*4.1. Results*

Table 5 presents the results of our analysis under the various assumptions regarding the parameters we presented earlier.

The results provide a clear distinction between the different scenarios: efficientinexpensive-low fine ((90%; USD 9.62/ton); USD 10/ton); inefficient-expensive-low fine ((1%; USD 24.72/ton); USD 10/ton); efficient-inexpensive-high fine ((90%; USD 9.62/ton); USD 20/ton); and inefficient-expensive-high fine ((1%; USD 24.72/ton); USD 20/ton), which are reflected in Table 5. Clearly seen are the suggestions that, in three out of the four scenarios, the net present value of the differences between the fee payments for the total managed salt load and the storage or reuse cost plus the fee payment for the remainder of the unmanaged salt suggest that the subarea should not engage in managing the salt and should pay the cost of the fine. Only under the scenario of a high level of fee per ton and efficient and inexpensive treatment, the difference between the costs was positive, suggesting that treatment is justified.

**Table 5.** Cost of temporarily storing salt in surface ponds, reusing, or recirculating the salt or temporarily storing it in the shallow groundwater system under different assumptions of fee level, storage efficiency, and cost.

