WSP08224 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The following is a @,,, ,oCi",: ;J:t~'" summary of the data collected t:.9" 't!'_:"-:" ".- to date. POWER DEMAND Projected power resource requirements by area for preference and non-preference customers as of Janurary 1980 prepared by Western Area Power Administration: Area Additional Resource Requirements for the Year 2000 Preference Non-preference Arizona, et. al. (120) MW surplus 5,077 MW Colorado/Wyoming 5,153 MW 3,683 MW New Mexico 597 MW 917 HW Utah 1,719 MW 4,718 HW Total 7,349 MW 14,395 MW . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Construction 2/ Interest durin construction- Total Capitol Cost ECONOMICSY Tota 1 Cost 8 Benefits J/ $165,428,000 31 132 000 196,560,000 Annual Power Benefit Ne ative Recreation Benefit 6/ Net Annual Benefit ,$30,000,000 -165 000 29,835,000 Annua I Cost 8 Annual Capital cost 1/ Annual OM&R !!...I Total Annual Cost $14,508,000 589,000 $15,097,000 Benefit/Cost Ratio 1. 98/1. 00 Installed Cost Per kilowatt $790 l/Janurary 1981 price level. l/Based on 6-year construction period and 7.375 percent interest compounded 3/Based on capitol recovery factor of .07381 (7.375 percent and 100 years). 4/0perations. Maintenance, and Replacement Costs S/BenefitB are figured by multiplying increased capacity by S120/kilowatt and subtracting S165,000 for recreational 10s8es. 6/Losses have only been assessed at a qualitative level and with a qualitative reduction in the rafting experi@nce, a quantitative reduction in use could also be imposed by the National Park Service. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS: Riparian or Streamside Habitat Aquatic Habitat Endangered Species RECREATIONAL RESOURCES: Beach Camping Ri ver Na vigability Fisherman Access VISUAL QUALITY: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Under worst-case conditions, approximately 15% of the existing riparian habitat would be lost over the long-term, based on an aerial survey vegetation survey. Projected normal operations of the dam would also impact the riparian habitat but to a much lesser degree. Aquatic furbearers, such as beaver, would be impacted over the short-term. There may be some slight impacts to other mammals, waterfowl, reptiles and amphibians. Increased seasonal fluctuation in water releases would impact the survival rate of stocked rainbow trout fry and fingerlings. There would be no impact to adult and juvenile trout. other than a possible mild adverse effect due to losses in the food base. Native fish would not be further impacted. The humpback chub and peregrine falcon would not be further adversely impacted. Some decrease in the availability of suitable campsites due to high flows. Increase in camping and mooring hazards due to fluctuations. Running rapids adversely impacted by some imcrease in hazards and congestion at low flows, but beneficially impacted in many cases by high flows. Increased periodicity and duration of low flow would inhibit upstream movement of fishing boats between Lee I s Ferry and Glen Canyon Dam. Short-term impact during construction activities. Addition of new power house would detract from visual aesthetics. Slight loss in visual quality because of increased erosion along river bank. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES: No adverse impact associated with project