PROJ00113 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. TRANSMITrAL for recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement and all costs of flood control would be nonreimbursable. Irrigation costs for each block of land would be paid in a 50-year period following the availability of water and a suitable farm develop- ment period. The costs would be covered by payments made by the irriga- tors in accordance with their estimated ability, ad valorem taxes levied by the San Miguel Water Conservancy District, and revenues from the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund of the Colorado River Storage project appor- tioned to Colorado. Apportioned revenues required for the San Miguel project from the basin fund are estimated at about $45,068,000. Accord- ing to tentative schedules these revenues would be available to Colorado prior to the time they were needed even with allowances made for prior commitments to all authorized participating projects in Colorado and to the Animas-La Plata, Dolores, Dallas Creek, and West Divide projects in Colorado which have not yet been authorized but which have been investi- gated and found justified as participating projects. . All municipal and industrial water costs would be paid by the water users. Construction costs would be paid with interest at the rate certi- fied for the year in which project construction was started. Under the Water Supply Act of July 3, 1958 (72 Stat. 319), payments on construction costs of storage facilities for municipal and industrial water use could be deferred until the storage water was first put to use. Payments for each block of water would have to be completed, however, within 50 years after use was first made of the water in that block. Non-Federal interests would be required to repay the reimbursable costs of recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement. Under Public Law 89-72 these interests could pay the costs with interest over the 50-year repayment period from a portion of the entrance and user fees collected by them on the project and from such other sources as may be necessary, or they could discharge the obligation by payments, provisions of lands, interests therein, or facilities for the project. Economic Justification The project would be economically justified. The ratio of total benefits to average annual equivalent costs is estimated at 1.52 to 1. Cooperating Agencies . The Bureau of Reclamation sponsored the investigations leading to this report. Other interested Federal agencies collaborated in the stud- ies, including the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, National Park Service, Corps of Engineers, Public Health Service, and Bureau of Mines. Reports of these cooperating agencies or excerpts from their reports are 4