|
<br />THE SOLUTION
<br />
<br />In 1972, an amendment to the Federal Water Pollution
<br />Control Act, Public Law 92-500 (now kn4wn commonly
<br />as the Clean Water Act) sets forth a pub~jc policy
<br />embracing the restoration _and maintenat(ce of water
<br />quality, pollution effluent discharge limitfltion, and
<br />eventual zero pollution discharge. EP A io.terpreted the
<br />Act to require water quality standards, i4cluding
<br />beneficial use designations, numeric salini~y criteria, and
<br />a plan of implementation fOf the Colora~o RiVer. .
<br />Numeric criteria were subsequently established- at three
<br />stations by the Forum (Colorado. River IJasin Salinity
<br />Control Forum). The criteria and a plan:Of
<br />implementation were adopted by each oft~e Basin States,
<br />and approved by EPA. The criteria, set ill terms of
<br />milligrams per liter of TDS, are:
<br />
<br />Location
<br />
<br />Animal
<br />f1ow.w~ighted
<br />average nps (Illg/L)
<br />
<br />Below Hoover. Dam
<br />Below Parker Dam
<br />At Imperial Dam
<br />
<br />7~3
<br />*
<br />819
<br />
<br />To meet these criteria, an additionall.lmiHion tons of
<br />salt annually will need to be kept from th~ river's waters.
<br />The overall approach in meeting the sta~dards is to
<br />prevent salt from entering and mixing w(tb the river's
<br />flow. A number of agricultural, point, and~diffuse sources
<br />
<br />N
<br />c.rr
<br />.,p..
<br />0')
<br />
<br />Basin States and
<br />Federal Agencies
<br />Coordination
<br />
<br />An issue as complex as salinity controfaffects many
<br />people. Various governmental entities hate capabilities
<br />that can be combined to most effectively Jmplement
<br />control measures. In addition, public participation plays
<br />a key role in salinity control.
<br />At the state level, all seven Colorado Rivl:r Basin States
<br />(Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, Ne~ Mexico,
<br />California, and Nevada) have joined efforts to adopt
<br />standards and to implement a plan to .m~t those
<br />standards while water supplies continue t~ be developed.
<br />To accomplish needed coordination, th, Gov~mors of
<br />each of the Basin States appointed repres~ntatives to the
<br />Forum and the Council (Colorado River ;Basin Salinity
<br />Control Advisory Council). These groups) coor<linate
<br />State actions and advise the Federal Govornment of the.
<br />State views on issues affecting the salinity~iandards and
<br />ways to meet those standards, These groqps were
<br />established purs;uant to Public Laws 92-500 and 93-320,
<br />respectively. )
<br />At the Federal level, salinity control requires
<br />coordination efforts of the Department of the Interior,
<br />including FWS (Fish and Wildlife Service), USGS (U.S.
<br />Geological Survey), BLM (Bureau of Land
<br />Management), and USBR (Bureau of Re~amation); the
<br />EP A (Environmental Protection Agency); and the USDA
<br />(Department of Agriculture), including S~S (Soil
<br />Conservation Service), ASCS (Agricultura.l Stabilization
<br />arid Conservation Service), ARS (Agricul(ural Research
<br />Service), CSRS (Cooperative Stale Research Service),
<br />and ES (Extension Service).
<br />The capabilities of the Federal agencies ate coordinated
<br />through an Interagency Salinity Control <;ommittee.' Its
<br />
<br />'\
<br />
<br />of salinity have been identifie,d throughout the Basin. The
<br />salinity control program ~Il im~lemei1t controls at those
<br />sites which -contain salt sources that can be intercepted
<br />and prevented from entering the river at least cost.
<br />In June. 1974, Congress enacted the Colorado River
<br />BaSIn Salinity Control Act, Public UlW 93-320, which
<br />directed the Secretary of the Interior to proceed with a
<br />program to enhance' and protect th~ quality of water
<br />available in the Colorado River for use in the United
<br />States and the Republic of Mexico. Title I of Public Law
<br />93-320 enables the United States to comply with its
<br />obligations under the agreement with Mexico of August
<br />30, 1973 (Minute No. 242 of the International Boundary
<br />and Water Commission, United States and Mexico),
<br />concluded pursuant to the Treaty of February 3, 1944.
<br />Title II of Public Law 93-320 directed the Secretary of
<br />the Interior to expedite the completion of planning
<br />reports on 12 salinity control units and to proceed with
<br />construction of the Paradox Valley; Grand Valley,
<br />Crystal Geyser, arid Las Vegas Wash Units.'
<br />. tPe President signed a law on <?ctober 30,'1984, which
<br />amends Public- Law 93-320. It directs the Secre~ry of
<br />. AWicultu~e to est,abUsh a'malor voluntary onfarm .
<br />cooperative salinity control program within the
<br />Department -of Agriculture. The new. Agriculture
<br />program proyides.for cost sharing of onfarm
<br />improvements consistent -with the degree of onsite and
<br />ciffsite downstream benefits as determined for t~e project
<br />. area. Maximum 'Federal cost shares are norto exceed 70
<br />percent unless higher levels are approved by the Secretary
<br />of Agriculture. The new authority also requires that 30
<br />perCent of the Federal cost shall be repaid from power
<br />revenues generated through the Upper and Lower Basin
<br />funds.
<br />
<br />purposes include coordination of management of
<br />irrigated agriculture, research and implementation of off-
<br />and onfamdmprovements, and implementation of,
<br />selected, point and nonpoint ~ontrol measures.
<br />Coordination between USDA and Reclamation is
<br />enhanced through the activities of an SCSI BR Technical
<br />Policy Coordination Committee and the staffing of the
<br />USDA Basin Coordinator for Salinity Control in
<br />Reclamation's Colorado River Water Quality Office.
<br />Interagency coordination within USDA is maintained
<br />through a USDA Salinity Control Coordinatjng -
<br />Committee.
<br />
<br />The States
<br />
<br />The Colorado River-Basin-States s.upport the-salinity
<br />control program through water quality management
<br />p~ans, effluent discharge control, and education in the
<br />control of s!llinity.
<br />The Basin States individually developed water quality
<br />management plans to conform with the requirements of
<br />section 208 of the Clean Water Act. These requirements
<br />include: public involvement, problem assessment,
<br />identification of best management practices,
<br />establishment of control programs, and designation of
<br />management agencies.
<br />State programs also include the control of total
<br />dissolyed solids from point discharges through the
<br />NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Eliinination
<br />System) permit program. Fish hatcheries, lumber
<br />products mills, sewage treatment plants, and powerplant
<br />wastes are some of the municipal and industrial effluent
<br />sources under control. Reuse of treated wastewater is
<br />encouraged as a general prin,ciple..Industries are also
<br />encouraged to use saline Water in pla~ of fresh water.
<br />
<br />,For Interior, the ame.ndmeut to Publi.~. Law 9:3-~20
<br />~;'ovides- for the' following actions not prev;.ously included
<br />in the Reclamation program: .
<br />
<br />I. Authorization of construction of stage I of the
<br />Lower Gunnison Basin Unit and the'McElmo Creek
<br />Unit as a part of the Dolores Project.
<br />2. The use of cost-effectiveness as a decisionmaking
<br />criterion.
<br />3. Joint feasibility studies with industri~l water.users as
<br />a part of ongoing Saline Water Ure-and Disposal
<br />Opportunities activities.
<br />4. Authority for the Secretary of the lnterior~to
<br />contract with non~Federal entities for organization,
<br />construction, operation, maintenanCe, and
<br />replacement of authorized salinity control facilities.
<br />5. Authority to concurrently replace incidental fl$h
<br />and wildlife values foregone as salinity control units
<br />are constructed.
<br />_6. Thirty percent ,reimbursable from t.he Upper and
<br />Lower' Basin funds on the'newly autboriz~ :uhits to
<br />be repaid eithe!; during the year tl:Ieexpe_ndit~res are
<br />made or o_ver time with interest. By compa.rison, 25
<br />percent .of the ~onsiruction costs o(:previously
<br />authorized:.units are to be repaid_from the &sin
<br />Funds ov;~ 50_ years- without inter~~~.
<br />7~ Complian~ with procedural and substantive St8:te
<br />water law. . .
<br />8. Deauthoriwion of.the Crystal'Geyser, Unit initially
<br />authorized for construction under Public Law
<br />93-320,
<br />
<br />In addition, the Secretary of the Interior was djrected to
<br />do advance planning studies on Sinbad' Valley, aBu'reau
<br />of Land Management (BLM) project.
<br />
<br />
<br />r
<br />
<br />Education and public involvement are_~phasized.
<br />The basinwide nature of Salinity requires ail awareness Of
<br />salinity~sources~ impacts, and alternative methods _of
<br />control. The Basin States "continue to work through -the
<br />Forum with conCerned agencies to increa~e public
<br />understanding of salinity. -
<br />
<br />
<br />Colorado River Basin Salinity'
<br />Control Forum and Colorado
<br />Riv~r Basin Salinity,Co~trol
<br />Advisory Council
<br />The Forum is composed of up to th~ w,afer resource
<br />and/or water quality representatives from e'ach 0'( the
<br />seven Colorado River Basin States, -appointed by. their
<br />respective governors. Th.e A~visory cOllo6n is alSo
<br />composed of up' to three members appointed by the
<br />.governors of each of the seven Colorado 'itiver ~sin
<br />states.
<br />As a. result of Public Law 97-500, the For~m was
<br />established in 1973 as a mechanism for interstate
<br />cooperation and' to develop water quality:'standards,
<br />Section 303 of tpe Clean Water Act requires that these
<br />water quality standards 'be reviewed from:time t.o tiine,
<br />but at least once every three years.
<br />The seven-state Forum, with the aid of its internal
<br />Work Group, prepares a review of the w~ter qu~ity
<br />standards, including numeric criteria and:the plap. of
<br />implementation previously_developed by t~.e Forum. The
<br />1984 review included the modifications orre;visions to the
<br />plan of implementation that have become_necessary as a
<br />result of changed conditions and the availability of better
<br />information.
<br />In short, the Forum is concerned with the
<br />implementation pian progress, the numeric criteria, and
<br />whether the standards, will be met or maintained.
<br />
<br />
<br />']
<br />i,{
<br />
<br />\
<br />THE SOLU'l'ION-FOHl M ANn STATE ROLES I
<br />
<br />, ~'i!'::WIt~~~,~;;~~~ft"'I11P,W;:":<"~<:"J..!1"-:
<br />
|