Laserfiche WebLink
<br />," ~.,. , <br />1.'; 'ii <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />"lIe CC1TIlllend E?A for tile diligence and energy it cont:.l'ues to <br />expend upon viater D0l1uticl' p7'obler.ls. lie CI.~cSo hope that this letter <br />viill aid in deveio;)ing a mutaCl.l understanding of the' Basin States' . <br />posi tion and desire to coc'pe::'a'~e in the solution of COl,lplex pollut~on <br />problems of the Colorado River System. <br /> <br />"He ,,,ill await the opportunity for further discussion. If <br />additional information is desired, please let us know. <br /> <br />"Sincerely yours, <br /> <br />(Sgd) Lynn iI. Thatcher <br /> <br />"Lynn N. Thatcher <br />"Chairman <br />"Colorado River Basin Salinity <br />Control Forum <br /> <br />"Attachments: 6" (omitted) <br /> <br />Environmental Protection A~cncv Regulations <br />on Agricultural Discharges <br /> <br />The May 3, 1973, Federal Register contained notice of the <br />proposed form and rules regarding agricultural discharges as set <br />forth under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, <br />aClt.J:orized by t.he 1972 Amendments to the Federal Hater Follution <br />Control Act. These regulations will require that discharge permits <br />lnt"st be obtained for irrigated agricultural lands that total 3,000 <br />2cres or more served by a single water agency that discharge <br />i:c^rigation'return floVi to navigable Haters from one or more point <br />SCll.:-'ces... <br /> <br />A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System-Short Form B <br />i:; to be filed vTithin 30 days upon adoption of the proposed rules. <br />Tl.1e information required, at this time, on irrigation activities <br />covers monthly distribution of return flo~s, area and type of <br />irrigation, and the volume and number of points of diversions and <br />:i'3turns. <br /> <br />No further action on these regulations was tlli,en during 1973. <br /> <br />"later Ouali ty Improvement Program, <br />HIm Service Area <br /> <br />The Metropolitan Hater District of Southern California proposed <br />a plan to improve water quality in the district's service area <br />through the blending of Colorado River water and State Project water. <br />This policy ,,,ill require increasing deli ve:"ies of State Project vTater <br />and also reducing delivery of Colorado River water sooner ~han <br />originally contemplated as a result of completion of the Central <br />Arizona Project. A pricing differential policy was also proposed, <br />based upon the relative percentages of State Project and Colorado <br /> <br />- 23 - <br />