
Prepared By
Colorado Water Congress
Floodplain - Doc Type
Educational/Technical/Reference Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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 />~ <br />'- <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />!i ~ <br /> <br />In order to keep the competition for grants as open as <br />possible, we request that the Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />not rank categories for water conservation measures. Proposals <br />should be allowed to compete for funding on their own merits. We <br />believe that to do otherwise would limit creative ideas. <br /> <br />RESEARCH <br /> <br />There is no mention in the proposed guidelines of water <br />conservation activities related to research. Apparently, this is <br />because of difficulties in developing a concrete measure of the <br />results of research. Certainly, having a measure of results is <br />important. However, one of the goals of the program should be to <br />stimulate creative thought; therefore, research should form an <br />important aspect of this goal. We request that research be added <br />as a possible category of water conservation measures. <br /> <br />APPLICABILITY OF PROGRAM <br /> <br />There seemed to be some confusion at the meeting as to who <br />can apply for grants and who is required to develop a Water <br />Conservation Plan. This is probably due to the definition of a <br />.covered entity. in House Bill 91-1154. This defines a "covered <br />entity. as a water purveyor who supplies at least 2,000 acre-feet <br />per year. These entities are required to develop plans. In <br />contrast, all public agencies are eligible for grant awards. <br /> <br />Your proposed guidelines do make this distinction. However, <br />it would be helpful to have it further highlighted for those of <br />us that have a lot of information to absorb and little available <br />sotrage space. <br /> <br />APPLICATION REVIEW CRITERIA - PREVIOUS HISTORY <br /> <br />When reviewing the application, several criteria were given. <br />You state that the qualifications of the project manager are <br />important. Along the same lines, it would be beneficial to <br />require that the entity requesting a grant also include a history <br />of what it has done in the area of water conservation. The <br />proven track record of the applicant should receive some <br />consideration. <br /> <br />I appreciate the time that you spent meeting with the CWC <br />Water Conservation Committee. It was informative for all. I <br />hope that you will continue to keep us up to date on the progress <br />of your program. <br /> <br />Sincerely yours, <br /> <br /> <br />Dou as Kemper, Chairman <br />Water Conservation Committee <br />Colorado Water Congress <br /> <br />cc: Re~. Pat Grant <br />Sen. Tom Norton <br />Ken Salazar <br />Kim Hout <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.