Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00621 <br /> <br />CONSTRUCT,~BIUTY <br /> <br />The physical construction 'i'ime r'equlred for all alternatives Is <br />approximately three years. The initial design and/or construction for <br />each of the alternatives would be dependent upon the time required by <br />the various Governmental agencies to issue final appr'oval. Studies, <br />Investigations, and designsfo,' the proposed Strontia Springs alter'na- <br />tive are presently complet,g enough 'i'hat construci-ion could proceed as <br />soon as the required approvals wer'e received, The other alternatives <br />would require additional time fo,- investigation and design. At best, <br />this would result in a one-year delay fo,' the oi-he~ alternatives, except <br />Chatfield, which would requir'e Federal legislation prior to use for <br />water supply. <br /> <br />The Joint Use of the Rampari' Tunnel alternative would require <br />three four-month shut-dmm periods of the tum-,el to complete the <br />construction. These would occur during successive winters when water <br />demands are at a mhimum. Aurora's raw water source would become <br />completely inoperable during these winter shut-down periods. The <br />feasibi I ity of such a shut-down has not been thoroughly explored. A <br />supplemental source for water may have to be provided. Costs for this <br />water have not been included In the cost estimate. Increasing future <br />water demands may so I imit the permissfble shut-down period that it <br />may not be econom i ca I to constn,~t. <br /> <br />EXPANDABILITY <br /> <br />As the proposed project contained bui It-In provIsions for future <br />expansion, the other alternatives were explored for including similar <br />provisions. In all plans, but the Harding Plan, features which appear <br />feasible could be incorporated with little disruption to the environment. <br />Expandabi lity, in the final analysis, is an investment decision. <br /> <br />ENERGY PRODUCTION AND USAGE <br /> <br />The energy usage data presented for Strontia Springs include <br />energy production and energy usage for a plant output of nearly 40 <br />bi II ion gallons per year. Energy usage for each of the remaining <br />alternatives includes treatment plant operation requirements at an <br />output of 20 bil lion gal Ions per year with associated pumping energy, <br />and energy requirements for additional output from the existing system <br />of nearly 20 bi I I Ion gallons per year. Energy usage for Chatfield also <br />includes over 8 million KWH annually for carbon regeneration. <br /> <br />14 <br />