Laserfiche WebLink
<br />_'_,' ,d__' <br />\, '., ~- "",', <br /> <br />"'k <br /> <br />. . "'_-,', .L~__ ,., <br /> <br />,._.":,r',, - <br /> <br />. , <br /> <br />. _:..i <br /> <br />':0 <br /> <br />Implementation Plan <br /> <br />replaced. Replacement costs for these facilities need not be included if they <br />are accounted for by amortizing over the facility's useful life. For example, <br />if a canal is lined and has a useful life of 50 years, the project should be <br />amortized over the project's 50-year life. <br /> <br />Interest During Construction (lDC).-This is interest that accrues <br />between the time funds are expended and the project comes online (begins <br />to control salinity). Most improvements reduce salinity in about the same <br />year they are constructed and need not consider IDC. If the proposal <br />requires the program to pay IDC, the costs should be included in the cost- <br />effectiveness computation. <br /> <br />Cost Sharing.-If cost sharing reduces the program's cost, then it directly <br />improves the project's cost effectiveness (the measure of the program's <br />effectiveness). Cost sharing by other entities reflects the value they place <br />on the incidental benefit they may derive from the program. For example, a <br />farmer may choose to cost share in irrigation efficiency improvements if it <br />improves the farm's productivity. The competitive nature of the RFP rank- <br />ing process should reward those willing to buy down the program's cost. <br /> <br />Thresholds <br /> <br />Considering the magnitude of salinity control needed and the availability of <br />staff to administer the basinwide program, review proposals, and validate <br />the results, a minimum project size of 1,000 tons per year is reco=ended. <br />The recommended minimum project duration is 10 years. These minimums <br />may be adjusted in future RFP's as Reclamation gains experience in <br />implementing the new basinwide program. <br /> <br />~ ..~~ <br /> <br />;;::.; <br /> <br />~~-_.:..-;.; <br />-.":{'-' <br /> <br />Reclamation's salt load reduction goals, budget, and authorized <br />appropriation ceiling anticipate that salinity control can be implemented at <br />an average cost to the program of $50 per ton. Future projects will be <br />implemented on a competetive basis and it is expected that a significant <br />reduction in salt loading can be accomplished for less than $50 per ton. <br />Based on Reclamation's current understanding of salinity control <br />opportunities, we believe that proposals more than $100 per ton are not <br />likely to be very competitive. <br /> <br />"'<.... ~ <br /> <br />. ~-, <br /> <br />_....;~:~< <br />'~j...\ <br />':~~. <br />'~~~ <br />,.,.... <br />. <br /> <br />r: i 1 i: '); J.i <br />.~ ...1 ..... ""- . <br /> <br />Performance Risks <br /> <br />The Salinity Control Act of 1974 directs that cost effectiveness (least cost <br />per ton of salinity control) be a prime criteria for ranking and selecting <br />projects. However, it is rare that the actual performance of a project can be <br />estimated precisely. Some methods of salinity control are more variable <br />than others in their implementation. Under certain circumstances, <br />accepting some risk may reduce the program's costs. The ranking needs to <br /> <br />14 <br />