|
<br />9. WILL ELECTRICAL COST TO PROJECT INCREASE? Electrical power for pumping
<br />will be purchased from the Colorado River Storage Project. The rate establish-
<br />ed for this power must be sufficient to pay annual operating costs, provide
<br />for replacements, pay interest charges, repay those costs of the reservoir's
<br />that are allocated to power, assist in repayment of reservoir costs that are
<br />allocated to irrigation, pay certain salinity costs, and provide assistance
<br />in repaying the irrigation allocation of the authorized participating pro-
<br />jects (including Animas-La Plata Project). The present trend of these factors
<br />on which the power rates are based is upward so it appears certain that
<br />electrical costs to the project will increase. Since this power is generated
<br />by water power and does not include a fuel cost factor it should rewa in an
<br />economical source of energy for project pumping. The present commercial CRSP
<br />power rate is $1.34 per kilowatt-month and 3.4 mills per kilowatt-hour. This
<br />is only a fraction of the cost of comparable power on the market today.
<br />
<br />Power
<br />Personnel
<br />Direct Power Transmission Line 0 & M
<br />Major Replacements
<br />Equipment
<br />Direct Pumping Plant 0 & M
<br />Supplies
<br />Admin. and General Expense
<br />Special Items
<br />
<br />SOCIAL IMPACTS
<br />
<br />ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />I
<br />!
<br />
<br />$1,090,800
<br />155,860
<br />33,200
<br />76,970
<br />53,840
<br />33,200
<br />19,650
<br />18,320
<br />1,630
<br />$1,531,930
<br />
<br />~
<br />i
<br />l
<br />I
<br />,
<br />I
<br />I
<br />
<br />~:
<br />
<br />j;;
<br />,
<br />,
<br />t
<br />'I
<br />:.,
<br />;,
<br />
<br />t;'
<br />
<br />"
<br />~
<br />
<br />t~
<br />~
<br />,
<br />..~
<br />
<br />t'
<br />t~
<br />a~
<br />~;
<br />I)J
<br />~
<br />
<br />~ "
<br />
<br />i':
<br />'.
<br />:,'
<br />~
<br />
<br />: ..~
<br />
<br />1. How H V THE S C O-ECONOM C MPA T F NED?
<br />T e start1ng p01nt for ana1yz1ng social 1mpacts 1S the study of popula-
<br />tion change. This was done by the Bureau of Reclamation using information
<br />obtained from city, county, and state planning departments on past growth
<br />trends and future population projections. Federal census figures were also
<br />used for past growth trends. The Bureau then developed a medium-growth pro~
<br />jection for the various urban and rural areas within the project area.
<br />Mountain West Research of Tempe, Arizona, developed for the Bureau of
<br />Reclamation a computer program utilizing these population projections, to
<br />analyze the impacts of Bureau projects. The analysis also involves migration
<br />patterns, labor supply and demand, economic patterns, and construction worker
<br />profiles. The profiles were developed by the Bureau through analysis of
<br />worker preferences on past projects and include such information as how far
<br />workers would commute rather than relocate, how many workers would bring wives
<br />and children or move to the construction area alone, what kind of housing is
<br />preferred, what features in a town would lead workers to choose to live there
<br />rather than in other nearby towns, etc.
<br />
<br />1.'1.
<br />
<br />"
<br />
<br />:1
<br />;
<br />~
<br />
<br />2. WHAT ARE THE LOCAL AREA POPULATION PROJECTIONS BOTH WITH AND WITHOUT
<br />THE PROJECT?
<br />
<br />Year
<br />
<br />La Plata
<br />
<br />with
<br />proJect
<br />28,328
<br />39,896
<br />
<br />39,647
<br />81,555
<br />
<br />1979
<br />1988
<br />1990
<br />2020
<br />
<br />(height of project)
<br />(end of project)
<br />
<br />,
<br />,
<br />"
<br />f."
<br />
<br />County
<br />wit!).out
<br />proJect
<br />28,328
<br />35,952
<br />38,101
<br />79,792
<br />
<br />Difference - %
<br />0-0
<br />3,944-10.0
<br />1,546-4.1
<br />1,763-2.2
<br />
<br />1
<br />~I
<br />
<br />~~.
<br />",,';;,
<br />iif
<br />
<br />3
<br />
|