BOARD00102 ‎(2)‎

• Board Meeting Date: 1/23/2007
• Description: CF Section - Construction and Severance Tax Trust Fund Perpetual Base Acct New Loans - Greeley Irrigation Co. - Greeley Canal No. 3 Rehabilitation
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Greeley Irrigation Company
January 23-24, 2007

Agenda Item 9a

reasonable condition except for some downstream foundation repairs that are needed. .
The original work was done with wood pilings and the anticipated repair will consist of
removal of the pilings and pouring of a downstream concrete foundation wall. It is also
anticipated that broken up concrete from the existing diversion structure can be used as
riprap material. Currently, the structure is not capable of delivering decreed flows.

2. Hiqhwav 34 Structure Improvements - The structure at Highway 34 needs improvements
to create a suitable water surface level for gate deliveries while avoiding the risk of
overtopping. A solution to this problem has been conceptualized and probable
construction costs developed for an actuated gate to control upstream water surface
level. A long-crested weir is envisioned as well to allow excess flows to bypass the
structure in the event of a gate failure.

3. Pipinq and Canal Lininq Improvements - Piping and lining of the canal is considered to
be an improvement that could provide significant reduction of seepage and improve
canal operations. Several alternative pipe materials are under consideration and piping
is being compared to lining from the cost and longevity standpoints. Pipe materials
selected for analysis were aluminized steel pipe, HOPE pipe, reinforced concrete pipe,
PVC, and ductile iron pipe. The analysis of the different piping systems looked at the
ease of installation, flow characteristics, durability, and cost of materials. It was
concluded that the most optimal pipe material would be HOPE pipe and Ultra-Flow
aluminized steel pipe. These pipe materials are very different and have different
characteristics. Final selection of the material for each reach to be piped will be made
during detailed design.

4. Tree Removal - Large trees adjacent to the canal have been undercut over time by .
water flowing in the canal. Tree limbs clog the canal and a toppled tree could shut down
canal operations at critical times. It is proposed that the worst case condition of
undercut or diseased trees be removed. Trees will be marked, the removal work will be
competitively bid, and work will be contracted with one or more tree removal companies.

5. Headqate Repair, Replacement. or New Installation - The Soard and the superintendent
have identified locations where old, unused headgates will be removed. In other cases
headgates need repair or new headgates/flow measurement devices must be installed.

ifhe GIC Soard and the superintendent have broken the various discrete cost elements of the
project into three rankings for priority - Year 1 (highest priority), Year 2 (moderate priority), and
~ear 3 (lower priority). Year 1 (highest priority) improvements total $783,600, Year 2
(moderate priority) improvements total $1,064,000, and the Year 3 (lower priority) improvements
total $609,900 for a total of $2,457,500.
I
he Total Project cost is summarized as follows:
1. Engineering Design
2. Construction (ine!. contingency)
TOTAL

$ 271,900
2,185,600
$2,457,500

Schedule - The project will be implemented over a multi-year period, generally between Spring
I
.2007 and Spring 2009. If the loan is approved by the CWCS, design would start in April -July
I
2007 for those items requiring engineering and construction documents. Construction for these .
items would start as soon as the canal is shut down in the Fall of 2007. Repair and partial
~eplacement of the GIC river diversion is expected to occur between October 2007 and March

40f6