Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />In Water Year 1994, a low runoff year in the Upper Colorado River Basin, the Lower <br />Cactus Valley Ditch diverted a total of 17,970 acre-feet according to the diversion <br />records for Water District 39, The Town of Silt's present ownership of 6.43 shares, or <br />2,38 percent, would indicate a headgate yield for the Town of about 428 acre-feet. In <br />comparison with the estimated RWIS demand figures in Table 2, it appears as if the <br />present ownership in the Lower Cactus Valley would have been more than adequate, <br /> <br />Analvsis of Alternatives <br />Two alternatives are analyzed here based on information provided in the Gamba report <br />and on information provided by the Town of Silt: <br /> <br />1. The With RWIS Alternative is The Raw Water Irrigation System as <br />described above, and <br /> <br />2, The Without RWIS Alternative represents the improvements needed to the <br />existing water supply system in the absence of the RWIS, <br /> <br />The capital cost estimates for the two alternatives are summarized on page 23 of the <br />Gamba report and are included in Table 4 below, Operation and maintenance (O&M) <br />costs for the two alternatives were estimated by Gamba and are also included in Table 4, <br /> <br />The annual cost shown in Table 4 is the sum of the annual debt service (amortized <br />capital costs) for the two alternatives and the annual O&M costs. Annual debt service <br />was estimated by amortizing the capital costs using 4,0 percent for 30 years, It should be <br />noted that, for purposes of comparison, the O&M costs for the Without RWIS <br />Alternative are the incremental costs for the improvements listed on page 23 of the <br />Gamba report and not the costs for the entire system. <br /> <br />8 <br />