WSP03638

• File Number: 8273.100
• Description: Colorado River Basin Salinity Control - Federal Agencies - Bureau of Reclamation
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 4/1/1987
• Author: DOI BOR
• Title: Salinity Update - April 1987 - A Quarterly Report on the Colorado River Water Improvement Program
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

~
OD
W
cr;

wells. The Planning Report/En-
vironmental Compliance Docu-
ment will be completed In the
spring 011987.
Since the Slate of Utah will nol
grant a waler right for the unit be.
cause deep-well injecrion is nOl
considered a beneficial use of
waler, the studies have been dis-
continued

Glenwood-Dotsero

Springs (USSR)

The Glenwood-Dotsero
Springs unit is located along the
Colorado River in Eagle. Garfield,
and Mesa Counlles in weSl-
cenlral Colorado. Combined dis-
charges annually contribute ap.
pro)(imately 440.000 tons of sail,
moslfy sodium chloride
The recommended plan con.
sists of collecling both surface
and subsurface sail water alDol-
sero. transporting it in a gravity
flow pressure line 10 Glenwood
Springs where additional surface
and subsurface sail waler would
be collected and added to the
001 sera salt water The water
would Ihen be piped through a
gravity pressure line to evapora.
tion ponds al lhe Colorado-Utah
border
The currenl plan is not as cost
effective as olher units being im.
plemented and. under Colorado
waler law, e'1aporation is nol con-
sidered a beneficial use of waler
A planning report concluding the
study was complete'(j in February
1986 and approved on April 1,
1986

Grand Valley Unit
(USSR and USDA)

The Grand Valley Unit in
weslern Mesa County in west-
central Colorado includes about

71.000 acres and involves about
200 miles of canals and 500
miles of laterals Grand Valley
contributes an estimated 580.000
tons 01 sail annually to the
Colorado Aiver. Most of the salls
are leached from the soil and un-
derlying Mancos Formation by
ground water that receives its
recharge from canal, lateral, and
onfarm seepage
Stage One was compleled in
1983 and reduced the Ions of
salt reaching the Colorado River
by 21,900 tons per year
The plan for Stage Two
provides for replacing existing
open earth laterals with buried
pipe and lining three reaches of
the Government Highline Canal
with membrane liners The sup-
plement to Ihe definite plan
report and final environmental
statement was filed with Environ-
mental Protection Agency May
23. 1986
Construction of the wesl end
of Ihe Government Highline
Canal began in the fall of 1986.
and construction of the west end
laterals is scheduled to begin in
the fall of 1988 The remaining
latera) systems will be imple.
mented approximately in order of
cost effectiveness. with construc.
lion concluding about year 2005

USDA'S onfarm and off.farm
lateral improvements in Stage
One and Stage Two of Ihe Grand
Valley have been accomplished
primarily through the annual prac.
lice cost-share proviSion at the
ASCS.s ACP program
Onfarm pipeline and ditch
lining installed during calendar
year 1986 was 117.800 feet and
18.100 feet respectively Total 011-
tarm pipeline and dilch lining
thus tar are approximately 1633
miles of pipelines and 44 4 miles
of ditch lining or combined aboul
31 percent of the total Grand Val-

ley project goal and an average
annual salt load reduction of
t7.931 tons
USDA's off-farm lateral im-
provements for calendar year
1986 consisled of t7.5oo feet of
pipeline improvements Cumula-
tive oH-farm laleral accomplish-
ments are 40.4 miles of pipelines
and '1 4 miles of dItch lining, or
about 273 percent 01 USDA's
over<'lll project goal with an
average annual sail load reduc.
lion of 15,638 tons
Tolal seepage,'deep percola-
tion reductions are 8,742 acre.
feel through calendar year t986
for a 33.569 tons per year sal!
reduction frOm USDA activities in
Both Stage One and Stage Two

LaVerkin Springs
(USSR)

During the past 20 years, this
unit has been studied eXlensively
with several reports being
produced The latest, a Prelimi.
nary Findings Report recommend-
ing the study be discontinued be.
cause 01 poor cost effectiveness,
was submitted to the Commis-
sioner in January 1984 The
report was released in August
1984

Las Vegas Wash
(USSR)

Las Vegas WaSh is a n<'lfural
drainage channel providing the
only surface water outlet for the
entire Las Vegas Valley One al-
ternative salinity control strategy
would be to prevent seePilge of
waste waler and minor storm
runoff by placing it in a bypass
channel running parallel to fhe
Wash lor about 4 miles. circum.
venting sail deposits in the Wash
allLNium The bypass channel