My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07009
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:25:20 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:02:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8221.106.J
Description
Eagle-Piney
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
6/1/1974
Title
Eagle-Piney/Eagle-Colorado Water Study--Summary Report
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.
/
26
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 />o <br />o <br />- <br />~ <br />o <br />c <br /> <br />VI. <br /> <br />BASES FOR RECOMMENDATION <br /> <br />The evaluation of the four operational configurations was based on the comprehensive <br />programs outlined above. The breadth and intensity of the evaluation emphasizes the importance <br />attached to responsible decision-making by the Denver Board of Water Commissioners. To achieve <br />rational choices, the decision-making process had to be properly structured. Relevant data for <br />evaluating each configuration were weighed; and costs, water deliveries and other influencing <br />factors were identified with the criteria for evaluating the configurations. Careful consideration <br />was given to the complex hydrological, water rights and physical factors within the Study Area. <br /> <br />The decision-making process in formulating the recommendation for the pursuance of the <br />most promising configuration was based not only on the measure of economic benefits in terms <br />of dollars but also on those factors to which a monetary yardstick cannot readily be applied, i.e., <br />environmental enhancement, recreational use, operational flexibility and other factors whose <br />values may be both positive and negative. These factors were considered by employing a planning <br />decision matrix to weigh the values. This planning matrix was applied in conjunction with the <br />technical, economic and water delivery analyses of each of the four configurations. <br /> <br />The methodology applied to determine the water available to each of the four configurations <br />was described previously. Preliminary design drawings of the four configurations were prepared <br />to describe the features of the structures associated with each configuration. Preliminary <br />construction cost estimates were then developed, taking into account the geological, <br />topographical, and environmental influences. The estimates of cost and annual water delivery of <br />each configuration are shown in Table 1, following. <br /> <br />Table 1 <br /> <br />ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS, POWER COSTS AND WATER DELIVERIES <br /> <br /> Construction Average Annual Present Worth Average Annual Total Present <br />Configuration Cost Power Cost Cost of Power* Delivery Worth Cost <br /> ($ million) ($ million) ($ million I (1,000 ac-ft/yr) ($ per ac-ftl <br />Eagle-Piney 145 0 0 77 1,880 <br />Eagle-Colorado 341 7.1 112 170 2,660 <br />Piney /Eagle-Colorado 370 6.7 106 177 2.690 <br />Eagle-Piney IEagle-Colorado 395 4.7 74 183 2,560 <br /> <br />* The present worth cost of power was estimated assuming an amortization <br />period of 50 years and an interest rate of six percent. <br /> <br />The construction and power costs are based on 1973 estimates and may be updated by <br />application of the appropriate factors. <br /> <br />The Eagle-Piney configuration could deliver an average of 77,000 ac-ft of water annually. <br />By comparison, the Eagle-Piney/Eagle-Colorado configuration (basically the Eagle-Piney <br /> <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.