Laserfiche WebLink
<br />003~42 <br /> <br />", <br /> <br />SYNOPSIS <br /> <br />develops, US(.) of the site for irrigation would fflve preference O'ler usa <br />fQr river regulatior. for compact purposes, or power production. <br /> <br />The Shiprcock a~d South San Juan project studies have been mf\de on <br />t.k f'.ssumption that these projects would have exclusive use of the sito. <br />'Phe required reservoir oll.pacities have been estimated variously from <br />1'37,000 acre-feet to 546,000 acre-feet for the Shipr0ck project alone <br />qnd from 524,~oo acre-feet to 1,954,000 acre-feet for the combined <br />Shiprock and South San Juan projects. A capacity of 1,200,000 acre-feet <br />was planned for the Navajo Reservoir as a unit of the Clo10rado River <br />Storage project. Possibilities for joint use of the site to accomplish <br />so far as possible the purposes of all three of the projects as well as. <br />for any replacement storage needs of the potential upstream San Juan- <br />Chama transmountain diversion project should be investigated in future <br />studies. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Potential hydropower development at Navajo Dam, or at t~e ~rop from <br />the combined highline canal to the Shiprock Gravity Canal, with water <br />releases for project needs have not been appraised under the several <br />project plans. In either case, however, the electric-energy production <br />would be governed by the amounts and seasonal distribution of diversions <br />for project needs and would have no material effect on the relative <br />economic justifiability of the South San Juan project. <br /> <br />It is not within the purview of this report to segregate one or more <br />plans for the South San Juan project as being most worthy 01' further <br />investigation. Prerequisite to such a selection are deoisions on the <br />broader questions mentioned in the first paragraph of this discussion. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />v <br /> <br />