WSPC05946 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . I OiJ\Ju46 CORRECTIONS The Forum, having adopted the 1996 Review in June of 1996, now finds that with the publication of a supplemental report in October of 1996, there is opportunity to identify any corrections that the Forum has determined need to be made to the originally adopted report. The first change to the report is not really a correction to the report but is more aPfropriately identified as an update. On Page 1-5, Table I-I, and again on Page 6-4, Table 6- of the 1996 Review, it is identified that in FY 96 the Department of Agriculture (USDA) had available for expenditure for the salinity control program $2,681,000. That is the amount of money that was appropriated by the Congress under the line-item authorized by amendments to the Salinity Control Act in 1984. In 1996, the Congress passed and the President sij?;ned the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act (1996 Farm Bill). There are proVisions in the 1996 Farm Bill for the creation of a new frogram which has been titled the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) that wil allow for several conservation programs to be operated under one authorization, including the Department of A~riculture's portion of the salinity control program. There is to be appropriated each year, startmg in FY 97, $200 million fOf the EQIP program. However, in an effort to get the new EQIP program started before FY 97, interim funding was made available to the administrators in the Department of Agriculture and there was allocated additional funds to the salinity control program. There was spent during the summer of 1996, subsequent to the publishing of the 1996 Review by the Forum, an additional $3,569,000 for on-farm salinity control measures in the State of Colorado, $2,225,000 in the State of Utah, and $686,000 in the State of Wyoming. The total EQIP appropriation and expenditure for the salinity control program in FY 96 was $6,481,000. That combined with the $2,681,000 appropriated under the original authorization provides for a total expenditure for the ~__J USDA component of the program of $9,161,000 in FY 96, and that number would be a more ~,' appropriate number to consider when reviewing Table I-Ion Page 1-5 and also when feviewing A,~ Table 6-1 on Page 6-4. For several years, the Congress has identified in their appropriation measures that $800,000 is to be spent specifically on salinity control efforts. It has been known, however, that through several programs, funding has allowed for land management practices that reduce salt loading from the public lands managed by BLM. Quantification of this effort has been difficult and long in coming. Subsequent to the preparation of the 1996 Review, BLM has estimated that, in addition to the $800,000 spent, in 1995 $3,620,000 has been spent on salinity controlling practices in six states by BLM, and that effort has controlled about 15,000 tons of salt from nonpoint sources. Although these numbers are from early estimates and subject to change, it is believed that they more correctly reflect the magnitude of BLM's current efforts in salinity control than does the number in Table I-Ion Page 1-5 and Table 6-1 on Page 6-4 in the 1996 Review. In the form of an update, the reader is referred to page I-Sand Table I-I wherein it is identified that $8,205,000 is available for Reclamation to spend in FY 96. Of that amount, $500,000 was appropriated by the Congress to be spent under a newly authorized basin-wide program with the passage of P.L. 104-20. That new program is briefly described on Page 3-4 of the Review. Subsequent to the June adoption of the 1996 Review, Reclamation awarded to the Hammond Conservancy District a contract for the full $500,000 to line canals and reduce salt load to the river at a very cost effective rate, estimated to be about $15 annually per ton of salt. The following typographical or grammatical errors have been noted in the 1996 Review. Water Ouality Standards For Salinity. Colorado River System. June 1996. They are as follows: Page 2-3: On Figure 2-1, in the upper left-hand comer, monitoring stations are identified and the fifth monitoring station listed should be changed from "Whiter" to "White". 18