Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />B. STUDY OBJECTIVE <br /> <br />At this time, NRCS has proposed to upgrade the Mutual Mesa Lateral by <br />installing a pipeline along the alignment of the existing ditch, Final design drawings <br />have been prepared for this purpose. NRCS will provide approximately $400,000 under <br />their cost sharing formula, CWCB will assist in cost sharing through a low interest loan. <br />The purpose of this study is to evaluate the NRCS design for the CWCB and determine <br />if it is the most cost effective solution for correcting the problems on the Mutual Mesa <br />Lateral. For salinity control projects, NRCS has certain criteria which they must follow <br />to determine if the project is cost effective, and these criteria will also be considered in <br />this evaluation. <br /> <br />Alternatives which will be reviewed as part of this study include the following: <br /> <br />A. Structural <br /> <br />1. Upgrade the Mutual Mesa Lateral using a pipeline system to convey <br />water. <br /> <br />2. Upgrade the Mutual Mesa Lateral using an open, reinforced concrete <br />ditch. <br /> <br />B. Non-Structural <br /> <br />3. Take no action; continue use of the Mutual Mesa Lateral as it is, <br /> <br />A secondary purpose of this study is to review the procedures followed by OMID <br />in their contract with NRCS to determine if they are in compliance with the Bylaws of <br />the District and the applicable State and Federal regulations, A local citizens' group has <br />expressed some concern that the project may be in violation of Bylaws, and this aspect <br />will be reviewed as part of this study. They have written several letters to NRCS, <br />CWCB, and OMID outlining specific items on the project with which they disagree. The <br />claims made by the citizens' group can be summarized as follows into five categories. <br /> <br />1. Misapplication of Water Right~, Claims made include: <br /> <br />a. Since OMID water rights are for irrigation, it is not appropriate to <br />serve urbanized areas (even for lawn and garden irrigation). <br /> <br />b. The water rights were adjudicated for the single purpose of growing <br />food and fiber. <br /> <br />c. Irrigation water is to be used only for the purpose of growing crops <br />for profit and no other usage. <br /> <br />1-3 <br />