WSP03108 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

lD Plan~ ,C\l loit 1 }nits 1 \& 2 (a) Inits 1 &. 2 (b) llnits I, 2, 6 J (a) Units I, 2, & 3 (b) Unitsl&2/ (/-~ tts ~) COMPARATIVE APPRAISAL OF PLANS Deseri tion Serves \Illite Riv..er drainage only Addition of lands in Axial Basin to above Increase stream diversion from above plan for increase in M&l supply Same as Units 1 and 2 (3) \.Jith addition of S~Jeetbriar Reservoir Substitution of Rio Blanco Reservoir for Sweetbriar in above plan Benefit to cost.'Tatio Net annual benefits $ Original Yellow Jacket Studies 1.20:1 (2) 1.85: 1 (3) 0.84:1 (2) 1.52: 1 (3) 0.97: 1 (2) 1.64: 1 (3) 1.18: 1 (2) 1.79: 1 (3) 1,07: 1 (2) 1.62: 1.(3) + 185,300 (2) + 797,200 (3) 334,000 (2) +1,109,500 (3) 77,900 (2) + 1,365,100 (3) + 436,500 (2) +1,879,500 (3) + 194,000 (2) +1,637,000 (3) Combined Juniper and Yellow Jacket Studies Serves same irri~ted area os Unit 1 in original studies, but "Yellow Jacket Canal less expensive l~ovides increased irriga- tion to area in vicinity of Axial and Hamilton, Colorado Units I, 'Z'i ' Combination of units 1, 2, ~__,.(~ and 3 ~its 1, f,)~~dition of Ri~ple Creek ,__ & 6 ,:Meservoir -to Units land 2 --,"-_._~--I'- , for d&l t>urposes Unit 4 Ju.niper Project wit:l the addition of service to the remaining Axial Basin lands Junil>er :'roject as ~rcsentcd in the 1963 Reconnaissance Report Unlt5 4 &: 5 Units I, 2, 3, & 4 Units 1, 2, 3, 4, &: 5 Units 1, ~, 3, ~ L' 6 Units I, 2, 3,4, 6, ano Rio Blanco Reservoir Addition of land in Deception Creek Drainage Addition of Unit 4 to Units 1, 2, and 3 Addition of Deception Creek area to previous plan Additiun 0: Ripple Cre~~ Reserv0ir to Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 Addition of Rio Blanco (!jt-..f/~v.f.v Reservoir to p Ian above for maximum }Utl development 1.27: 1 (2) 1.96:1 (3) 1.15:1 (2) 2.17:1 (3) 1,23:1 (2) 1.97: 1 (3) 1:40: 1 (2) 1.95: 1 (3) 1.24:1 (2) 1.72: 1 (3) 1.38:1 (2) 1.62:1 (3) 1.21: 1 (2) 1.73:1 (3) 1.24: 1 (2) 1.81: 1 (3) 1.22:1 (2) i.81: 1 (3) 1.25: 1 (2) 1,79:1 (3) 1.29: 1 (2) 1.74:1 (3) + 239,000 (2) + 850,300 (3) + 24,500 (2) + 186,700 (3) + 249,500 (2) +1,,):)3,luO (3) + 436,800 (2) +1,048,200 (3) + 455,600 (2) +1,379,200 (3) + 495,000 (2) + 819,000 (3) + 438,000 (2) +1,552,500 (3) + 705,100 (2) +2;402,300 (3) + 687,000 (2) $2,575,100 (3) + S09,800 (2) +2,507,000 (3) +1,055,400 +2,712,600 (2) (3) 3.0,000 10,5.00, 30,000 80,400 80,400 30-,.0.00 v None 30,000 55,POQ 30,000 JO,OOO 55,000 105,400 23" 226 47,579 47,570 47,570 47,57.0 23,220 5,43.0 28,656 23,226 18, 239il y" 9,000 Y 2~,21~ y 46,89:Pf Y 51,86~ y 46.895 46, 895!d Y 30 and 70 30 and 70 ~ 10 and 10 in dry years and 30 and 60 in average years 30 and 70 30 and 70 s~ rO SJ _..---:: I~~ 30 and 70 30 and 70 30 snd 70 JO and 70 30 and 70 30 snd 70 .3<) and 70 l/This is a miminum fish bypass made at the Yellow Jacket Canal diverS'ion. Average release Hill be 3teater til'i'n these figures. (2)Based on di~ect benefits. (3)Based on total benefits. ~Also produces 27,OOOkilowstts of saleable capacity. ~Al1 costs used in the H&I increments .~based-'-o~~'y_of the ..later at t:le end of Josepliine Basin Canal at an elevation of approximately 6,800 feet. Any terminal storage costs or costs for delivery of t:ater to other locations are not included in the analysiS. Some plans may require oora terminal storage than others bec3use of delivery t>atterns. 2J!nis does: not include 9,000 acres: served under.tlJ,e Deadmand Benc!l and Sunbeam Canals of the Juniper ?roject. ..