PROJ00098 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION The study will be conducted by personnel assigned to the Grand Junction office. Additional expertise is available on an lias needed basis" from any of the staff in other offices to meet the requirements of the study. A proposed work schedule is shown in Figure 1. This schedule indicates a minimum time of approximately eleven weeks would be needed to complete the project. This schedule assumes that reviews of data and recommendations and meetings for input from the Town, Division of Wildlife, National Park Service, and other affected agencies and persons can be obtained in a timely manner. It also should be noted that in order to have an eleven week schedule ending on August 2, 1976, the study should begin by May 17, 1976. There are four decision points shown in Figure 1, three of which are important to completing the program as scheduled. The fourth decision point will be important in fulfilling the stated objective for doing this study, i.e., providing a satisfactory water supply. Decision points 1, 2, and 3 are those points where decisions are expected to be needed from the citizens of Fruita as well as one or more agencies before the study can continue with any degree of acceptability. The following discussions explain the types of decisions to be made and the reason and basis for making them: . Decision Point 1: Basic available data regarding water usage and population projections will have been collected and evaluated prior to this point. An agreement now needs to be reached by all interested parties as to what future population and rate of usage will be designed for. Without this agreement, subsequently computed cost estimates, facility sizes, and water rights needs may all be in error for all alternatives. Decision Point 2: By this time, cost estimates, soils studies, land ownership data and water quality data will have been developed. Summaries of this data will be provided to interested parties to decide which alternatives deserve further attention. It is expected that institutional issues related to each alternative will also be discussed at this point. Examples of issues that need addressing include: . Legal agreements required to buy water from the Ute Water District. If Fruita buys water from the Ute Water District, who will maintain and upgrade the distribution system. Is an Environmental Impact Statement needed to maintain and improve the existing pipeline within the Colorado National Monument boundaries. . If these decisions and issues are not discussed, a fair evaluation of alternatives may be quite difficult. Decision Point 3: Cost estimates, pay-out schedules, user charges, and institutional concerns will have all been addressed by this point.