Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(t'-"'~8 <br />'-'vIe-\) <br /> <br />current Federal budgets. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Furthermore, Reclamation expenses for the preparation of the EA have been <br /> <br />minimal as the Agreement specifies that the Sponsors are responsible for a <br /> <br />major portion of the its development and funding. <br /> <br />2.3 No Risk to the Federal Government. <br /> <br />Salt removed from the saline spring waters of Glenwood Springs would be <br /> <br />measured at the plant prior to being transported and marketed to third party <br /> <br />users. Inspection privileges have been retained by Reclamation via the <br /> <br />Agreement. A fee would be paid to the Sponsors quarterly for each ton of salt <br /> <br />removed. In the absence of measurable salt production, Reclamation has no <br /> <br />obligation to make payments, and therefore, no risk should the facility fail <br /> <br /> <br />. to operate. The Agreement provides for the salt remo',cal payments, but does <br /> <br />not place the United States in a position of guaranteoing the overall <br /> <br />financial integrity of the private development. <br /> <br />2.4 Cost Effectiveness. <br /> <br />2.4.1 Calculation of Cost Effectiveness. <br /> <br />This salinity control plan has been developed as a portion of the C~'iQIP, <br /> <br />which aims at reducing the salinity of the Colorado River at the least cost <br /> <br />per llilit of salinity reduction, as dictat",d hy la'.". The term "cost <br /> <br />. effectiveness" has been developed as a comparison tool and is defined as '11= <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />7 <br />