CACHE HIGHLINE WATER ASSOCIATION CANAL PROJECT FINANCIAL ESTIMATE

1
CACHE HIGHLINE WATER ASSOCIATIONCANAL PROJECT
FINANCIAL ESTIMATE
2
CURRENT PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

• Do nothing to repair Logan N. canal
• Canyon Road routing to 600 East
• Hwy 89 (400 North) routing to 600 East
• 1500 North routing to 900 East
• 3100 North routing to 1200 East
• Requires upgrades to LHPS canal

3
SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES

• The final decision of which alternative will be
  constructed is to be made after the periods for
  public comment on the NRCS Planning Document and
  Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact
  Statement have ended.
• All shareholders are encouraged to comment on the
  alternatives during that time.

4
CURRENT ESTIMATE

• The current cost estimate for the most expensive
  alternative (3100 North) is 28,575,000.00 and
  includes design, construction and inspection for
  the project. The cost sharing for this
  alternative is as follows
• Agency Amount Percentage
• Emergency Watershed 21,685,000 75.9
• Protection Grant (NRCS)
• Board of Water Resources 5,875,000 20.6
• Sponsors 1,015,000 3.5
• (Canal Companies Cities)

5
SPONSORS COST SHARE

• Cost sharing among the Sponsors for the most
  expensive alternative (1,015,000) is estimated
  as follows
• Agency Amount Percentage
• Cities (Logan, North Logan, 395,850 39
• Hyde Park, Smithfield)
• Logan Northern Canal 314,650 31
• Logan Hyde Park Smithfield 304,500 30

6

• The Sponsors share is the 15 match for the loan
  from the Board of Water Resources. This will be
  paid incrementally during the construction of the
  selected alternative.
• The cost breakdown based upon shares is as
  follows

7
INITIAL COST PER SHARE

• Logan Northern Canal
• 314,650.00/3,279 Shares 95.96/share
• Logan Hyde Park Smithfield Canal
• 304,500/1,997 Shares 152.48/share

8
ANNUAL COSTS PER SHARE

• Logan Northern Canal
• 85,281/3,279 Shares 26.01/share
• Logan Hyde Park Smithfield Canal
• 82,530/1,997 Shares 41.33/share

9
BASIS OF COST SHARE

• The cost share percentages for the most expensive
  alternative are based on a study of benefits to
  each city and canal.
• The most expensive alternative offers the
  greatest benefits to the cities. The other
  alternatives provide less benefits to the cities.

10
BASIS OF COST SHARE
(Continued)

• As the benefits to the cities reduce so does
  their percentage of the cost share and the
  percentage of the cost share to the canals
  increases.
• The other alternatives are less expensive, but
  the costs to the canal shareholders could be
  lesser or greater depending on the benefits to
  the cities to participate.

11
SUMMARY

• If the most expensive alternate comes in at
  estimates with Federal funding providing 75 and
  BWR providing a 1.25 backup loan, The costs to
  LN shareholders would be 95.96/share paid by the
  end of construction with 26.01/share/year for 25
  years (total of 746.21/share in 25 years).
• The costs to LHPS share holders would be
  152.48/share paid by the end of construction
  with 41.33/share/year for 25 years (total of
  1,185.73/share in 25 years).

12
Disclaimer

• The preceding estimate is subject to change based
  upon in-kind work done with the project, changes
  in loan amounts or time of repayment, and changes
  in actual construction costs.
• No contracts will be signed without shareholder
  approval.