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 />II <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />the Narrows decree is 180,700 ac-ft per year, while that for the 1981 Hardin <br />filing is 150,300 ac-ft per year. <br /> <br />The storable flow for the 1981 Hardin Dam filing was subjected to a <br /> <br /> <br />reservoir operation study using a matrix of assumed storage values and assumed <br /> <br /> <br />demands to estimate the net available water at the Hardin Dam site. The <br /> <br /> <br />Narrows decree was similarily evaluated using selected storage values and <br /> <br /> <br />demands. It was concluded there was little difference in net yield from that <br /> <br /> <br />of the 1981 Hardin filing. The sizing and costing of the project then pro- <br /> <br /> <br />ceeded to conclusion utilizing the 1981 Hardin filing. <br /> <br />ANALYSIS OF PROJECT YIELD <br /> <br /> <br />The market for water depends on its price. Since price, demand and <br /> <br /> <br />project output are all interdependent, it is highly speculative to estimate a <br /> <br /> <br />reasonable or optimum allocation of active storage without extensive economic <br /> <br /> <br />analyses. Such analyses were beyond the scope of this study. To overcome <br /> <br /> <br />this problem it was decided to study and present the results of a range of <br /> <br /> <br />assumed active storage volumes and assumed demands. The results of the <br /> <br /> <br />operation studies for these assumptions is a graphical relationship between <br /> <br /> <br />construction cost, conservation storage volume, reliability and quantity <br /> <br /> <br />of reservoir yield. <br /> <br />Cost, capacity, reliability and yield data for conservation pools <br /> <br /> <br />ranging in size from 150,000 to 600,000 ac-ft using reservoir operation <br /> <br /> <br />studies were developed. Because of the large fixed costs of foundation <br /> <br /> <br />preparation and providing surcharge storage, a minimum conservation pool of <br /> <br />200,000 ac-ft was selected. A conservation pool of 600,000 ac-ft was selected <br /> <br /> <br />as the upper boundary, because it is the maximum volume which can be stored <br /> <br /> <br />without flooding significant development at Greeley during the inflow design <br /> <br /> <br />flood. On the basis of these studies a conservation pool of 400,000 ac-ft <br /> <br /> <br />with a yield of 100,000 ac-ft per year at 90 percent reliability was selected <br /> <br /> <br />for detailed study. <br /> <br />iii <br />