Laserfiche WebLink
<br />,'c,",,__ "'..:.:.,. <br /> <br />.cc':~,_,'...k~!~-'" .." <br /> <br />~ <br />c.~ <br />~ <br />.... <br /> <br />~~,.;- <br /> <br />BUREAU OF RECLAMATION REPORT <br /> <br />Annual e~uivalent costs were determined to be $915,500. These <br />costs include $565,100 for amortization of the estimated construction <br />cost of the Seedskadee project over the lOO-year period of analysis, <br />$91,000 for annual operation, maintenance, and replacement costs <br />of the Seedskadee project, and $259,400 for the Seedskadee project IS <br />prorated share of the cost of regulatory features of the Colorado River <br />Storage project. Costs of the storage project's regulatory feature', <br />although payable by revenues of the storage project, are being assigned <br />for purposes of benefit-cost analyses to future water-consuming projects <br />in the upper basin since development of such projects is dependent on <br />the river regulation that would be provided by the storage project. <br /> <br />Conclusions <br /> <br />The Seedskadee project plan as outlined in this report has engin- <br />eering feasibility. An ade~uate water supply could be made available <br />to project lands and the necessary water rights could be obtained under <br />wyoming State laws. The project is economically justified on the basis <br />of National benefits and costs. The annual benefits would compare with <br />the annual Federal costs in a ratio of 1.15 to 1. In a period of 50 <br />years the Federal Government could be reimbursed for the entire con- <br />struction cost by payments from the water users and revenues from the <br />Upper Colorado River Account. <br /> <br />13 <br />