WSP01110 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

l- oA C() l- NEED FOR PROGRAM EVALUATION AND REAUTHORIZA TION The original Salinity Control Program authorization is now more that 20 years old and the 1984 amendments are nearly 10 years old. Authorized portions of the program are nearing completion and Reclamation is quickly approaching the appropriation ceiling. The authorized ceiling (indexed) is approximately $301M and Reclamation spending through fiscal year 1994 was $273M, leaving a remaining ceiling of only approximately $28M. Completion of ongoing contracts, construction cooperative agreements, and wildlife habitat replacement will Consume the remaining construction ceiling by about 1998. The Salinity Control Act (as amended) authorized significantly more construction than could be completed under the construction appropriation ceiling for the program. The Act directed that only the most cost-effective portions of the authorized program be constructed. While construction of additional cost-effective portions of the authorized program is possible, insufficient ceiling remains to complete Reach la of the Grand Valley Unit and the East Side Lateral portion of the Lower Gunnison Basin Unit. Pending additional ceiling, these units were tentatively scheduled for awards in fiscal year 1994 and 1995 respectively and the 1994 awards were delayed as a result of the program review. Consequently, Congress will need to reauthorize the Title II program for it to continue. Reclamation believes that traCking of construction costs for project activities must be improved and that, along with new authority, appropriate methodology must be dsveloped and in place to make the new legislation work. Reclamation has gained from its experience with the program and has identified new and innovative opportunities to control salinity, including cooperative efforts with the USDA, BLM, and private interests, which are very cost- effective. However, these opportunities could not be implemented under the 1974 Act of 1984 amendments. The Inspector General's recent audit report confirmed this problem. The report notes the Salinity Control Act directed "the Secretary shall give preference to. ..implementing practices which reduce salinity at the least cost per unit of salinity reduction." The IG report concluded that Reclamation's unit specific authorization process impedes implemsntation of the moet coet-effective measures by restricting the program to specific authorized units. For example, salinity control in the Price-San Rafael, San Juan River, and Uinta Basin areas are all more cost-effective than the salinity component of the authorized Dolores Project, yet because of the lack of authorization, none of those projects have been implemented. The IG Report recommended Reclamation seek changes in Title II of the salinity Control Act to simplify the process for obtaining Congressional approval of new, cost-effective salinity control projects. Specifically, _.the IG recommended a basinwide-programmatic construction authority so that the most cost-effective alternatives for the Salinity Control Program can be implemented in a timely manner. These authorities would be similar to those provided to the OSDA in the 1984 amendments, wherein the OSDA was granted programmatic planning and construction authority, Reclamation agreed with the IG and wants to explore innovative ideas which would help improve the effectiveness of ite program and taks advantags of opportunities which were not envisioned 20 years ago. With reauthorization needed to continue the program, this is an appropriate time to reassess the direction of the program to incorporate technological advances and new ideas to improve the program's effectiveness and the overall water supply conditions of the Colorado River Basin. Consequently, in the hope of strengthening the program through public inVOlvement, Reclamation initiated, in March 1994, a 5 I I I .1 1