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 />B) Pipeline Alternative <br /> <br />1) Maintenance <br /> <br />The pipeline alternative should be relatively maintenance free. However, <br />due to adverse subsurface conditions, it should be assumed that there will be <br />some future maintenance costs associated with this alternative. The routine <br />maintenance anticipated will be restoration of pipe cover material in flood <br />plain areas due to erosion, scour problems at river crossings and regrading <br />of settled cover material. For life cycle analysis, it was assumed that $2,000 <br />annually will be spent on maintenance. <br /> <br />2) Access Roadway <br /> <br />It is anticipated that the maintenance road be located along the pipeline <br />route on the western bank of the Colorado River. This road will require <br />periodic grading and maintenance. For this analysis, it was assumed that <br />$1,000 annually will be spent on the road maintenance. <br /> <br />The result of this life cycle analysis is presented in Table 7.1. <br /> <br />The result of the life cycle analysis indicates that the tunnel alternatives A-I, A-III, B-1 and B-III <br />have a lower present value and therefore represent more cost effective alternatives than the bypass <br />pipeline alternative. Based on our preliminary calculations utilizing HGL presented in WEt's report, <br />the flow capacity of both water transmission systems alternatives will meet and exceed the current <br />predicted demand of 15 MGD (22.4 cfs). <br /> <br />7.2 Schedule Comparison <br /> <br />A comparison of the estimated schedules for both the proposed alternates revealed that both the <br />tunnel and pipeline alternative will be completed in approximately 8 to 12 months. <br /> <br />7.3 Comparative Evaluation <br /> <br />To compare the most feasible alternative, a rating method was devised for this project. This rating <br />system assigns numerical values from 1 to 10 to different features of each alternative. These <br />features include: design, construction, permitting, and right-of-way considerations, construction costs, <br />and construction duration. The rates will be assigned based on criteria outlined in Table 7.2, and <br /> <br />44 <br />