Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- <br /> <br />Chapter V - Evaluation of Alternatives <br /> <br /> <br />A.3 Social Structure Impacts <br /> <br />There will not be any impact on existing neighborhoods and communities or on employment. <br />The project will not increase the storage of the reservoir; therefore, will not impact the surrounding lake- <br />front property land owners. <br /> <br />B. Institutional Considerations <br /> <br />The institutional requirements for the project were previously addressed in Section A. Table V-I <br />lists the federal institutional requirements for the project. <br /> <br />Table V-I lnstitutional Requirements <br /> <br />A ene <br /> <br />Re uirements <br /> <br />U.S. Arm <br /> <br /> <br />Nationwide 404 Permit <br />Construction Dewaterin Permit <br /> <br /> <br />C. Comparative Evaluation <br /> <br />The plans were evaluated based on costs and technical merit since the previously mentioned <br />evaluation factors are common to all alternatives considered for the project. <br /> <br /> <br />C.1 Alternative 1 - Upstream gate <br /> <br />A standard method for rehabilitating an existing outlet works, similar to the existing outlet works <br />at Horseshoe Dam No.2, is to sleeve the existing pipe and construct an upstream inlet works. The SEO <br />usually prefers this approach since the outlet pipe is not pressurized under normal operating conditions. <br />The construction of this alternative would be the fastest and the most cost effective. The one <br />disadvantage to this alternative, is that there is only one gate. There is not a backup or emergency gate if <br /> <br />Horseshoe Dam NO.2 Outlet Works Study <br /> <br />25 <br /> <br />BOYLE <br />