Laserfiche WebLink
<br />SUMMARY . <br /> <br />f',,) <br />~ <br />"" <br />--:I <br /> <br />This report is submitted pursuant to Public Law (P.L.) 104-20 of July 28, , <br />1995, an act to amend the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (Act) <br />of 1974,. This amendment requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit <br />a planning report to the appropriate committees of Congress concerning <br />the new, basinwide approach to salinity control established by <br />section 202(a)(6) of the Act. <br /> <br />The BUI!eau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is committed to pursuing efficient <br />new methods of controlling salinity, In a review of the Colorado River <br />Basin Sillinity Control Program (Audit Report No, 93-1-810 dated <br />March 11993), the Inspector General found that the unit-specific authorities <br />provided by earlier legislation (P,L, 93-320 and P.L, 98-569) limited the <br />opportutlities for Reclamation to implement cost-effective salinity control. <br /> <br />The Insl'ector General recommended Reclamation seek legislation to <br />broadendts authorities to allow more alternatives to be added to the mix of <br />projects :eligible for implementation. Reclamation accepted the <br />recomm~ndation and thoroughly reevaluated its role in the salinity control <br />program; in 1994, Later in 1994, Reclamation and the Colorado River Basin <br />States (Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona) <br />developEjd legislation to implement the Inspector General's recom- <br />mendatipns, This legislation was enacted and signed into law on July 28, <br />1995. PlIrsuant to P,L. 104-20, this report summarizes Reclamation's plans <br />for impl~menting its new basinwide salinity control program, <br /> <br />As an alternative to adopting new regulations, Reclamation plans to <br />administer the program through existing procurement techniques and <br />establislied regulations. Reclamation will solicit proposals and award <br />funding through a "Request for Proposals" (RFP) process, An example RFP <br />is attached to this report. <br /> <br />Essentia:lly, the RFP would request proposals from the public and private <br />sector that would control salinity, The proposals would be ranked, based on <br />their cost to prevent salt from entering the river system, The ranking <br />would also consider risk factors that might affect the project's performance, <br /> <br />Cost effectiveness will be computed on a cost-per-ton basis and include all <br />potential costs to the program, Risk factors will evaluate performance risks <br />to the program and be used to adjust the ranking of projects. <br /> <br />The prol1osals will be ranked by a ranking committee. Members of the <br />committee will be selected to avoid any conflict of interest that would bias <br />their choices. The ranking committee members will individually and <br /> <br />:'" <br /> <br />L <br /> <br />." , <br /> <br />d, .,._h':."";,. = <br /> <br />.-t;; ,i <br />,:11..::1 <br />