My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC05946
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
17000-17999
>
WSPC05946
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:03:44 PM
Creation date
10/9/2006 5:34:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8272
Description
Colorado River - Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program - CRBSCP
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
10/10/1996
Title
Proposed Supplemental Report on the Water Quality Standards for Salinity - Colorado River System - 1996 Review - Draft
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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 />. <br /> <br />OiJ0335 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The Forum offers the following response to the four issues brought to the Forum by the <br />lID. First, the Forum does recognize that for the first time in the history of the triennial <br />reviews, the 1996 Review does indicate that with the long-term mean water supply in the system <br />rather than the actual experienced inflows, flow-adjusted salinity concentratIOns in the river <br />system presently exceed the numeric criteria. The Forum believes that the plan of <br />Implementation set forth in this report is an aggressive plan and is intended to maintain salini1y <br />concentrations at the numeric criteria levels through the year 2015, assuming long-term average <br />hydrology. The Forum believes the plan of implementation as outlined in the report provides <br />for implementing salinity control measures as fast as reasonably anticipated funding can be <br />obtained from federal, state and local sources. The Forum, however, would welcome additional <br />funding. The Forum will be constantly monitoring the rate of program implementation, <br />formally reviewing this issue every three years, and will be looking for cost-effective ways to <br />accelerate the program so that the observed salinity levels will be in compliance with the adopted <br />water quality standards. The Forum notes that in the past, it has uq~ed a more aggressive <br />program than has been funded by the Federal government for the portion of the program the <br />Federal Government has the responsibility to implement under Public Law 93-320 as amended <br />(Salinity Control Act). On Page 1-5, Table 1.1 of the 1996 Review report indicates that for the <br />last three fiscal years, with one exception, federal appropriations for Reclamation, BLM and <br />Agriculture have not equalled the Forum-identified funding need. Past inadequate federal <br />fundin~ places the program in the position it is in today. The Forum has consistently urged the <br />Admimstration and the Congress for funding levels adequate to implement the plan of <br />Implementation and has pointed out that deferring funding until later years only adds to the <br />ultimate cost of maintaining the water quality standards. <br /> <br />Secondly, the Forum is aware that the non-operational status of the Yuma Desaltin~ Plant <br />results in Reclamation bypassing the Welton Mohawk drain water to the Gulf of California with <br />a resulting loss of water supply to the Colorado River Basin users. However, water supply <br />issues are addressed by the states and the federal government in meetings specifically called for <br />this purpose by representatives assigned by their governments to represent them on these water <br />supply matters. Forum members, s~ng within the capacity of their appointments to the <br />Forum, do not represent the states With respect to water supply issues. Further, water quality <br />issues that arise between the United States and the Republic of Mexico are not a part of Title <br />II of the Salinity Control Act, and those issues with respect to the states' concerns are not <br />formally assigned by their states to the appointed Forum members. The Forum has not felt it <br />appropriate to take formal positions concerning what has been termed Title I activities under the <br />Salinity Control Act. The Forum and its membership, however, are most interested in an <br />appropriate resolution of water quality issues at the border. The Forum, from time to time, has <br />provided Reclamation and the International Boundary and Water Commission an opportunity to <br />converse with representatives of the Basin states at Forum meetings. Further, the Forum has <br />gone on record urging Reclamation to invite state-designated participants to comprehensive <br />sessions held by Reclamation to discuss options with respect to the operation of the Yuma <br />Desalting Plant. The Forum and its members continue to urge Reclamation to convene such <br />meetings and ensure appropriate participation by the Basin states and affected water users. <br /> <br />Thirdly, the Forum recognizes that cloud-seeding and other precipitation augmentation <br />programs have the potential to provide additional water supply and, at times, studies have <br />mdicated will result m reduced salt concentrations in the Colorado River system. The Forum, <br />however, believes that this precipitation management issue is of primary concern to the United <br />States as it might address ways to replace water that has been committed by the Congress, and <br />of concern to the Basin states' representatives assigned by 1heir governors to address water <br />supply issues. If the subject of precipitation management were to be actively discussed by the <br />federal government and/or state representatives assigned to examine water supply issues, the <br />Forum would become actively involved in examining options that would reduce salinity <br />concentrations in the Colorado River system. <br /> <br />Lastly, the Forum recognizes that the studies used to estimate damages are somewhat <br />oU1dated and that the current values being used most likely underestimate the actual damages <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />,~ <br />/('.,) <br />\~ <br /> <br />{'J.vJ <br />#1.~~'1 <br />cY <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.