Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />~"... <br />-J <br />C,.;\ <br />o <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />describe present ambient water quality in the Upper Colorado Riven <br /> <br /> <br />Bas i n [see report, Chapter 3, Present Water Uses and Hydro 1 ogi c <br /> <br />Conditions(2)]. Basic lack of data and the developing state of <br /> <br /> <br />water quality modeling prevented in-depth analysis. While ambient <br /> <br /> <br />water quality conditions were found to vary greatly throughout the <br /> <br /> <br />Basin, the only persistent variable of concern appears to be dis- <br /> <br /> <br />solved solids (OS). At the March 17, 1978 meeting of the Steering <br /> <br />Committee in Denver, there was a concensus that there would be no <br /> <br /> <br />di scharge of effl uents from EET developments - industry seemi ngly <br /> <br /> <br />having determined it would be cheaper to evaporate process and waste <br /> <br /> <br />waters rather than to treat and return them to the streams. There <br /> <br />pceft'orl <br />will be a) ~x pr.epared by the USGS on instream water quality)~ <br /> <br />^ <br />the f~Ad'i'Rgs-and coll'C"J:r'~ Rat ani'Fable at th,;a .:\ H;~. In <br /> <br />vi ew of the reconnai ssance nature of thi s undertaki ng and 1 ack of <br />available data, the CIFSG addressed the subject of temperature <br />impacts only in a general way and did not analyze the impacts of <br />sedimentation or other water quality aspects at all. All indica- <br />tions are, however, that the percent change in present conditions or <br /> <br />year 2000 conditions due to EET development will be slight. Lacking <br />-f <br />knowledge of threshold levels, prediction of impact o~ such change <br />I <br /> <br />is practically impossible. <br /> <br />4. Hydrologic Data (Discharges) Specific to the Assessment <br /> <br />38 <br />