Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />economic burden on developing industries, including energy <br />development. The word "practicable" should be interpreted so <br />as to comply with the statutory requirements of the State Water <br />Quality Control Act, specifically C.R.S. 1973, 25-8-102(5), as <br />amended, which requires a much broader evaluation of water <br />quality control measures using economic, environmental, energy <br />and public health costs as the basis for decisions. The State <br />statute also specifically provides in Section 25-8-102 that it <br />is the State's policy to "maximize the beneficial uses of <br />water, and to develop waters to which Colorado and its citizens <br />are entitled. . ." <br /> <br />A no salt return program may seriously affect water <br />conservation efforts and may, in fact, lead to greater <br />concentration of salinity while eliminating some element of <br />salinity load. No analysis has accompanied this plan of <br />implementation which reviews the effect of the higher <br />consumptive use required to achieve the no salt return, either <br />as to the effect on Colorado River water rights or as to the <br />impact of the concentrating effect on salinity that the no salt <br />return program may have. <br /> <br />Furthermore, industrial and municipal uses account for the <br />smallest salt contribution to the Colorado River. These two <br />sources account for 1% of the total salt contribution from the <br />upper basin. (Page 60 of the 1981 Review by the Colorado River <br /> <br />-4- <br /> <br />1~9 <br />