My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11822
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11822
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:18:59 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:11:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.43.J
Description
Grand Valley/Orchard Mesa -
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
9/19/2000
Title
Draft Environmental Assessment - Orchard Mesa Wildlife Area Selenium Remediation Project
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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 />Orchard Mesa Selenium Remediation Environment Assessment <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />Endangered Species Act or Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The program is managed by Reclamation <br />on behalf of the participating agencies. <br /> <br />An interdisciplinary (ID) team was formed in October 1998 with the assignment to develop a <br />selenium remediation plan for the OMW A. The team members were: <br /> <br />Soecialitv <br /> <br />Steve McCall - Reclamation <br />Del Smith - Reclamation <br />Larry Burns - Reclamation <br />Jone Wright - Reclamation <br />Dave Butler - Geological Survey <br />Barb Osmundson - Fish & Wildlife Service <br />Mike Baker - Reclamation <br /> <br />Environmental analysis <br />Wetlands! ground water <br />Design & cost estimates <br />Public information <br />Water & sediment monitoring <br />Biota impacts & monitoring <br />Team leader/ general planning <br /> <br />Public Scopine <br /> <br />In November 1998, the ID Team held a tour and workshop to inform the public and interested <br />agencies about the problems and issues at the OMW A and to obtain the public's ideas on how to <br />correct the problems. Two newsletters were developed and distributed to stakeholders to present <br />information on the alternatives and study progress, and solicit stakeholder input. Nineteen <br />remediation options, suggested by the public and study team, were then screened (see Table 1 in <br />the appendix). <br /> <br />From the scoping process eight options met the initial screening criteria and were developed by <br />the ID Team: <br /> <br />I. Treatment Plant <br />2. Evaporation Ponds <br />3. Collect and Convey Directly to the Colorado River <br />4. Divert and Reuse <br />5. Deep Well Injection <br />6. Dilute or Flush <br />7. Retire Agricultural Lands <br />8. Remove Beaver Dams <br /> <br />CHAPTER II -ALTERNATIVES AND PREFERRED AL TERNA TIVE <br /> <br />Alternatives <br /> <br />The Team evaluated the options in terms of cost and implementation ability. The following <br />screening criteria were employed: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.