My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00569
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00569
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:26:38 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 9:50:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8449.860
Description
South Platte Projects - Metropolitan Denver Water Study
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Date
1/1/1985
Author
USACOE
Title
Metropolitan Denver Water Supply Environmental Impact Statement - Appendix 4 and 4b - Water Sources For Future Supply
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
EIS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
50
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 />~ <br /> <br />pal water supply. Projects that were determined to be technically <br /> <br />feasible for municipal water supply advanced to step three. <br /> <br />Step three estimated the potential safe yield of the water source <br /> <br /> <br />and determined whether a safe yield could be reliably produced in the <br /> <br /> <br />future. A safe yield is defined as water that can be supplied during a <br /> <br /> <br />drought. Water rights requirements were considered during this step. <br /> <br /> <br />If the water source produced a safe yield during dry year demand <br /> <br /> <br />periods, it qualified for consideration in step four. <br /> <br />Step four determined the unit cost per acre-foot of the safe yield <br />produced. The water sources were evaluated individually in this step. <br />Although water sources that could operate in combination may have <br />improved efficiencies that could reduce the overall unit costs of the <br />yield produced, such speculative combining was not done at this stage. <br />Project costs were based on known capital, ope rat ion, and maintenance <br />costs of the individual project. The costs were Slnnualized at 8 <br />percent over the life of the project. For the purposes of this EIS, <br />water sources that would have an annual cost of approximately $1,000 <br />per acre-foot of safe yield or more were considered too expensi ve and <br />were eliminated from further analysis. The sources eliminated by this <br />procedure are described and evaluated in technical appendix 4A. <br /> <br />The technical appendix 4B water sources are not being analyzed at <br /> <br /> <br />a site-specific level of detail because they are not alternat i ves to <br /> <br /> <br />the Two Forks Dam and Reservoir or the Williams Fork gravity extension. <br /> <br /> <br />The water sources included in technical appendix 4B are the Straight <br /> <br />Creek Collection System, East Gore Collection System, Green Mountain <br /> <br />Pumping Collection System, Eagle-Piney/Eagle-Colorado CollectIon <br /> <br />System, Blue River Exchange/Joint Use Reservoir, Satellite Well Field, <br /> <br />Projects of Other Water Providers, and Gross Reservoir Enlargement. <br /> <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.