Arkansas - LAVWCD - Super Ditc_Application_July2008

Home Browse Search

Alternative Agricultural Water Transfer Methods -Grant Application Form January 2008 incorporate all relevant assumptions and data underlying Program operations. It has the ability to quickly assess the financial impacts of a range of °what ifs?" with respect to participants, lessees, terms and conditions, capital improvements, and all other potential options. Deliverable: Forty-year Financial Plan for the operation of the Super Ditch Company, including the spreadsheet model and its supporting documentation. All of the deliverables far TASK A will be included in an Economics Technical Memorandum Task B - Pipeline Alternatives HDR's Final Feasibility Study discussed above involved an assessment of the exchange capacity remaining in the Arkansas River between Pueblo Reservoir (upstream} and the ,John Martin Reservoir. This quantity was estimated as the minimum flow rate remaining after meeting all existing demand requirements, including minimum instream flows and downstream commitments. While it appears that there may be some capacity to exchange Super Ditch water upstream to Pueblo Reservoir, in reality, much of that capacity may be consumed by exchanges already adjudicated or pending in water court, e.g., Colorado Springs e# al's Colorado Canal decreed exchange, and the Aurora-Highline Canal pending exchange. The Boyle pipeline study discussed above is looking at combining the alignments of four contemplated pipeline projects. Because the Arkansas River exchange capacity is quite limited, it will be necessary to find other means to transport water to the Project's customers. One such option is the construction of new transmission pipeline{s}. This Task will buiid on the information in the Boyle study and identify the following with regard to water leases by the Super Ditch Company: • Required pipeline capacities • Number of pipelines to be constructed {i.e., would there be multiple pipelines taking water from various points along the Arkansas River, or would there be one major pipeline, with branches serving various customers?) • Location and timing of diversions to pumping facilities • Pumpstafion locations and capacity requirements (e.g., number of pumps, pump power requirements, etc.} • Pipeline delivery locations • Cast estimate, including materials, construction, O&M, right-of-wayleasement acquisition, etc. All pipeline configurations developed during this phase of analysis would be preliminary and subject to revision during final design. However, a level of detail would be achieved that is sufficient to meet any requirements for a water court application or local land use permit, as described beiow: 1. Refine the Pipeline Alignment for the preferred alternative {Timber Lakes) • identify more hydraulically efficient alignment(s) • Research and identify environmental concerns and obstacles • Evaluate costs and availability of electrical power 24