My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01110
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01110
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:29:23 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:10:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8273.100.10
Description
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control - Federal Agencies - Bureau of Reclamation
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
5/1/1995
Title
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project - Report on Public and Agency Review of the Program and Implementation Plan for the Basinwide Program - Discussion Draft
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />....'~.;..:~;:..n. Wf.-~ .....-.~ <br /> <br />~ <br />Ul <br />o <br />N <br /> <br />,. <br />~ <br />\ <br />. <br />j <br />~ <br />:~ <br />~ <br /> <br />.i <br /> <br />il <br />'I <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />". <br />.; <br /> <br />7.\ <br />".'1 <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />:.~ <br /> <br />..; <br /> <br />Devil Rivers, and the tributaries of MUddy Creek, Hanksville Salt Wash, and <br />Emery South Salt Wash. The Dirty Devil River drainage contributes <br />approximately 150,000 tons of salt each year to the Colorado River. The Muddy <br />Creek tributary contributes an average of 86,000 tons of salt annually. No <br />significant sources of salt or potential alternatives were identified on the <br />Fremont River or its tributaries. Approximately 28 percent of the Muddy Creek <br />salt load (24,200 tons per year) comes from springs in Hanksville Salt Wash <br />and Emery South Salt Wash. <br /> <br />The geologic formations in the area consist primarily of sedimentary deposits, <br />about 60 percent of whiCh are mudstones, claystones, and shales. The Carmel <br />Formation of Jurassic age and the Mancos Shale Formations of Cretaceous age <br />are major contributors of diesolved solids. Irrigation of alluvial soils <br />derived from shales increases the contribution of dissolved solids to the <br />streams. <br /> <br />Reclamation's plan was designed to reduce the salinity of the Dirty Devil and <br />Colorado Rivers by collecting saline spring water in Hanksville Salt Wash and <br />Emery South Salt Wash and disposing of it by deep well injection. Collection <br />would be accomplished by pumping surface and alluvial water from' shallow <br />wells. This water would be filtered and chemically stabilized after which it <br />would be injected into a deeply buried geologic formation, the Coconino <br />Sandstone, where it would be stored indefinitely and isolated from any <br />freshwater aquifer now in use. This means of disposal would reduce the salt <br />contribution to the Colorado River by 20,900 tons annually. Reclamation <br />completed a planning report in May 1987. The unit has not yet been authorized <br />for construction due to its marginal cost effectiveness. <br /> <br />Glenwood-Dotsero Springs Unit <br /> <br />Glenwood-Dotsero Springs is located along the Colorado River in Eagle, <br />Garfield, and Mesa Counties in west-central Colorado. The springs are located <br />near the town of Glenwood Springs and the rural community of Dotsero. The <br />combined annual discharge of the springs is 25,000 acre-feet of water which <br />contain about 440,000 tons of salt. About half of the salt contribution comes <br />from 20 surface springs; the remainder enters as seeps and underwater springs <br />within the river channel. <br /> <br />Reclamation started detailed planning investigations in 1980. Technical work <br />included the msasurement and chemical analysis of springs and ground water in <br />the two areas and a detailed technical study of the salt-loading mechanism. <br />Plans were then formulated with the aid of public input. More than 33 <br />alternatives were generated. The most cost-effective plan at the time <br />consisted of collecting both surface and subsurface salt water at Dotsero and <br />transporting the salt water in a gravity flow pressure line to Glenwood <br />springs where additional surface and subsurface salt water would be collected <br />and added to the Dotsero salt water. The water would then be piped to <br />evaporation ponds at the Colorado-Utah border. At $126 per ton, this plan <br />could not compete with alternatives available in other units. plans were <br />deferred until a more cost-effective alternative, possibly an industrial use, <br />could be found. A planning report concluding the evaporation pond alternative <br />was completed in February 1986. <br /> <br />As an alternative to a federally developed project, Reclamation solicited <br />proposals from industry for privately developed desalination facilities. On <br />october 23, 1989, a cooperative agreement was signed by Reclamation and a <br />desalting company that could lead to the development of a privately financed, <br />owned, and operated facility. <br /> <br />26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.