Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Operation and Maintenance <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The existing irrigation companies would continue to maintain and <br />operate the system using equipment that would be purchased as part of <br />construction of the unit. An operation, maintenance, and replacement <br />contract similar to that with the Grand Valley Water Users Association for <br />the Grand Valley Unit would be negotiated and signed before construction <br />begins. The contract would prohibit any "saved" water, or water conserved <br />as a result of lining the canals and laterals, from being used on presently <br />nonirrigated land. The contract would also encourage water conservation on <br />presently irrigated land and would assure that use of saved water would not <br />impair reductions in salinity concentrations that are projected at Imperial <br />Dam as a result of the Uinta Basin Salinity Control Unit. <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />Winter Water <br /> <br />Conveying winter water for stock is not recommended if the canals <br />are concrete lined. Where winter flows are passed in concrete-lined <br />canals, problems are experienced with the lining and high maintenance <br />costs occur. Further studies on this issue will continue during feasibility <br />investigations. <br /> <br />Project Cost-Effectiveness and Repayment <br /> <br />Cost effectiveness as it is used in this report is the cost per <br />mg/L reduction in salt concentration at Imperial Dam. The Bureau is <br />attempting through its salinity studies to determine which of the.units of <br />the CRWQIP have the greatest potential for salt concentration reduction for <br />the least amount of money expended. <br /> <br />Those units which have a cost effectiveness which meets the current <br />guidelines as determined by the Department of Interior through interaction <br />with various Federal, State, and local agencies will be sent to Congress <br />and authorization for construction funds will be requested. <br /> <br />The preceding Tables Nos. 4 through 7 show the annual cost for each <br />mg/L of salinity reduction in the Colorado River for each of the four <br />candidate plans being considered. The annual equivalent cost includes the <br />annual value of the capital investment amortized over the estimated 50-year <br />life of the development at an interest rate of 7-3/8 percent and the annual <br />operation, maintenance, and replacement costs. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />The interest during construction estimates assume that portions of the <br />canal system will be in service within 1 year of initiation of construction <br />on those portions. The cost of investigations made prior to authorization <br />of the unit is not included since it has been incurred and would have no <br />bearing on the decision to undertake construction. <br /> <br />The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act provides that 75 per- <br />cent of the total costs of construction for the four authorized salinity <br />control units would be nonreimbursable. The remaining 25 percent would <br />be reimbursable and would be allocated between the Lower Colorado Basin <br /> <br />1.):1.-.,' ",}...'" <br />. ." '. II , .) <br /> <br />22 <br />