Laserfiche WebLink
<br />_ 0' :j~; __', - <br /> <br />"h'~ <br />';A <br />-j[ <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />40,000 acre feet of water for in basin uses comes from the same project, the size of the project .- <br />must be about 320,000 to 640,000 acre feet. . <br /> <br />Existing water projects in Colorado that hold at least 120,000 acre feet (acre-feet estimates have <br />been rounded to the nearest thousand): <br />· Colorado River Basin: Green Mountain (154,000 AF) and Dillon (257,000) reservoirs. <br />· South Platte River Basin: Horsetooth Reservoir (154,000 AF). <br />. San Juan River Basin: McPhee Reservoir (381,000 AF). <br />· Arkansas River Basin: Trinidad (123,000 AF), Turquoise (129,000), Twin Lakes (141,000), <br />Great Plains (266,000 AF), Pueblo (350,000 AF) and John Martin (603,000 AF) reservoirs. <br />· Gunnison River Basin: Blue Mesa Reservoir (941,000 AF) <br /> <br />The CWCB estimates that, based on cost curves provided by staff and engineering consultants, it <br />would cost about $1,000 per acre foot to construct a project with a storage capacity of several <br />hundred thousand acre feet. A project that yields 120,000-acre feet may cost from $240 to $480 <br />million or more. A project that yields 160,000-acre feet may cost from $320 million to <br />$640million. <br /> <br />It will also conservatively cost at least 10 to 20 percent more to complete the necessary planning <br />and design studies, secure the water rights and land, complete the legal work, obtain lhe permits <br />and complete any required mitigation. Thus, if it costs $480 million to construct a project, it may <br />cost $96 million to get to the point of beginning construction. <br /> <br />By comparison, the recently constructed Wolford Mountain Reservoir holds 66.000-acre feet and <br />yields about 38,000-acre feet. It cost $42 million to build the project, including about $10 <br />million to get the needed permits and do the necessary mitigation. Three people work full time <br />managing the project. The planning, design and permitting of the project lOok aboul eight years. <br />It should be noted that no extensive mitigation was needed for this project because only a few <br />hundred acres of wetlands existed to be mitigated and the project was not controvcrsial. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Another useful comparison might be the proposed Two Forks Project. The project was designed <br />to yield 98,000-acre feet of water and had a capacity of more than 1 million-acre feet. Prior to the <br />project's Clean Water Act 404 permit being vetoed by the EPA, about $10 million was spent. <br />The total project cost was estimated to be at least $440 million. <br /> <br />Coincident with the Two Forks permit review process the Denver Post in 1988 conducted a cost <br />comparison of large existing water projects: <br />· McPhee Reservoir -- $450 million, completed in 1989. <br />· Frying Pan Arkansas Project (Ruedi, Sugar Loaf, Twin Lakes and Pueblo reservoirs) -- $530 <br />million, completed in 1987. <br />· Aspinall Project (Blue Mesa, Morrow Point and Crystal reservoirs) - $140 million, <br />completed in 1980. <br /> <br />In order to operate and maintain a project of the size mandated by the bill the CWCB would need <br />more than $1 million annually and at least five additional FTE. e <br />