My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00158
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00158
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:46:02 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:32:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
12/12/1973
Description
Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />drainage system in the Mexicali Valley in Mexico to take care of the <br />salinity problem. Why the United States should go into Mexico and <br />pay for improving the irrigated lands in that area is beyond me. In <br />anfevent. that was the total agreement with the Republic of Mexico. <br />it is a one-way deal. The United States gets nothing. except a <br />--tremendous expense. Mexico persuaded the United States to agree to <br />s~sidize irrigation practices in Mexico and an agreement that it is <br />entitled to another 160.000 acre-feet of water over and above the <br />Mexican Treaty. Some agreement~ <br /> <br />That sets the stage. The proposed EPA regulation followed shortly <br />after the agreement with Mexico. The proposed regulation provides <br />that by next June each of the Colorado River basin states shall <br />prepare a plan leading to the adoption of salinity standards by 1975. <br />This gives us only roughly six months to come up with a plan. How- <br />ever. there is a saving feature in the proposed standards. Just what <br />it means. we are not sure. At the time that we have to adopt the <br />salinity standards. which is 1975. we then have to present a plan to <br />enforce those standards. That is. we have to indicate how we intend <br />to carry out the standards. No time limit is specified in the EPA <br />proposal. It is this time factor that is critical to us. Just what <br />the EPA will agree to in the way of time to actually effect the <br />salinity standards. we are not sure. That is the crux of the problem <br />at this time. The fact remains that in 1975 we are expected to <br />establish a specific standard for each of the tributaries in colorado. <br />the Colorado. the Dolores. the White. the Yampa. the San Juan. and <br />the separate drainages which discharge at the stateline. Then we <br />have an unspecified amount of time to actually put those standards <br />into effect. All the states have argued that it will take time to <br />actually put the standards into effect. because the methods are not <br />currently available and projects are not currently available to <br />enforce those standards. The states have a~~ed that they have until <br />1983 to actually put the standards into effect. This was a common <br />resolution adopted by the salinity forum of the seven states. <br /> <br />The EPA regulation reads very much like all the regulations which <br />have been adopted to date on pollution standards. And this is a <br />standard phrase in all the EPA regulations: "Studies to date have <br />demonstrated that the high salinity of stream systems can be alle- <br />viated." Now what that doesn't say is what the cost is. The economic <br />factors of these EPA regulations have been totally ignored. We can <br />in fact. I think. meet a zero discharge standard by 1985 in the <br />United States. if we want to spend fifty billion dollars or so. At <br />least that much. I would say. and thereafter pay a staggering annual <br />operation and maintenance cost. So the dollar figure, the EPA <br />conveniently ignores. What effect this may have upon the economy of <br /> <br />-4- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.