My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP03264
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
WSP03264
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:49:30 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:37:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8449.913
Description
Foothills/Windy Gap Project
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Date
1/1/1977
Author
Denver
Title
Final Analysis - Foothills Project
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.
/
41
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 />Of the shortcomings in the use of such structures which <br />the USBR recognizes, some are translatable into cost in- <br />creases which are unnecessary from any standpoint, while <br />others represent operating deficiencies so severe as to be <br />intolerable in a twentieth century water plant. <br /> <br />Anyone of the deficiencies recognized by the USBR <br />would make the selection of any suggested alternative using <br />the low-diversion unacceptable. The fact is that the low- <br />diversion dam concept is burdened by not just one, but three <br />such deficiencies which, taken together, compel a conclusion <br />that the use of such a structure is not a rational choice. <br /> <br />A discussion of those three major deficiencies follows. <br /> <br />1. No operating or regulatory storage. <br /> <br />The USBR recognizes this shortcoming but fails to <br />explain how seriously it jeopardizes the operation of the <br />plant. As we see from Exhibit 8, over fifty years of operating <br />experience has demonstrated the vital necessity of such <br />storage in the provision of competent, continuous water <br />service without wasting raw water. Indeed, the best judgments, <br />uncontradicted by any who know the utility business, is that <br />the operation of the Foothills Plant and the regulation of <br />stream flow require an absolute minimum of 2700 acre feet of <br />storage. In the absence of that minimum volume, there can <br />be no reasonable assurance that the spectre of water service <br />outages as well as the waste of significant quantities of <br />unregulated raw water will not be regular, periodic occurrences. <br />Such occurrences may well be of no serious consequence for <br />the irrigation deliveries the USBR is accustomed to providing, <br />but they cannot be permitted when the provision of fire and <br />domestic water service for the public safety, health and <br />welfare are at stake. <br /> <br />2. No control of frazil ice. <br /> <br />The official USBR document which discussed for the BLM <br />various cost estimates and comparisons gave little more than <br />lip service to the extraordinary winter icing problems which <br />exist in the Waterton Canyon, suggesting that high annual <br />operating costs might be associated with the problem and <br />that under, "extreme conditions," municipal water deliveries <br />could be "severely" reduced for prolonged periods. For <br />reasons not made clear, the official USBR statement failed <br />to point out to the BLM the most important single factor <br />surrounding the entire icing problem in the context of the <br />Foothills Treatment Plant operation, a factor which was <br />recognized by the USBR Ice Research Management Team, but not <br />included in the USBR report. That factor is that no filter <br />plant can accommodate ice-laden water. The report of that <br />Team (Exhibit 9) states, "Diversion from Strontia Springs <br />-11- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.