My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00401
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00401
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:25:50 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 9:43:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8443.400
Description
Narrows Unit - Reports
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
2/1/1978
Author
US DoI BoR
Title
Special Report Investigation of Review Issues Narrows Unit Colorado
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />,., nr ....\ <br />UUuU <br /> <br />The cost of constructing the distribution canals was based on an <br />average of costs experienced by the Bureau of Reclamation in <br />constructing similar size canals in Kansas and Nebraska. All costs <br />were indexed to a January 1977 price level. Diversion dams on the <br />South Platte River were also estimated by comparison with actual <br />costs experienced by the Bureau of Reclamation. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />Rights-of-Way <br /> <br />The cost of acquiring land for the recharge system was based on the <br />estimated cost of land acquisition for the railroad relocation in <br />conjunction with the Narrows Unit Dam and Reservoir, The combined <br />system to serve the entire recharge area would require approximately <br />2,500 acres for the canal distribution system and 1,158 acres for <br />recharge ponds, <br /> <br />Operation, Maintenance, and Replacement <br /> <br />Annual maintenance costs for new canals were estimated based on similar <br />irrigation canals in Federal irrigation districts. Maintenance of <br />new divers i on dams was also based on experi enced cos ts for s imi 1 ar <br />structures in Federal projects. Consideration was given to <br />maintenance problems unique to recharge systems, such as trash <br />removal, increased weed control, increased earthwork maintenance, <br />and possible ice problems. <br /> <br />Operation and maintenance costs for the existing canals was estimated <br />on a cost per mile basis the same as the new canals in the test area. <br />The change in operation and maintenance costs due to use of the existing <br />canals for ground-water recharge was based on the number of days that <br />both the operation season would be extended and consequently, the <br />maintenance season would be shortened. Shortening the time available <br />for maintenance activities would necessitate the hiring of temporary <br />labor and probably rental of additional equipment to accomplish the <br />required annual maintenance tasks. Only the change in operation and <br />maintenance costs attributable to ground-water recharge operations <br />would be charged to the annual costs of the ground-water alternatives. <br /> <br />An estimate of $1 per cubic yard was used to calculate the annual cost <br />of sediment removal. In addition, the bottom of the recharge ponds <br />would need to be scarified with a disk harrow to insure open flow <br />paths for seeping water. It was estimated that disking would be done <br />twice each year at a cost of $5 per acre of pond for each disking. <br /> <br />50 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.