REPORT OF STEERING COMMITTEE
ON
SALINITY CONTROL OF IRRIGATION RETURN FLOWS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII - DENVER, COLORADO
DECEMBER 1972

-------
REPORT OF STEERING COMMITTEE
ON
SALINITY CONTROL OF IRRIGATION RETURN FLOWS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII - DENVER, COLORADO
DECEMBER 1972

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
FOREWARD 					1
CONCLUSIONS		 . . 				3
RECOMMENDATIONS				6
INTRODUCTION	. . . .		8
SUPPORTING MATERIAL			TO
PROPOSED EPA PROGRAMS		26
i

-------
FOREWARD
In view of the continuing and expanding' importance of con-
trolling salinity pollution due to irrigation return flows, the
Regional Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Region
VIII, appointed a Task Force to consider the feasibility of
applying the permit program to such flows. Subsequently, the
passage of the 1972 Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act and the creation of the Browne11 Task Force, appointed by
the President to recommend measures for improving the quality of
the Colorado River water entering the soveriqn State nf Mexico,
made it advisable to increase the personnel and to enlarge the
scope of the assignment of the original Region VIII Task Force.
This paper, in brief, has as its purpose a definition of the
salinity problem, the enunciation of a proposed Environmental Pro-
tection Agency,policy for control of salinity from irrigated
agriculture, ai^d a recommended course of action to implement those
t
portions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (PL 92-500}
pertinent to this problem.

-------
The members of the Task Force Steering Committee were:
John A. Green, Regional Administrator, EPA, Region VIII,
Chairman.
Louis Str1>egel, Enforcement Division, EPA, Region VIII,
Vice-Chairman.
Michael Glenn, Enforcement Division, EPA, Washington, D.C.
H. Bernard, Chief, Agriculture and Marine Pollution Control
Branchf EPA, Washington, D.C.
William C. Shilling, Chief, Non-Point Sources Control Branch
Water Quality Division (OWPO), EPA, Washington, D.C.
B. David Clark, Director, Surveillance & Analysis Division,
EPA, Region IX
Jack Rademacher, Enforcement Division, EPA, Washington, D.C.
Russ Freeman, Intergovernmental Affairs, EPA, Region IX.
Much of the material in this report results from studies sub-
mitted to the Steering Committee by Sub-Groups under the direction
of:
Jay Law, Chairman: Sub-Group-Problem Assessment
Joseph Krivak, Chairman: Sub-Group-Implementation
Cooper Wayman, Chairman: Sub-Group-Legal
2

-------
CONCLUSIONS
1.	There are many water quality problems' resulting from
irrigation return flows in the arid western regions. Salinity
problems caused by a complex interrelationship of irrigation
return flows; municipal and industrial discharges and natural
pollution sources; consumptive water uses and other water .deple-
tions, such as reservoir evaporation and exports. However, as
future flow depletions cause changes in mineral quality of water
resources, control of salinity from irrigation return flows
becomes increasingly significant. Thus, basin-widp control pro-
grams dealing with all water uses and natural sources are require
to solve the problem.
2.	Salinity falls within the scope of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. This Act requires that the Environmental
Protection Agency develop a national pollution control program,
and further requires that the States develop basin-wide managemen
plans to control both point and non-point sources of pollution.
The national program should be focused-on providing assistance
to the States in the development of a series of such basin-wide
programs. As a minimum, Environmental Protection Agency programs
3

-------
should encompass: (a) mechanisms for providing assistance to and
review of such State programs; (b) development and demonstration
of control technology; and (c) monitoring the effectiveness of
established controls.
3.	A minor percent of the salinity problem caused by irriga-
tion return flows can be controlled via a national permit program.
The most viable approach to control of this problem is through
water management.
4.	The Federal Water Pollution Control Act places primary
responsibility for control of water pollution problems in the State
The States have the authority to control both water quality
and water quantity which is essential to a complete water manage-
ment program.
5.	Improved water management practices, particularly the use
of water at optimum efficiencies on the farm, is the most feasible
approach to controlling excessive salt loads from irrigation return
flows to many of our western river systems. Present technology
would permit the implementation of several salinity control measure
that are not inow widely employed. The cost of installing available
pollution control devices in many cases will be more than individua
farmers can manage. However, if the salinity is not controlled,
the cost to the Nation will far exceed the cost of the pollution
4

-------
control. Federal and State financial assistance may be necessary
if pollution controls are to be established.
6.	Legal and institutional means must be found to control
water salvaged\through improved water management in order to
finally achieve a solution to basin-wide salinity problems.
7.	There are at present many federal , state, and local pro-
grams which do or could affect mineral water quality control. The
mechanisms of existing programs should be utilized in implementing
the mandates of the new water aualitv act.
5

-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that:
1.	The Environmental Protection Agency adopt, the following
policy with respect to the control of salinity pollution from
irrigation return flows.
"Control of salinity is necessary if the quality
of the Nation's waters is to be maintained and enhanced.
The Environmental Protection Agency recognizes that
while irrigation return flows are only a part of the
problem, they contribute materially to the total salinity
problem in many of the Nation's basins. There are
several principles which should be applied to the con-
trol of irrigation return flows including:
Responsibility for control of .pollution should
be placed upon the parties responsible for
such pollution.
b.	Pollution should be minimized by applying
management control at the source rather than
through treatment of return flows.
c.	Management control should utilize the most
efficient techniques now available for limiting
wjater usage."
2.	The States assume the primary responsibility for the
implementation of a program to control salinity from irrigation
return flows.
6

-------
3.	At present, the Environmental Protection Agency not
require application of Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act to irrigation return flows, provided such return
flows are brought under broader state or interstate programs
which meet the mandatory requirements of the new water aualitv
act.
4.	The Environmental Protection Agency undertake a salinity
control program in support of federal programs and the state or
interstate control programs recommended in (2) above.
5.	Any basin-wide plan developed under Sections 102, 208,
303, or 305 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act include
a plan to control salinity where it has been identified as a
water quality problem.
6.	Where a salinity problem already exists new lands
should not be brought under irrigation development unless at the
same time a program for a comparable reduction of the salt load
is implemented.
7

-------
INTRODUCTION
Irrigation is one of the most important agricultural
practices developed by man, having been practiced-in some form
since the earliest recorded history of agriculture. Indians of
the western hemisphere were irrigating crops long before the
discovery of the New World. Irrigation has been the dominant
factor in the development of land and water recources in the
arid and semi-arid areas of the Western United States, and has
greatly influenced the basic economy of that region. Irrigation
is practiced in about ten percent of the total cropped land in
the United States and produces about twenty-five percent of the
Nation's total crop value. Irrigation farming not only increases
productivity, but it also permits a shift from the relatively
few dryland crops to many others which may be in greater demand.
Irrigation strengthens other facets of a region's economy by
creating employment opportunities in harvesting, processing, and
i
marketing agricultural products. However, National Water
Commission studies indicate that United States food and fiber
demands through the year 2000 could be met using less irrigated
8

-------
land than is being used at present. Compensation for the loss
in production would be achieved by returning lands not requiring
irrigation (presently idle under government control proqrams)
to production.\
The water quality problems- associated- w-itlv irrigation
return flows are of special concern because irrigated agriculture
is the largest consumer of water resources. In addition, it is
of major importance to the Nation as the source of a significant
part of the food and fiber produced annually. Irrigation return
flows constitute a large portion of the flow in many streams of
the Western United States. Due to the consumptive nature of
irrigation, some degree of salt concentration must be accepted
as the price for irrigation development. However, there are.
areas where water quality degradation has been unduly serious
and excessive. As pressures on water resources increase, there
is mounting concern for proper and adequate control of such
serious water quality deterioration. The exact role of irrigation
return flows in both surface and groundwater quality problems
i
must be examined more closely to develop and implement measures
to control or alleviate the unnecessary detrimental effects. The
need for more precise information as a basis for wise action has
been brought sharply into focus.
9

-------
SUPPORTING MATERIAL
Before addressing the salinity problems and solutions to
irrigation return flows, it is necessary to understand that
irrigation return flows are only one contributing factor to the
problems, and that the salinity problems as a whole must be con-
sidered on a basin-wide basis with due consideration to the many
other factors involved.
Salinity concentrations progressively increase from the head-
waters to the mouth of western rivers. This increase results from
two basic processes - salt loading and' salt concentrating. Salt
loading, the addition of mineral salts from various natural and
man-made sources, increases salinity by increasing the total salt
burden carried by the river. In contrast, salt concentrating
effects are produced by stream flow depletions and increase salinity
by concentrating the salt burden in a lesser volume of water.
Salt loacis are contributed to the river system by natural and
i
man-made sources. Natural sources include surface runoff and
diffuse groundwater discharges, and discrete sources such as mineral
springs, seeps, and other identifiable point discharges of saline
waters. Man-made sources include municipal and industrial waste
discharges and return flows from irrigated lands.
10

-------
Streamflow depletions contribute significantly to salinity
increases. Consumptive use of water for irrigation is responsible
for the largest depletions. Consumptive use of water for municipal
and industrial^purposes accounts for a much smaller depletion.
Evaporation from reservoir and stream surfaces also produces large
depletions. Phreatophytes cause significant water losses by
evapotranspiration.
Out-of-basin diversions from the upper reaches of a basin
contribute significantly to streamflow depletions and produce a
salt concentrating effect similar to consumptive use. The water
diverted is high in quality and low in salt content. Thus, while
these diversions remove substantial quantities of water from the
basin, they remove only a small portio'rhof the salt load.
The Colorado River Basin offers an example of this situation.
Analysis of the relative effects of the various salt loading and
salt concentrating factors on salinity concentrations of the
Colorado River at Hoover Dam indicates that only about half of the
average salinity concentrations are attributed to natural factors.
While in the past, salt loading has been the dominant factor
i
affecting salinity concentrations, future increases in salinity
levels will result primarily from flow depletions caused by out-of-
basin exports, reservoir evaporation and consumptive use of water
for municipal, industrial, and agricultural purposes.
11

-------
Projections for Hoover Dam indicate a relatively constant,
average salt load over the next 40 years, but a substantial drop
in water flow. Over 80% of the future increases in salinity con-
centrations at hoover Dam will be the result of increases in flow
depletions. Over three-fourths of the projected salinity increase
between 1960 and 2010 will be the result of increases in reservoir
evaporation brought about by the filling of major storage reser-
voirs completed since 1960, and of increases in consumptive use
brought about by the expansion of irrigated agriculture.
From the discussion it is clear that any solution to the over-
all salinity problem of a river basin must be basin-wide in scope,
and it must take into account water diversions and consumptive
uses as well as natural and man-caused sources of salinity loads.
There are several factors which influence the severity of
irrigation return flow qua!ity problems. Major among these are:
(1) quality of irrigation water applied; (2) climate of the
region; (3) quantity of water applied; (4) geology and soil types
in the basin; and (5) total irrigated acreage in a river basin.
i
Usually, the quality of the water coming from the mountanious
watersheds in the West is excellent. At the base of the mountain
-ange, large quantities of water are diverted to valley croplands,
luch of .the diverted water is lost to the atmosphere by evapo-
;ranspiration (perhaps one-half to two-thirds of the diverted water)
12

-------
with the remaining water supply being irrigation return flow.
This return flow will either be surface runoff, shallow horizontal
subsurface flow, or will move vertically through the soil profile
until it reaches a perched water table or the groundwater reser-
voir. There it will remain in storage or be transported through
the groundwater reservoir until it reaches a river channel.
That portion of the water supply which has been diverted for
irrigation, but lost by evapotranspiration (consumed) is
essentially salt-free. Therefore, the irrigation return flow will
contain most of the salts originally in the water supply. The sur-
face irrigation return flow will usually contain only slightly
higher salt concentrations than the original water supply.
Whether irrigation return flows come from surface runoff or
have returned to the system via the soil profile, the water can be
expected to undergo a variety of quality changes due to varying
exposure conditions. Drainage from surface sources consists
mainly of surface runoff from irrigated .land (there will be some
precipitation runoff). Because of its limited contact and exposure
to the soil surface, the following changes in quality might be
i
gxpected between application and runoff: (a) dissolved solids con-
:entrations only slightly increased; (b) addition of variable
ind fluctuating amounts of pesticides; (c) addition of variable
imounts of fertilizer elements; (d) an increase in sediments and .
13

-------
other colloidal material; (e) crop residues and other debris
floated from the soil surface; and (f) increased bacterial content.
Drainage water that has moved through the soil profile will
experience chartges in quality different from surface runoff.
Because of its more intimate contact with the soil and the dynamic
soil-plant-water regime, the following changes in quality are pre-
dictable: (a) considerable increase in dissolved solids concen-
trations; (b) the distribution of various cations and anions may be
quite different; (c) variation in the total salt load depending
on whether there has been deposition or leaching; (d) little or
no sediment or colloidal material; (e) generally increased nitrate
content; (f) little or no phosphorus content; (g) general reduction
of oxidizable organic substances; and (h) reduction of pathogenic
organisms and coliform bacteria. Each type of return flow will
affect the receiving water in proportion to respective discharges
and the relative quality of the receiving water.
Many of the western rivers show the effects of irrigation
return flows on the quality of water. Along a 200-mile stretch
of the Sevier River in central Utah, there are seven complete streaiT
diversions for irrigation. Although there are several high-quality
streams entering the valley, the total dissolved solids (TDS) con-
centration shows a 20-fold increase to a value of over 900 mg/1.
14

-------
The Colorado River shows at least a 20-fold increase in salinity
from Grand Lake to Imperial Dam, where the average concentration
is about 850 mg/1. ¦ There are several reservoirs and irrigation
diversions alon§ the Rio Grande in New Mexico. Salinity increases
from about 200 mg/1 near Sante Fe to over 2,000 mg/1 below El Paso
Valley. These salinity levels are in excess of the 500 mg/1 TDS
criterion recommended for public water supplies. The public water
supply criteria for both chloride and sulfate are 250.mg/1. These
values are also exceeded under these conditions described since
these are ordinarily the predominant anions in irrigation return
flows.
Water quality degradation in a river basin due to irrigation
return flows bears a somewhat linear relationship to the total
irrigated acreage in the basin. For instance, an increase in
irrigated acres would be expected to further degrade the downstream
water quality, assuming no concerted effort to implement basin-wide
salinity control measures.
The tota
irrigated land in the United States has increased
from under four million acres in the 1890's to almost 44 million acres
i
in 1969. During the last two decades, the value of supplemental
irrigation has been recognized in the humid Eastern United States,
with atotal irrigated acreage of 3.6 million acres in 1960 which
reflects more than a two-fold increase in the last ten years. The
15

-------
Economic Research Service (U. S. Department of Agriculture) has
made projections of irrigated acreage in the United States to
the year 2020. If these projections hold true, irrigated acreage
could continue Ho increase by five to ten. percent per decade for
the next half century.
Arid regions are characterized by inadequate-rainfall and
high evaporative losses. In those areas, economic crop production
is not possible without irrigation. In contrast, supplemental
irrigation in more humid regions is employed only to assure adequate
soil moisture through the growing season when extended dry periods
occur. In rainfall-deficient areas, soils may be salt-laden and/or
high in exchangable sodium due to insufficient natural leaching.
The U. S. Salinity Laboratory estimates thait crop production is
reduced on one-fourth of the irrigated land in the Western United
States due to saline soils. Salinity is a potential hazard to
half of the irrigated land in the West. The complete reclamation
of saline soils can require long periods of time and large quantitie
of salt may be displaced to surface streams or groundwater.
Excessive water use is the greatest cause of water quality
t
degradation associated with irrigation. This is especially true whe
saline aquifers and/or salt-bearing geologic formations underlie the
irrigated area. Excessive deep percolation (over and above the
leaching requirement) will flush more salt to the river drainage
16

-------
system and increase the total salt load of the river. Excessive
irrigation will also increase non-beneficial water losses resulting
in added streamflow depletions and an increased salinity concen-
trating effect.^ Thus, efficient water use is the key to controlling
both the salinity loading and salinity concentrating effects
attributable to irrigation.
Although there are many factors which affect efficient farm .
water management, it is generally agreed that much higher irrigation
efficiencies are attainable than are normally achieved. Optimum
irrigation efficiencies are achieved when just enough water is
applied to meet the crop needs and leaching requirement. The water
needs of various crops at different stages of growth and maturity
have been determined for different climatic regions. The leaching
requirement is based on the quality of irrigation water and the salt
concentration that can be tolerated in the root zone of the crop.
There are standard procedures for determining the leaching require-
ment for any given set of conditions. It has been demonstrated (at
the Riverside Laboratory of the U. S. Department of Agriculture) on
small plots that leaching requirements as low as three to five per-
cent (indicating field irrigation efficiencies as high as 95-97%)
are attainable. However, such low leaching fractions (high
efficiencies) have not been obtained in general practice. In order
to achieve higher irrigation efficiencies, a substantial invest-
ment in improved irrigation technology would be required.
17

-------
U. S. Bureau of Reclamation studies reported to the Brownell
Task Force indicates the following costs for improvement of
irrigation efficiency:
Farm Irrigation	Approximate. Equivalent
Efficiency	Annual Cost ($/Acre)
50% (pres)	0
75%	15
30
90%	50
95%	70
These cost estimates are based on use of increasingly complex
controls to improve the timing and volume of applied water in
accordance with crop water requirements, it is also noted that
practical considerations might preclude achieving farm efficiencies
in the 90% range. Treatment of return flows appears to be the only
other visible control alternative. A case study of the Well ton-
Mohawk Project in the Lower Colorado River Basin, indicated that
through the range of practical applicability reducing return flows
through more efficient irrigation was less expensive than treatment
of return flows by desalting.
Although annual costs in the range reported above exceed, the
repayment capacity of most farmers, studies supported by the Enviro
mental Protection Agency in the Colorado River Basin indicate that
18

-------
benefits resulting from salinity control throughout a river basin
generally exceed the cost of controls. When such a situation
occurs, the normal practice is to share costs between the irrigation
and other beneficiaries elsewhere in the basin.
The initial charge to this study group was to determine the
applicability of an effluent-permit program to the. control of irriga-
tion return flow. This approach does not appear to be practical for
several reasons:
1.	Control of return flow salinity does not deal with the
total aspect of irrigation effects on salinity, particularly the
concentrating effects stemming from non-beneficial consumptive use
of water.
2.	The best approach to' control return flow is water manage-
ment; water management can best be regulated by control on diversions
or beneficial consumptive use, rather than by irrigation return flows
3.	There are technical problems in identifying, measuring, and
regulating sub-surface return flows.
4.	Permits should have only a minimal effect since most of the
1
1
salinity probilems result from sub-surface return flows. It is
i
estimated that only a small fraction of sub-surface return flows
would appear to meet the definition of "point source" and would
come within the scope of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
19

-------
5. Severe administrative problems would be involved in
application of a permit program because of the potentially large
number of applicants involved.
These points are discussed in more detail as follows:
Approximately 40-60% of the return flows from irrigation are
tailwater losses. Since this water is about the same quality as
that of the diversion water, tailwater does not create major
salinity problems. The salinity- problems to a great extent are
associated with sub-surface drainage from the irrigation projects.
There are serious technical problems in identifying, measuring,
and monitoring these sub-surface return flows. Tile drainage is
the only fraction of sub-surface return flows which can be measurec
It is estimated that only 15% of all irrigated lands are tile
drained. Thus, only a small percentage of the sub-surface waters
could reasonably come within the scope of the permit program, as
provided in the Act.
The administrative problems of dealing with all farm units
discharging into navigable waters would be overwhelming. There
l
i
are perhaps about 100,000 industries generating wastes in the
i
United States. Only 25,000 to 30,000 of these require permits
to discharge to navigable waters or their tributaries. All others
dispose of their waste to municipal treatment' facilities or are
20

-------
no-discharge situations. The 1969 Census of Agriculture shows
that more than 39,000,000 acres were irrigated on more than 230,000
farms in the United States. Obviously it would be very difficult
to issue permits for irrigation return flows from each-farm, even
if technically feasible, since the work load would be about ten-
fold that necessitated all other industries combined. Also, each
individual farmer would not have the technical capabilities for
chemical or other analyses which are required in the permit
application, or to show compliance with the permit requirement.
For this reason, if a permit program is to be implemented, it
would be more efficient to consider a permit for a larger entity
such as an irrigation district, river basin, valley, or a block
of lands.
Given the relative merits and cost of administration of
Section 402 of the Act, as compared to the development and opera-
tion of an effective administrative institution for water manage-
ment, the latter is clearly preferred. •
For the foregoing reasons, it has been recommended that a
be applied to irrigation return flows at present.
Rather, basin-wide control programs should be developed which
embodies the following principles:
1. Water management is the key to control of salinity in
water use, particularly in irrigation.
"permits" not
21

-------
2.	All sources of pollution, both natural and man-made, and
all concentrating effects should be recognized. Concentrating
effects related to man's activity should be controlled.
3.	The resulting water quality control program must be corn-
pa table with other water management institutions. However, it is
recognized that this approach may involve changes in western water
law.l/
1/ There are two potential benefits of water salvage: (1) reduced
return flows generally imply reduced salinity loads; and (2)
salvaged water may be made available to dillute downstream pollu-
tion sources. In order to assure that the latter type of salinity
control benefit will result, some change in western water law may t
required. Instream uses are not nowgenerally .held to come within
the definition of beneficial use. If the definition of beneficial
use were expanded to include instream use of water, the State
would be allowed to acquire and hold water rights for environmenta'
and recreational needs. Western water law generally: (1) limits
the definition of beneficial use to agriculture, municipal,
industrial, and domestic uses; (2) holds any one (including the
i
State) who intends to acquire, pr holds a water right, must be abli
to demonstrate a beneficial use; and (3) allows all water to be
appropriated. Therefore, water salvaged becomes vulnerable to
subsequent allocations. At present, the State is unable to acquiri
and hold water rights for instream uses.
22

-------
. The 1972 Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act provide a basis for States to accomplish these broad basin-
wide salinity control programs in cooperation with the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
Passage of the 1972 Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (PL 92-500) ushered in a new era in the field of
water pollution control. The Act's stated objective is "to restore
and maintain the chemical...quality of the Nation's waters"
(Section 101), and the Administrator is required, in cooperation
with other Federal, State, and local agencies "to develop compre-
hensive programs for preventing, reducing, or eliminating the
pollution of navigable waters and groundwaters" (Section 102(a)).
Salinity, technically described as Total Dissolved-Solids (TDS)
is the composite of chemical ions which have known adverse physio-
logical, aesthetic, and economic effects. Thus, TDS is considered
to be a pollutant, within the meaning of the Act, and its control
falls with the purview of the Act.
Section 208 provides for the development of aera-wide waste
I
treatment management plans by an agency designated by a state or a
group of states. Any plan prepared is to include a process to
identify and set forth procedures to control pollution from
agriculturally related non-point sources. Section 208 further pro-
vides that the Governor or Governors designate one or more waste
23

-------
treatment management agency(ies) to carryout the plans. Pro-
vision is made for full Federal funding of costs of developing
and operating a continuing aera-wide waste treatment planning
process for theVirst three years and. for 75% funding thereafter.
Under Section 305, each State is to prepare a report by
January 1 , 1975, which is to include a description-of the water
quality of all navigable waters in such State. The report must
inclutffe a description of the nature and extent of the non-point
sources oC^SWrEants and recommendations as to programs to control
these sources.
The Environmental Protection Agency under Section 304(e) is to
issue informational guidelines for identifying and evaluating non-
point pollution sources and information on processes, methods, and
procedures for controlling these sources. Agricultural activities
are to be covered.
Activities under Sections 208, 305, and 304, as well as other
pertinent sections of the Act are brought together under Section
303. This Section provides for the establishment of water quality
standards by |the States, and for the Environmental Protection
Agency to approve these standards.. At the same time, the States
must submit plans acceptable to the Environmental Protection
Agency which will insure compliance with the established water
quality standards.
24

-------
Section 104 provides for research and demonstrations by the
Environmental Protection Agency with specific reference to
agriculture wastes.
It is clea>r from a review of the various sections of PL 92-500
that it is intended that pollution control programs are to be
developed by State and local agencies. It is also clear that there
are to be national programs in support of the State and local
programs.
Specific requirements are spelled out in the various sections
of the Act which provide for development of basin-wide water
management plans for both point and non-point sources. The States
have the primary role in their development and implementation
with the Environmental'Protection-Agency-providing instructional
guidelines, funding, and an overall mechanism for review and approval
Where s river basin is interstate, an institution developed by the
affected States is encouraged to develop and implement an effective
basin-wide water quality management program. Meeting the require-
ments of the Act will necessitate a close working relationship
|
among the Stajtes and Federal agencies.
25

-------
PROPOSED EPA PROGRAM
(Re: Section 102)
A salinity control program to implement the recommendations
contained in this report is outlined below. This outline con-
templates that EPA would take implementing actions directly
only where states failed to do so in conformance with EPA guidelines
Elements of a Salinity Control Program
I. Develop and issue information and guidelines (re: Sections
208, 209, 303, 304, 402, etc.).
II. Review and approve state continuing, planning process, water
quality standards implementation plans; and other actions
taken in response to information and guidelines.
III. Establish interagency coordination.
IV. Priority Research and Demonstration Projects
A.	Western water law in relation to water management.
B.	Institutional study of interstate water management.
C.	Irrigation technology demonstration (with USDA).
V. Plan and Implement Other EPA Programs Elements Including
But Not Limited to:
A.	Program monitoring and control.
B.	Grant Administration.
C.	Acceptance and promulgation of regulations.
D.	Key enforcement actions.
26

-------
Table I, Continued:
VI. Colorado River Pilot Control Program:
A.	Establish basin-wide institution consistent with requirements
of Section 208.
B.	Develop technical plan with proposed regulations; implementa-
tion process; financing procedures; and legislative and
institutional recommendations.
C.	Accomplish required designations and other implementing
actions.
D.	Promulgate regulatory controls.-
E.	Implement three (3) accelerated control projects as
recommended by the Colorado River Enforcement Conference.
There are a number of actions whicfi should be accomplished to
implement this program: designate a program manager; develop a
detailed work plan; allocate a budget for the program; establish
responsibility for executing each of the elements or sub-elements;
and create a program coordination and control mechanism.
It-is recommended that the Assistant Administrator for the
Air and Water Programs Division.be designated .as program manager.
This committee stands, ready to develop a budget and work plan
to implement this program upon approval by the Administrator.
27

-------