PROJ00427

• Contract/PO #: FS0028X
• Contractor Name: Avery Lake USBR 1976
• Contract Type: Miscellaneous
• Water District: 0
• County: Rio Blanco
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Feasibility Study

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

',I'

Of the six plans evaluated, one was considered by the planning team
to be the most likely blend or compromise oJ features needed to meet prob-
able future conditions. This "MOP 'Compromise" plan is only a'tenative se-
lection at present and is subject to improvement or complete elimination
as the study continues. The plan provides water for all purposes consid-
ered, including coal and oil shale uses, irrigation, and municipal use.
The plan includes two reservoirs. A reservoir on Milk Creek would pro-
vide a regulated water supply for irrigation and coal uses. Enlargement
of an existing reservoir on Big Beaver Creek, a tributary of the White
River, would provide regulation of flows for oil shale and coal industry
uses, for municipal and domestic uses, and for irrigation of lands near
the White River east or Meeker, Colo. A diversion dam and conduit would
convey the water supply from the White River to turnouts for the various
project uses or to the enlarged reservoir for storage. A key concept in
the plan is the flexibility of operation afforded by the system without
the necessity of a reservoir on the White River itself. Project water re-
quirements could be met most of the time by gravity flow through the con-
duit from the river, but water stored in the enlarged reservoir could be
returned to the conduit when needed by means of a pumping plant. Recrea-
tional facilities would be built at each reservoir and fishing access
easements would be acquired. The plan also provides for acquisition of
private land to be managed for wildlife use.

Comparisons of the six alternative plans are summarized below.

.~ - .,

Comparison of alternative plans

Water supply (1,000 acre-feet)
Surface ir~lgatlon 30.4 8.5 10.3 8,' 8.5
Sprinkler irrigation 17.9 17.' 26.8 17.9
011 shale industry 30.0 60.0 60.0 60.0
Coal industry 37.2 35.0 54.5 30.9 35.0 30.0
Municipal 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 LS
Total 72.6 66.4 112.1 131.6 126.4
Areas served' by irrigation (acree)
Full service 8.000 8.800 9,150 12,430 8.800
Supplemental service 3.140 3.140 3.030 3.140 J.UD
Total 11,140 11,940 12.180 15.570 11.940
Construction costs ($1.000) $68,250 $68.610 $81,150 $95.160 $7'.800
Ben~fit-cost ratio 1.06:1 1,10:1 1.44: 1 1.53:1 1. 11:1

Without oil ahara
SprInkler
Surface and surface Coal
lrr1gat1t)n Irdaatlon emphasis

With oil shale
Oil shale
and
lrrh:ation

1I'ederal en-
vironmental
management
Mop COtll- with private
promise development

;.,.

As investigations continue, the Yellow Jacket Project is being ab-
sorbed as a unit of the broader Upper Colorado Resource Study initiated
in January 1976. This broader study covers the Lower Yampa River Basin
below Craig, Colo., and the entire White River Basin in Colorado and Utah.
The study will identify reasonable alternatives, including non-Federal de-
velopment, to meet the water requirements for prototype oil shale de' e~op-
ment on tracts C-a and C-b in Colorado and U-a and U-b in Utah. Prim~ry
considerations also include water requirements for Indian lands of the
Ute tribe east ~f Ouray, Utah, snd for development of the tribe's mineral

2