|
<br />I
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />It was eriginally designed to supply 15,000 acre-feet for M & I and
<br />60,000 acre-feet fer irrigatien. In t971, the Kemmerer Ceal Company
<br />eptiened 24,000 acre-feet, and the project changed to 57,000 acre-feet
<br />fer M & I and 8,800 acre-feet for irrigation.
<br />
<br />In 1972, Cengress appropriated $250,000 fer a censtructien start. These
<br />funds were frezen by O.M.B. In 1974, $400,000 was appropriated, frozen,
<br />and then released. The Ridgway Reserveir site has been changed three
<br />times. In fiscal year 1975, $450,000 was appropriated and has not been
<br />used. In the fiscal year 1976, $4,500,000 was apprepriated and in all
<br />probability will not be used.
<br />
<br />Will Cengress continue to. appropriate construction funds? Tri-County
<br />is concerned that it will not. What is the treuble? First, Tri-Ceunty
<br />has never been able to. get a definite plan report en the preject, ner
<br />a repayment contract, a1theugh we have come clese a ceuple ef times.
<br />In January 1975, it leoked as theugh the Dallas preject ceuld net fail
<br />to be under censtruction that year. Unfertunately, the Governer ef
<br />Colorado asked the,'Bnreau to remeve the Kemmerer Ceal Company from the
<br />project and restere it back to agriculture. This was finally done, but
<br />at a cost ef nearly a year in time and several mil lien dellars due to
<br />inflation.
<br />
<br />In 1976, it leeked as theugh everything was meving again. The,project
<br />was now 27,500 acre-feet fer M & I and 19,100 acre-feet for agriculture.
<br />The timetable in 1976 was the E.I.S. hearing April the 17th, the definite
<br />plan report to be completed in May and on May the 13th the repayment
<br />centract was presented to the Tri-Ceunty Board. It was decided at this
<br />time that the Dallas Reservoir and the Leg Hill Mesa increment ef the
<br />project could net pay its prepertienate share of the cost, which was
<br />appreximately $40,000,000, and wou~d have to. be drepped. The Tri-
<br />Ceunty was teld that this weuld cause very little delay because the
<br />Dallas and the Ridgway segments were figured separately, and that elimi-
<br />nation of the Dallas Reservoir and appurtenances weuld remeve most of
<br />the ebjections to. the environmental impact statement, and it sheuld be
<br />appreved with little trouble or delay.
<br />
<br />When the repayment plan was presented again, it was feund that the
<br />revised preject could net justify the Ridgway Reservoir to. the size ef
<br />125,000 acre-feet. So., the Tri-Ceunty Board agreed to. scale the reser-
<br />voir size dewn to 80,000 acre-feet. This caused much censternation
<br />ameng the peep1e in the district. When asked what delay this weuld
<br />cause, the Bureau said it weu1d still try to. cemplete everything so the
<br />repayment centract could go to a vote ef the peep1e before the end of
<br />fiscal year 1976, which is October the lst, so. that the apprepriated
<br />menies ceuld be spent in this fiscal year. Tri-Ceunty was very dis-
<br />appeinted and dismayed to. learn on July 27 ef the revised timetable
<br />which now sets the develepment plan repert appreval in February of 1977,
<br />the environmental impact statement gees to. the Council on Envirenmental
<br />Quality in March of 1977, and the electien in May 1977, a delay ef nine
<br />monthsg The Board realizes that the reduction in the size ef the res-
<br />ervoir ceuld cause a cemplete revision of costs, but it is very appre-
<br />hensive ever this delay. Our Cengressman has infermed us that there is
<br />
<br />-25-
<br />
|