PROJ00239 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . CHAPrER II COMPREHENSIVE PLAN all projects except the participating projects which have been authorized and for which feasibility studies have been completed. In Colorado the Paonia, Smith Fork, Florida, and Silt projects have been authorized, and feasibility investiga.tions have been completed for the Savery-Pot HOOk, Bostwick Park, Fruitland Mesa, Animas-La Plata, and Dolores projects. In Utah the Emery County project and the initial phase of the Central Utah project have been authorized but feasibility investigations have not been completed for any other projects. Apportioned revenues could, of course, be available at considerably later dates than presently indicated if other proposed participating projects were given priority. Before authorization is sought for the Juniper project, the situation with respect to the avail- ability of apportionments from the basin fund would need to be carefully reviewed. Power Repayment , , pqwer revenues from the Juniper project would average $680,000 annu- ally as previously discussed. After payment of the annual operation, main- tenance, and replacement costs allocated to power ($1~8,OOO), net power rev- enues would total $542.000 annually. Juniper project power would be sold with that from powerplants of the Colorado River Storage project units a.nd other participating projects through the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund. The combined net power reve- nUes of the storage units and participating projects would be used to pay the combined power costs of the units and participating projects. Follow- ing this payment and the payment of the portion of the costs of the Colo- rado River Storage units allocated to irrigation, net power revenues of the Juniper project would be apportioned to Colorado and Utah. Inclusion of the Juniper project power development for repayment would increase by a few months the time that would otherwise be required for repayment of the combined power costs of the presently authorized units of the Colorado River Storage project and other participating projects. Inclusion of the development also vould slightly reduce the apportionable paver revenues in the basin fund for States other than Colorado and Utah. Irrigation costs of participating projects which have been authorized or for which feasibility studies have been completed could be repaid within the required repayment periods in spite of the slight delay in the availability of revenues that would result from inclusion of the Juniper project power costs. If Juniper project power reVenues and costs vere not pooled in the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund, a period of :about 88 years after the beginning of project power production would be required for net power revenues of the project to repay the project power allocation of con- struction costs and interest during construction. A periOd of 50 years for repayment of reimbursable projects costs is required by the Colorado River Storage Project Act. 55