WSP07975

• File Number: 8278.100
• Description: Title I - Yuma Desalting Plant
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Date: 10/1/1987
• Author: USDOI/BOR
• Title: Yuma Desalting Plant Operations Study - Draft Special Report
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

I

I

I

.Plan has significant institutional problems.
'Intense local opposition is expected.
.Plan may have significant environmental, economic
impacts.
'Water saved may
"May have severe

and social

I

be claimed by states.
impacts upon agri-business

economy.

I

Plan B-2!. ~oraive Particioatina Districts' Indebtedness in
Exchanae for Substitute Water.
Cost $6.4 million, TVS 967 points, Category II.

I

In this plan, one or more irrigation districts would make a
volume of water available for use as substitute water when
needed. In exchange, the ~ederal Government would forgive
participating districts of any remaining debt and would waive
certain requirements of the Reclamation Reform Act (RRA).

I

I

I

This plan could generate some social and economic benefits in
lieu of enforcing acreage limitations. There are indications
that several irrigation districts may be interested in
participating in the plan because of costs associated with
monitoring and enforcing provisions of the RRA. Estimated annual
cost of the plan, including costs of forgiving outstanding debts
and based on the assumption that sufficient water (116,000 acre-
feet per year) could be secured to eliminate production from the
YDP.

I

I

Advantages:
"Low cost.
"Benefits farmers and irrigation district.

I

I

Disadvantages:
"Could undermine Reclamation enforcement of the RRA.
"Results in loss of water in the Colorado River Basin.
"Water saved may be claimed by states.
"May require legislation.

I

plan B-22.

ComDensate ~armp-rs For Lost Production

Durina Drv

Years.

Cost $23.9 million, TVS 1011 points, Category III.

I

I

During dry years when the YDP would normally be operated,
participating farmers would make a sufficient quantity of water
available for use as substitute water. Participating farmers
would be compensated by the Federal Government for losses
incurred because of inadequate water supplies. This plan could
be difficult to administer because difficulty may be encounte~ed
in determining what benefits individuals would be entitled to.
It was assumed that the yield would be 116,000 acre-feet.

I

I

30

I