Laserfiche WebLink
<br /><::> <br />00 <br />C"". <br /> <br />c <br />c;:. <br />:-:;:-~}';.-. <br />..... 'J'. <br />".,:.- <br /> <br />SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS (Continued) <br /> <br />provided for a reservoir on the Gunnison River with a base load powerplant <br />only; one plan did not have storage impoundment but included recreational <br />and environmental features and a provision for M&I water by pumping; and <br />one plan was an environmental quality emphasis plan which did not provide <br />a reservoir, powerplant, or M&I water system, <br /> <br />Four alternatives selected as candidate plans from among the nine <br />were a peaking power plan, an environmental quality emphasis plan, a <br />nonstructural plan, and a municipal and industrial water plan. After <br />selection, these plans underwent further study and refinement, and minor <br />changes were incorporated to improve their efficiency. <br /> <br />The peaking power plan was originally selected as the recommended <br />plan and was investigated at the feasibility level, while the others were <br />evaluated at the appraisal level. This selection was based on several <br />factors. Based on original projections, this plan would appropriately <br />have satisfied the needs for M&I industrial water, for base load and <br />peaking power, for recreation, and for water quality improvement. This <br />plan would have the highest benefit-cost ratio (2.01:1) and the greatest <br />net annual benefits ($62,459,000). The plan received broad public sup- <br />port with project sponsors who expressed a need and a willingness to pay <br />for the water supply provided by the project. <br /> <br />More recent studies, however, performed by Western Area Power Admin- <br />istration (Western) indicated the need for peaking power in the future <br />would be less than earlier studies predicted. This new projection made <br />it necessary for Reclamation to reevaluate its entire program for peaking <br />'power development in the CRSP market area. A peaking power prioritiza- <br />tion study was conducted to determine which projects were most cost ef- <br />fective and could or should be implemented first. The results of this <br />study indicated there are several other proposed projects in the CRSP <br />area which could provide peaking power at less cost per kilowatthour <br />(kWh) than the Dominguez Project, one of which could be on line at an <br />earlier date, <br /> <br />This situation coupled with the fact that there are abundant energy <br />resources in western Colorado which, if developed, would create the need <br />for a large quantity of M&I water, prompted Reclamation to formulate and <br />examine at appraisal-level the municipal and industrial water plan. This <br />plan could satisfy future M&I water needs associated with the emerging <br />communities and potential energy-related developments along the Colorado <br />River corridor between the Utah border and the headwaters of the Colorado <br />River. The oil shale industry may require as much as 834,000 acre-feet <br />of additional water by early in the next century, about the time Dominguez <br />Reservoir water could be made available. This plan also has a positive <br />benefit-cost ratio (1.17:1) and would have net annual beneficial effects <br />of $62,249,000. However, explicit interest in this amount of M&I water <br />and a willingness to pay if it became available were not identified, <br />Moreover, crucial water allocations will be facing the State of Colorado <br />in the next 2 decades as the State's entitlement to the river approaches <br />complete utilization. This plan would have used about 250,900 acre-feet <br />of the State's remaining Colorado River entitlement. <br /> <br />5-3 <br />