Response to Comments on the Colorado River Wat

Response to Comments on the Colorado River Water Supply Availability Scope of Work - October 19, 2007 Individual and/or Date of Comment Response Organization Comment sufficient time be allowed during the study for roundtable understanding of the CDSS which will form the basis of mem bers and other water users to develop a thorough phase one of the study. Review the CDSS manuals for understanding and confidence in the study assumptions, data, each sub - basin. These are available on the web and water availability modeling. If understanding and acceptance http://ibcc.state .co.us/Process/Needs/WaterSupplyAvailab ( of the water availability model are not achieved, it will impede the follow - on w ork needed to assure adequate water for Colorado. ility/ ). Under “helpful links” you can access the Basin Background Information References and the Basin Water Resources Planning Model User's Manual for each sub - basin included in the CDSS. GBRT 10/3/07 Specific su ggestion a) Section 4b of the Scope of Work changed from a “four week A minimum of eight weeks is needed at Task 4b for roundtable period” to an ”eight week period” and under the Phase I members to review summaries and model documentation. Four Schedule, the completion month for Phase I changed from weeks is inadequate for members to complete their reviews and March 2009 to June 2009. for roundtables to meet and adopt comments. GBRT 10/3/07 Specific suggestion b) Task 4d in the scope of work was amended to include The scope of work, timeline, study funding should provide a dditional workshops with roundtable members . There will flexibility to allow the consultant, as necessary, to loop back in an also be c onsultations on individual basin’s water supply/uses. iterative process to refine earlier tasks based upon the outcome of Comments will be solicited from roundtable members on draft later tasks. For example, it appears that the first output from the water availability modeling will not be circulated for review by the products and incorporated into the study documents. roundtables until completion of Task 9 which is at the end of the study. However, based upon the review of this output by the roundtables, it may be beneficial to have the option to go back and refine data, modeling, as sumptions, or other technical aspects of model operation addressed in earlier tasks, and them to make further simulations of water availability before the Phase I Report is completed. GBRT 10/3/07 Specific suggestion c) Each Roundtable already has the ability to establish sub - Conf idence and understanding of the model would be enhanced if committees and it would be helpful so the study team can work members of the consultant team could bring portions of the water with a smaller committee rather than the full roundtable. allocation model (sub basin or smaller) out to the West Slope as they are being developed and in the early testing phases, and demon strate them to water managers, the division engineer, and/or interested roundtable members. These would be sit down sessions at the computer during which existing operations of key facilities in the basin would be simulated to see if the simulations match the kind of operations that are observed by water managers in the field. Each roundtable should be provided with the opportunity to appoint its own roundtable technical advisory committee which will be consulted with by the study management team and the project consultants. GBRT 10/3/07 2) The GBRT requests that a more precise ex planation of what is The definition of these terms will be refined in Task 3 – meant by “water availability” and “water use” be included at the preparation of Glossary of Terms. top of page 2 of the scope of work. The scope of work should 6 of 10 Page