PROJ02040

• Contract/PO #: CT2015-034
• Contract/PO #: C150206
• Contractor Name: Overland Ditch and Reservoir Company
• Contract Type: Loan
• Water District: 0
• County: Delta
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Feasibility Study

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

which will result from the proposed project and total marlcet values of $4,804,570 to $5,951,930 (loan
to value ratios of 0.44 to 0.36 respectively) for the final total reservoir storage after completion of the
proposed project of7,171 ac-ft.

Following is a summary ofthe collateral value estimated as discussed above:

Table 6 - Collateral Value
STORAGE LOAN TO
VOLUME CWCB LOAN VALUE
METHOD (AC-FT) TOTAL VALUE AMOUNT RATIO
Least Cost 97l $5,340,500 $1,130,000 0.21
Alternative
Least Cost 7,171 $39,440,500 $2,133,600 0.054
Alternative
Potential Water Sales 971 $650,570 - $805,930 $1,130,000 1.74 - 1.40
Potential Water Sales 7,171 $4,804,570 - $5,951,930 $2,133,600 0.44 - 0.36

The above figures indicate that, on the basis ofleast cost alternative, the collateral has more than
sufficient value to cover the loan amounts. On the basis of potential water sales, even though the
loan to value ratios are insufficient when considering only the value of the additional water storage
produced by the proposed restoration project, when the entire project is considered (including
outstanding loans), the loan to value ratios are adequate.

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS:

The estimated economic benefits from the project are discussed below:

1. The project will have the ability to supply 600 acre-feet or more of augmentation water to the
area. The economic benefit ofthat can be measured in teIlIls ofthe least cost alternative to
supply the same amount of water. The difference between the least cost alternative
($5,500/ac-ft) and the project cost ($1,292/ac-ft) is $4,208/ac-ft. This represents at least
$4,086,000 of benefit.

2. In a 1976 Overland Fteservoir feasibility study, it was estimated that a full agriculture
irrigation supply consisted of about 4 acre-feet/acre. Therefore the 371 acre-feet of water not
designated for augmentation would provide a full irrigation supply for about an additional 93
acres of currently non-irrigated land. The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis data indicates
that, in 2003, average Delta County fPross faIlIl income was about $195/acre. Therefore, on
the basis of fPross income, this additional irrigated acreage represents approximately $18,000
in economic benefit.

3. There are additional unmeasured economic benefits. For example, it is lilcely that some, or all
of the water designated for augmentation use related to the coal industry will rarely, if ever,
be used. This will require that the water be held over which will effectively result in an
increase in the minimum annual pool level. There will be associated fishery and recreation

12