Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001256 It <br />Draft Task 7 Technical Memorandum <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Sub-task 7a primarily involved incorporating project alternatives identified through <br />Tasks 3 and Task 5 into the Yampa River Basin Model. The basin model was developed in <br />Task 4 of the Feasibility Study. Task 7 occurred simultaneously with efforts originally <br />identified under Task 6 and included development of plan formulation and evaluation criteria <br />and development of alternative projects. Alternative projects were specified in ways so as to <br />allow input to the model. This sub-task also involved testing the model to ensure that defmed <br />projects operated in the desired way. <br /> <br />Sub-task 7b involved evaluation of projects incorporating only near-term components. <br />This task was accomplished by running the basin model using the projected near-term (2015- <br />level) demand and operating only existing and near-term storage projects. <br /> <br />Sub-task 7c involved evaluation of projects incorporating near and long-term project <br />components. This was accomplished by running the basin model using the projected long-term <br />(year 2040-level) demand along with existing, near and long-term storage projects. <br /> <br />The primary focus of Sub-task 7d was to make adjustments to project cost estimates. <br />Minor modifications to project alternatives which occurred during the iterative modeling and <br />evaluation process resulted in some changes to the estimated cost. <br /> <br />This Task 7 Technical Memorandum is a synthesis of our investigations of alternative <br />projects in the basin and is the product of Sub-task 7e. <br /> <br />Sub-task 7f was defined as a contingency task and involved the evaluation of potential <br />environmental impacts associated with development of a long-term project and the potential <br />requirement and cost of mitigation efforts. This sub-task has not been carried out at this time. <br /> <br />The objective of Task 8, as defined in the original Feasibility Study scope of work, was <br />to review project alternatives defined and evaluated in Tasks 6 and 7 and determine if changes <br />or refinements should be made to the projects. This task in fact was performed throughout <br />Tasks 6 and 7 as many model revisions and refinements were made. Model revisions occurred <br />as additional information became available on historical operations of reservoirs and opinions <br />of the USFWS on flow requirements necessary to promote the recovery of the Threatened and <br />Endangered Fish. <br /> <br />EVALUATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES <br /> <br />Alternative storage projects addressing only near-term conditions and both near-term and <br />long-term conditions were evaluated. It was necessary to conduct evaluations of near-term- <br />only alternatives for at least two reasons: 1) to identify and remove any masking effects that <br />long-term project components have on evaluation of impacts of near-term project operations, <br />and 2) because somewhat different evaluation criteria were needed for the two categories of <br />project components. <br /> <br />Primary factors considered in evaluating near-term alternatives included: <br /> <br />. Ability to meet near-term water demands. <br />. Opportunity for reservoir-related recreation near Craig <br />. Potential for instream flow/tailwater fishery enhancement <br />. Impact on flows recommended in the Recovery program <br />. Water rights considerations in transfer of Juniper decrees <br />. Environmental impact (on and off site) <br />. Cost of project development (capital and unit cost) <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />,jj;c;'';'. <br />