My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01968
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP01968
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:33:38 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:46:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8271.300
Description
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program - General Information and Publications-Reports
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
1/24/1974
Author
L Russell Freeman
Title
The Problem of Salinity in the Colorado River
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.
/
8
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 />(:J <br />o <br />l-" 1. by July 1, 1977, the best practicable control technology <br />CO currently available. (301-b-l-A) <br />N <br />W 2. by July 1, 1977, any more stringent limitation necessary to <br />meet water quality standards, treatment standards, or either <br />state or Federal law or regulation. (301-b-1-C) <br /> <br />3. by July 1, 1983, the best available technology economically <br />achievable which will result in reasonable further progress <br />toward the goal of no discharge. (301-b-2-A) <br /> <br />4. The Act also sets a national goal of "no discharge" by 1985. <br /> <br />Thus, the act establishes a minimum performance standard, "best practicable <br />control," which must be achieved by 1977. It also anticipates a gradual upgrading <br />of this minimum standard, with the goal of "no-discharge" by 1985, where such a <br />goal is feasible. Finally, this section of the act restates the need to meet standards <br />or other such requirements where these are the more restrictive. <br /> <br />Water quality standards legally in effect prior to amendment to the act were <br />continued in effect (Sec. 303); however, the act requires that new water quality <br />standards be promptly prepared and promulgated where necessary to meet with <br />requirements of the amended act (Sec. 303 (b) (4) (B)). To determine the status of <br />standards, therefore, one must evaluate what exists in view of new requirements <br />of the amendments to the act. State-Federal Water Quality Standards for Arizona <br />contain the following language in the section on the quality of water in the Lower <br />Colorado (Sec. 6-2-2-1 (J) (5)): <br /> <br />The flow of the Colorado River has been reduced to a minimum at this <br />point, and except for occasional storm flows, only enough flow is <br />maintained to supply the Mexican Treaty requirement. The TDS <br />fluctuates somewhat because of changes of demand as compared to <br />volumes of return flows. This problem is of international concern <br />and some relief has been afforded by the construction of the Wellton- . <br />Mohawk Dam Drain Extension shown on Plate 2. The final solution <br />to this problem is of total basin concern, and the entire burden <br />should not be placed on the local area or on one state of the ba sin. <br /> <br />It is important to note that this official document does characterize the <br />situation as a problem, specifically mentions irrigation return flows, and only <br />questions placing of responsibility for solution of the problem. This is based <br />on the fact that conditions throughout the Colorado River Basin contribute to <br />water quality problems in the lower reach. <br /> <br />When water quality standards were originally established by the Colorado <br />River, it was decided that specific numeric criterion for TDS and constituent ions <br />would not be required. Arizona standards reflect this decision (Sec. 6-2-5): <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.