DWR_2713951 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Dick Wolfe, P.E. Mr. Steve Witte, P.E. Mr. Bill Tyner, P.E. February 14, 2015 Page 2 of 3 the study period for these farms was adjusted to 1973 through 2002 so as to provide the continuous study period absent Rule 14 dry -up. The Schweizer Farm study period remains as 1984 through 2013 as originally proposed. 2. Additional aerial photography was obtained and evaluated for 1975 since the study period extended to another decade. Figures 5.5, 9.5, 13.5, 17.5 and 21.5, which illustrate the estimated irrigated acreage, are included in the Updated Appendix A at the FTP site. 3. Shapefiles for the 1985 irrigated acreage mapped by Colorado and agreed by Kansas as part of the Kansas v. Colorado litigation were compared to the estimated acreages as illustrated in Figures 34 through 45, also in the Updated Appendix A. This resulted in reducing the irrigated acreage estimated for the Diamond A West Farm in both 1983 and 1993. Note that an error in the Diamond A East Farm 2010 acreage was corrected as noted in term and condition #10.b., and the current irrigated acreage was modified to be consistent with shapefiles provided by Division 2 used as part of the Rule 14 dry -up tracking. 4. The Schweizer acreage has been reduced by 5.15 acres in 2012 and 2013 to account for the area of the Schweizer Recharge Pond installation, which is therefore not included as dry -up under the Catlin Pilot Project. 5. The URFs, in the Updated Appendix H, for deep percolation return flows and the recharge ponds were modified as necessary per term and condition #20, in consultation with Dam Niemala of Bishop and Brogden Associates, Ina The x and w distances are illustrated in Figures 27 through 31 in the Updated Appendix A. Please contact us if you have any questions or any additional information is needed for your review of this submittal of the revised LET analysis. Sincerely, MARTIN AND WOOD WATER CONSULTANTS, INC. Craig M. Lis, P.E. Senior Water Rights Engineer Martin and Wood Water Consultants, Inc.