My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06711
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06711
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:24:01 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:50:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.760
Description
Yampa River General
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
2/7/1992
Author
Unknown
Title
Yampa River Feasibility Study - Progress Reports - February 1992 through April 1995
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
82
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 />00139S <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />Date: March 4, 1992 <br />To: Ray Tenney <br />From: Chuck Brendecke <br />Re: Progress Report for February - Yampa Basin Study <br /> <br />Our work effort in February was direeted primarily at Tasks 4 and 7, with a smaller amount of <br />time spent on Task 1. <br /> <br />Under Task 1, we prepared for and participated in the Technical Steering Group (TSG) meeting <br />on February 13. A summary of the meeting was subsequently prepared and circulated to the TSG. <br /> <br />Under Task 4, we spent some time revising the draft Task 4 memorandum pursuant to TSG in- <br />structions at the Fehruary 13 meeting. This revised,draft will be mailed to the TSG by March 6 in prepa- <br />ration for the next meeting which is scheduled for March 12. Some additional billing on Task 4 will ap- <br />pear in next month's invoice as well; this will reflect time spent on memo revisions in early March. <br />Beyond that I do not expect any further billing on Task 4. <br /> <br />Under Task 7, our efforts were devoted mainly to formulating and executing scenarios reflecting <br />various, water development alternatives. We have now completed initial model runs for flve scenarios: 1) <br />a "no action" scenario, 2) a scenario reflecting a Juniper-based instream flow right but with no new <br />storage, 3) an Elkhead enlargement scenario, 4) a Stagecoach enlargement scenario, and 5) a Williams <br />Fork (HamillOn) scenario, Results of the first three were sent out for review about a month ago. Results <br />of the latter scenarios will be shipped to the TSG by March 6 in preparation for the March, 12 meeting, <br /> <br />Please give me a call if you have any questions or comments on our February work effort. <br /> <br />cc: Sue Uppendahl <br />Bob Norman <br /> <br />cmb:jd <br />N:\pROJECTS\155\TASKl\MEM035,RDT 03/05/92 9:31 AM <br /> <br />Hydrosphere 1002 Walnut Suite 200 Boulder, Colorado 80302 <br /> <br />i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.