Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Conclusions <br /> <br />An evaluation of the data presented on Tables 1, 2, and 3 indicates the Sinbad <br />Evaporation Alternatives with pump rates of 0.2 and 0.3 cfs and the Sinbad <br />Deep Well Alternative with a pump rate of 0.3 cfs are the most cost effective <br />proposals. The Evaporation Alternatives have estimated $719,000 and $751,000 <br />milligram per liter cost effectiveness, respectively. The Deep Well <br />Alternative has a cost effectiveness estimated at $755,000. The higher cost <br />of the Deep Well Alternative may be at least partially offset by some <br />environmental advantages over the Sinbad Evaporation proposal. The <br />environmental advantages include less surface disturbance and no significant <br />land use modification. These current cost effectiveness values are more than <br />three times the original estimates presented in the 1978-79 Status Report. <br /> <br />Before a preferred alternative can be selected, an assessment of environmental <br />impacts needs to be completed. ' Sewemup Mesa, located immediately east of <br />Sinbad Valley, is a wilderness study area and is also proposed as an <br />Outstanding Natural Area in the Resource Management Plan. The area has high <br />visual sensitivity, both onsite and along the powerline alignment. Peregrine <br />falcons nest in the area. Water right questions need to be resolved. <br />Compatibility of the project with existing land uses also needs consideration. <br /> <br />Recommendat ions <br /> <br />None of the alternatives presented are within the Bureau of land Management's <br />(BlM) current capabilities. The Bureau lacks personnel, experience, and <br />technical expertise to conduct a project of this type. In addition, even the <br />least costly alternative presented exceeds the total 4340 Water Resources <br />annual budget for the entire Bureau. <br /> <br />The BlM recommends that, if the project is to be funded, lead responsibility <br />and fundi ng shoul d be assumed by the Bureau of Recl amat i on (BOR). The BOR has <br />actively participated in similar salinity control projects since passage of <br />the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (P.l. 93-320) of 1974. The BOR <br />also has served as a consultant for the Salt Creek SinbJd Valley Feasibility <br />Study. With its knowledge of the work done to date, available personnel, and <br />technical expertise, this agency is well suited to assume project <br />responsibility. The BlM would act as a support agency. <br /> <br />Future Study Needs <br /> <br />The BlM's Sinbad Valley Feasibility Study indicates that additional <br />information is needed before final selection can be made among the various <br />alternatives. Should the BOR assume responsibility for the project, the <br />following studies would probably be required. First, additional discharge and <br />conductivity measurements to define salt loads of high flows. (The present <br />salt reduction estimate in mg/l is based on only 2 years of record.) These <br />data could be obtained by an addendum to the existing memorandum of <br />understanding for continued opoeration of the streamflow station located on <br />Salt Creek. <br /> <br />0022.14 <br /> <br />13 <br />