Laserfiche WebLink
<br />,,~;::.:;.l <br />,. <br /> <br /> <br /><=> <br />c:> <br />en <br />00 <br /> <br />reservoirs were available eo replace the bypassed drainage and all <br />parcies were satisfactorily served by the Rivet system despiee the <br />situaeion ae Welleon-Mohawk. <br /> <br />Plant ooeratin~ coses. !he projeceed cases to desale Wellton-Mohawk <br />irrigation drainage have risen dramat:ically since use of the desalting <br />plant was originally authorized by Congress. When the plane becomes <br />operational in 1992, the Bureau will begin to incur annual operation and <br />. maintenance costs that. are project:ed to range between $6 million (no <br />drainage processing) and $25 million (maximum drainage processing). !he <br />act:Ual cost:s incurred will depend on the quantity of Well ton-Mohawk <br />irrigation drainage water needed to help fulfill Mexico's annual wat:er <br />allocation and the corresponding level of plant operation necessary eo <br />desalt that amount of drainage. <br /> <br />If all Wellton-Mohawk irrigat:ion drainage is desalted to satisfy the <br />cOlllllitment and the plant operates every year, we estimec:e that it will <br />cost about: $316 an acre- foot: for the desalting process. !his is in <br />contrast to the project:ion of $75 an acre-foot computed by the Bureau in <br />1973 just prior to enactment of the enabling legislation. The cost per <br />acre-foot is not: a static figure, and it will vary upward considerably <br />depending on the amount of drainage thae act:Ually needs desalting. For <br />example, for scenarios where ehe plant is operated an average of 67, 40, <br />20, and 10 percent of the time, the proj eceed acre- foot cost rises eo <br />$354, $430, $620, and $1,000, respectively. This is significant because <br />the plant will not always be at full operation. <br /> <br />The high projected cost for the operation of the plane recenely came <br />under the scrutiny of the Office of Management and Budget during ies <br />budget formulacion process for fiscal year 1989. In the 1989 budgee <br />passback, the Bureau was request:ed eo develop and submit an analysis of <br />the economic feasibility of operat:ing the plane, including an analysis of <br />al ternative means to comply with the required salinity st:anclards. !he <br />Office of Hanagemene and Budget requested the analysis because it was noe <br />convinced that the benefit derived from the plant would outweigh even ehe <br />annual operations and maintenance costs. The Ilureau advised us that ie <br />informally discussed the issue with an Office of Management and Budget <br />"examiner," but a formal analysis was not submitted, as originally <br />requested. <br /> <br />We agree with the Office of Hanagement and Iludget's concern because the <br />operating costs seem eo have risen to the point where the desal ting <br />program may no longer be considered reasonable or economically desirable, <br />especially since these costs will be incurred eo remoVe the salt <br />pollution aet:ribut:able eo a single irrigation district. <br /> <br />Plant: caDabilities. I t appears thae under certain condieions, the <br />desaleing plane lacks ehe capability eo remove sufficiene sale from the <br />liellton-Mohawk irrigaeion drainage eo meet the es.tablished waeer <br />seandards. Thus, despiee estimated capieal investments of as much as <br />$485 million and ehe pot:eneial incurrence of $25 million in annual <br />operaeing cases, ehe Bureau may ae eimes be in a posieion of ei eher <br />giving waeer eo Mexico ehae was allocated eo ehe staees or noe meeting <br /> <br />7 <br />