Laserfiche WebLink
<br />L_ <br />, <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />0814 <br /> <br />FRYlNGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT, COLORADO <br /> <br />25 <br /> <br />It is interesting to note that no Bureuu witness contradicted testi- <br />mony offered in prior hearings of the increased cost of construction if <br />covered conduits are found to be required. <br />. In view of t.he foregoing, tbe eCOllOI11ic j usLification :LIld finllllc-ial <br />feasibility of the power development as proposed for the project is <br />highly quest.iorluble, which casts doubt, on the ft~l\.sibility of the- ent.ire <br />project. <br />'(d) The high cost of the irrigat,ioll features of (,he projcet,-$21 i per <br />acre construction cost for a supplementlll water supply of 0.6 aCl'e- <br />feet per acre, which is equivalent to $1,156 per nere fol' 11 full wn.t.er <br />supply-present a serio liS question fiS t,o t.he just,ificut.inn for t.he <br />project us II Fedt~ral reclt-uunt.ion undert.llking. As compured t,o t.his <br />cost, tIle average. value of irrigated fnrmlund ill tlie ltrCtl does not <br />exeecd $225 pel' acre. If, as indictlted oy test.imony of Bureau of <br />Reclamat.ion wit.nesses, the se.rvice ftl'('.\\' ".;ere. reduced from t.he orig- <br />inltlly proposed :332,000 acres to 280,000 aeres or less, the cost per acre <br />would be incrcl1sed proportiontt.tcly b:v 10 percent. or more. <br />There is no assurance t.hat t,h~ i,'rign.t.ors <,_ollld or \\'"olllrl pll'y t,he <br />prop()St~tll'Hf,e of $:).4(1 per HI:-rt'-foot. for proje(',f, wllkr. (Tlte prnjrct, <br />pl:llllling report, f011l1l1 t.llIlt. t.lle ilTigllllll'S ,\-uuhl ue <lull' Lu p:l} ollly <br />!f::Uif.l pl'l" Hl'l'e-fooL). ~Iol'el)\'l'r, t'~lilllaLI.~d l"l'pnYIlll'r\[.s rnlll1 ('011- <br />sen':llll'.\" distl'ict, t.uxes :tpJlC'nr to Iw O\"Nopt.imistic llnd not, fllll.y <br />assllf(ld. It, appears impr(lhl1.hle, t.hc.rdol'e, t.l1ut. ilTigat.iull revenues <br />as cstinh\tcd could or would he l'I~ldii'.t.'\l. <br />(e) The t'COlltJlllic justification uf Lhe project is eluimed on the basis <br />of an unrealistic evululltion of benefits lLnd costs with benefits esti- <br />mat.ed over n. pCl'iou of 100 yenrs, which i::i bighl.v specullltivf'.. Lnl'ge <br />indirect Lenefits ul'e included. <br />One of the most st.artling features of the testimony offered to the <br />Congress this year is the report from the Bureau of Reelamlttion tlwt <br />the benefit cost ra.t,io of UlC irrigat.ion features of t.he projeet, bused on <br />estimat,ed direct benefits are in excess of 1 to 1 ratio. This is the <br />Sttnle project Oil which. the eame witnesses hn..ve appeared before prior <br />Congresses and stated that the bellefit cost mt,io of the irrigation <br />features of the project, bused on est,imateo. direct benefits on the <br />basis of a 50-yem' payout period. to be substltntially less (,han 1 to 1. <br />This complete cbange of test,imony by the some people on the figuring <br />of cost benefit ratio is further evidence of the fact, tbat t.heir economic <br />justification is baseu all un unrealistic evuluation of benefit cosl.s. <br />3, The ArkuIlsilS River development fcut-ures of the project Ilppear <br />to be u feasible I'CclnIlllltion undert-a.king which could Le Iluthol'ized <br />as il Sept\l'llte unit" exduding the costly llnd uneconomic trunsmountl\in <br />diversion llI1d power fCIl.turcs of t.he project. . <br />It appCHI'S from the report of t,bf' BUI'P;ul of ReclllIllat,ion (H. Doc. <br />187, s;~d C\mg.) thut, the AJ'knnstls River dc\~{-'lopment. fC:lturcs of the <br />Fryingpnn-.Arknns.l1s project could he (;,tI'ried out, independently of the <br />propospcl trflnslllollnt.nin diycl'sion fent,ures flS :l fillunei,dly feusible <br />undl'l'tnking under existing I'Cclllnll1t.ion bw. A cllpit:tl cost of' $50 <br />million would cover the {'nt.ire cost of such Il development, including <br />the rost of mUllicipl\1 wnt,el'-slIpply deli\"er,v systems. Thc rcim- <br />bursl\.hle cost of the wllter supply it.self nggl'eguting 92,000 llcre-re.e\ <br />n yelli' would only be $ 19../Jt19,OOO. <br />