Laserfiche WebLink
KINGSLEY DAM RELICENSING <br />POTENTIAL WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES <br />At the request of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) was <br />asked to evaluate potential water conservation measures that Central Nebraska Public Power <br />and Irrigation District and Nebraska Public Power District (the Districts) could possibly <br />implement to meet environmental obligations associated with the Federal Energy Regulatory <br />Commission (FERC) relicensing of their hydropower facilities. <br />The information presented herein includes estimated quantities of diversion reductions which <br />could be achieved under various scenarios, and estimated costs associated with achieving the <br />reductions through water conservation measures. Specifically, estimated quantities of <br />irrigation diversion reductions are presented under several scenarios with a cost of $10.4 <br />million (constant 1996 dollars), which is the amount identified for water conservation <br />implementation under the Preferred Alternative of FERC's November 1995 Biological <br />Assessment for Kingsley Dam and North Platte /Keystone Diversion Dam Projects (1995 BA). <br />The 1995 BA RDEIS is not clear with- regard to whether annual operation, maintenance, and <br />replacement costs during the 40 year period are included in the $10.4 million, or if an inflation <br />provision is included to recognize increased costs through time from the 1996 constant dollars. <br />Based on a telephone conversation between John H. Lawson of the Bureau of Reclamation and <br />Robert Mohn on behalf of FERC, the following direction was provided: <br />(1) Annual operation, maintenance, and replacement costs were included in the $10.4 <br />million of the 1996 constant dollars. <br />(2) An inflationary clause is to be included to provide for cost escalations through <br />time. This could possibly be done by using the consumer price index (CPI). <br />Water conservation measures identified for consideration include both delivery system related <br />' measures and on -farm measures. Delivery system measures identified include irrigation <br />scheduling modifications, improved flow measurement (irrigator headgate metering), seepage <br />control (canal lining), and groundwater supply development. On -farm measures identified <br />include installation of gated pipe, surge valves, and reuse pits, and the use of crop strains with <br />lower moisture requirements. <br />Implementation unit cost estimates (dollars per acre -foot) have been developed for each of the <br />above measures. The unit costs developed are based on an economic evaluation of initial <br />' installation, future replacement, and annual operation and maintenance costs over a 40 year <br />period. Based on the unit costs developed, several of the above measures were eliminated <br />from further analyses for this discussion. Those eliminated include all of the on -farm <br />measures and improved flow measurement. These measures were eliminated due to their <br />relatively high unit costs. It is significant to note that other benefits associated with on -farm <br />measures, such as increased crop yields, are not included in these evaluations of relative cost- <br />' effectiveness. The remaining measures include canal lining, groundwater supply development, <br />