Laserfiche WebLink
<br />p <br /> <br />eJ <br />~. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1-4 <br />...... <br />o <br /><"'1 <br /> <br />COLORADO RIVER SALINITY CONTROL PROGRAM (continued) <br /> <br />3 <br />and the annual flow amounts to about 150 acre-feet (185 OOD m ). The <br />climate at the geyser is desert-like with an average annual temperature <br />of 52' F (110 C) and an average annual precipitation of 6 inches (150 mm). <br />The vegetation in the geyser area is sparse with tamarisk and scattered <br />cottonwood trees along the edges of the river and cactus, Brigham tea, <br />greasewood, and shadscale elsewhere. <br /> <br />The estimated annual removal of salt by the alternative plans is <br />about 3,000 tons (2700 t), a relatively minor amount. Salinity concen- <br />trations of the Colorado River at Imperial Dam would be reduced by an <br />estimated 0.3 mg/L. <br /> <br />The Definite Plan Report (DPR) , Environmental Assessment, and Negative <br />Determination of Environmental Impact have been completed and were sub- <br />mitted in June 1976. <br /> <br />The plan is to collect and convey the flows to evaporation ponds <br />about 3 miles (5 km) downstream. A compacted earth embankment would be <br />constructed on the stream side of the geyser to collect and temporarily <br />store the water from the eruptions. A plastic pipe would convey the water <br />from the temporary storage pond at a uniform rate to the evaporation ponds. <br />The pipeline would cross many small drainages and the Little Grand Wash. <br />Bedrock may present some difficulties in laying the pipe. The evaporation <br />ponds would be located on a typical river flood plsin of lean clay with <br />lenses of silt, sand (sometimes clean), and gravel. The ponds would <br />require a flexible polyvinyl lining to assure that no leakage back to the <br />river occurs. About 2 miles (3 km) of the access road to the geyser would <br />need improvement by grading, installing culverts, and possibly gravel <br />surfacing. The access road to the evaporation ponds would also need some <br />improvement. <br /> <br />Construction on this unit has been delayed indefinitely due to high <br />construction costs and low cost effectiveness. <br /> <br />4. Las Vegas Wash Unit <br /> <br />Las Vegas Wash is a natural drainage channel providing the only <br />sur face water out let for the enti re 2,193 square mi les (5680 km2) Las <br />Vegas Valley. A drainage area of 1,586 square miles (4108 km2) directly <br />contributes to the Wash which conveys stream runoff and wastewater to Las <br />Vegas Bay, an arm of Lake Mead. Located in Clark County in Southern <br />Nevada, the Las Vegas Valley contains the largest population center in the <br />state. Three cities (North Las Vegas, Las Vegas, and Henderson) and other <br />communities are drained by tributaries to Las Vegas Wash. Studies eval- <br />uating salinity contributed by the wash are concerned mainly with the 10 <br />mile (6 km) reach upstream of Las Vegas Bay. The wash flood plain and <br />adjacent area support about 1,800 acres (730 ha) of halophyte, hydrophyte, <br />and phreatophyte vegetation. <br /> <br />69 <br />