WSP00967 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . ..~:. f-'o '-" f,) l\.) 5 others would relate cost-effectiveness criteria only to a positive Benef{t/ Cost ratio. The original estimate for salt removal was in the $200,000 - $400,000 mg/L range but recently many of the projects being studied have surpassed the million dollar per milligram per liter level. In light of a recent report that estimates economic benefits of salinity reduction at about $470,000 mg/L, the enthusiasm toward many of the projects has become more cautious not only from the viewpoint of the planner, but also from the viewpoint of those who must bear the costs. Within the Service, it is widely held that one problem that detracts from effective planning on the salinity control program is the lack of clear direction in the area of cost limits. Conversely, comments were received from some members of the Forum that it is the intent of Public Law 93-320 that cost limits should not be considered, and that the full potential of each site should be developed regardless of cost. The study team believes that the Service cannot, in good conscience, recommend the construction of all salinity control units regardless of cost. Respon- sibility to the taxpayer dictates that the most cost-effective means be found to implement adequate salinity control. Therefore, a cost limit for salinity control measures must be established. Options: A. Set the cost limit at the level of current benefits of salinity control (if this is done most of the proposed units would likely be eliminated) . B. Request the Salinity Control Forum to provide cost limits for evaluating salinity control units. C. Develop cost limits within the Service and present those values to the Salinity Control Forum for their information. D. Submit a feasibility report to the Congress for authorization of a salinity control unit with costs in the higher range to get a reading from the Congress on cost limits. E. Convene a conference of State congressional delegations to consider the cost problem and to give a reading on it. F. Move to establish i.separate funding mechanism that is dedicated to paying the non-Federal costs of salinity control measures, such as increasing power rates accordingly in the 1987 Hoover Power Rate Renegotiation. G. Rank projects according to cost effectiveness then concentrate resources on those with the highest ranking.