WSP07611 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

" that ~rait. However, the Council understanda BPA bas serious obj ecUoM and has opposed the bsuance of the 404 parai t. The Council urges BPA to take a aore poaitive approach to the voluntary portion of the nations aost active and success fill nonpoint source ~ progra. 00 <=> Finally, the Council and Forum reaain concerned with the lack ~ of adequate implementation of Forum policy on DDES permits issued by EPA. Closer coordination is needed between salinity coordinators and permits and enforcement personnel within the EPA Regional offices to ensure Forum policy compliance. Manaaement and Budaet Recommendations The President'sFY 1989 and 1990 budget recommendations were disappointing. The Council has requested only the minimal funding necessary for the salinity control activities required to maintain the federally mandated and state adopted nUlleric criteria for salinity. All activities are consistent with the salinity control program set forth in the 1989 Joint Evaluation Report. Unlike many other federal programs, the salinity program provides a significant amount of up-front, non-federal cost sharing; 30 percent from the Upper and Lower Basin funds for Interior proqraas, and 51 percent from the local participating farmers and the Basin funds for the USDA onfarm program. The non-federal participants (farmers, irrigation districts, etc.) stand ready to contribute their up- front share of program costs. The Council urges Reclamation to press for adequate funds for this vital program and urges the other federal agencies to vigorously pursue adequate funding to implement their portion of the salinity program in a timely and cost-efficient manner. l , J .~ . I j The following. tabulation contains the Council's recommendations for appropriations for FY 1991 and FY 1992. Tentative recommendations for FY 1993 funding to provide program continuity are also offered. It is important to note that the Council's budget recommendations are not fully consistent with the Forum's recommended schedule for the plan of implementation which is a part of the state-adopted, EPA-approved salinity standards. These recommendations were made in light of the current federal budget priorities and deficit reduction goals. However, the council hastens to point out these shortcomings in the current funding levels will have to be offset by increased funding in subsequent years in -order ~-o lIlaintaln the cost -effective salinity contr!3l program necessary to achieve the water quality objectives for the Colorado River. , J , , ; , i j . ~ ! ., , 1 ., ., . ,8 I . , , ,I }:. . ~