Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />8 <br /> <br />COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD <br />Department of Natural Resources <br /> <br />823 State Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (3031866-3441 <br /> <br />October 5, 1982 <br /> <br />Company <br /> <br /> <br />Richard D. lamm . <br />Governor <br /> <br />D t~rq~5(Wl <br /> <br /> <br />JAf{ 1.1 '9 <br />'" 183 <br />COLOR <br />CONSfRII~~OONW.4iER <br />Dear Nelson: eO~RD <br /> <br />As you will recall, paragraph 9 of the January 1, 1982, <br />contract between Tudor and the State of Colorado (Contract <br />Encumbrance Number C153368) provides that changes in Exhibit B <br />(Scope of Services) to the contract may be made without executing <br />amendments to the contract itself. The purpose of this letter is <br />to confirm in writing changes which have already been agreed to <br />orally. <br /> <br />J. William McDonald <br />Director <br /> <br />Mr. Nelson Jacobs <br />Tudor Engineering <br />910 15th Street <br />Denver, CO 80202 <br /> <br /> <br />David W. Walker <br />Deputy Director <br /> <br />Specifically, it is stated under "Conduct of the Study" in <br />Exhibit B, at the top of page 2, that no more than six <br />preliminary alternative projects will be developed in Phase I of <br />the study. By this letter, I am confirming my previous <br />instructions to you that eight preliminary alternatives be <br />developed in Phase I. Would you please acknowledge this agreed <br />upon change by executing the statement below and returning a copy <br />of this letter to me. <br /> <br />As you know, Exhibit B also specifies that only one or two <br />alternatives will be selected for further analysis in Phase II <br />(see "Conduct of the Study" at page 2). The Board has, of <br />course, concluded that three alternatives should be retained for <br />Phase II analyses. In light of this, the larger number of <br />preliminary alternatives developed, and the need to focus phase <br />II on the economic evaluation of the selected alternatives, it <br />will be necessary to reduce and reorient the scope of Task 12 <br />from that now set forth in Exhibit B (see page 8). <br /> <br />Attached for your review is a draft of revised Tasks 12 and <br />13 (Study Schedule) in Exhibit B. This draft has also been <br />prepared to serve as a substitute for Tasks 12 and 13 in the <br /> <br />222 <br />jwmjnj <br /> <br />Robert A. Jackson, Chairman. John R. Fetcher, Vice Chairman <br />eM. Furneaux, Floyd l. Getz, Dale F. Grant, Richard W. Johnston, Jr., Frederick V. Kroeger, David W. Robbins. Herbert H. Vandemoer <br />