Below Hoover Dam 723 mg/L

The Hoover Station reflects damages associated with the metropolitan areas

of Las Vegas and southern Nevada

Below Hoover Dam723 mg/L

The Parker Station reflects damages associated with the metropolitan

regions of southern California and central Arizona

Below Parker Dam 747 mg/L

The Imperial Station reflects damages associated with agricultural areas of

Imperial and Coachella in California and Yuma Arizona

At Imperial Dam879 mg/L

The Plan of Implementation• Offset the effects of human-caused

activities in the Upper Basin

• Maintain the numeric criteria thru 2030–Target objective – control 1.8 M tons/year–Reduce the economic damages

• Enactment of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (Public Law 93-320)

Salinity Control Act

• 1974 – PL 93-320 enacted–Title I – Addresses US commitment

to Mexico – Yuma Desalting Plant–Title II – Measures Upstream of

Imperial Dam• Authorized 4 units• Cost share of 25%

Title II Salinity Control ProgramAdministered by Reclamation

• Grand Valley• Crystal Geyser

(deauthorized 1984)

• Paradox Valley• Las Vegas Wash

Grand Valley Unit

Paradox Valley Unit

Brine Disposal

Paradox Valley Unit

Interception/Injection

COLLECTIONWELLS

INJECTIONWELL

DoloresRiver

SALINE GROUNDWATER

The BLM ProgramControl Salinity on Public Lands

Unified watershed assessmentcharacterization

Point source control (well-plugging)

Resources Management Plans

Nonpoint source control(rangeland management)

Title II Salinity Control Program

• 1984 Amendment- –Authorized 2 units, de-authorized 1–Authorized USDA’s on-farm salinity

control program–Cost share of 30%

Title II Salinity Control ProgramAdministered by Reclamation

• Lower Gunnison (Winter Water Replacement)

• McElmo Creek (Dolores Project)

Natural Resources Conservation Service

The USDA Program

• Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)

– Technical Assistance to improve irrigation efficiency

– Financial assistance –

• Provides financial incentives of 75 to 90% of the cost

of the irrigation improvements

• Remaining costs paid by the producers

Title II Salinity Control Program

• 1995 Amendment–Created Reclamation’s Basinwide

Salinity Control Program•Cost share of 30%

• 1996 Amendment–Authorized Up-front Cost Sharing

Title II Salinity Control Program

Funding for Reclamation’s Basinwide and NRCS’s EQIP Programs

Appropriations 70%

Up-front Cost Sharing30%

85%Lower Colorado River

Basin Development Fund

15%Upper Colorado River

Basin Fund

Reclamation’s BasinwideSalinity Control Program

• Reclamation solicits new projects based on a competitive process open to the public – Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA)– Applications ranked on cost effectiveness ($/ton)

and risk factors– Highest ranking applications receive grants for

construction of salinity control measures• Most projects have been improving irrigation

delivery systems

Basinwide Program Projects

• Big Sandy (4)• Manila (1)• Uinta Basin (23)• Price-San Rafael (17)• Paria (1)

Basinwide Program Projects continued

• Grand Valley (2)• Lower Gunnison (12)• McElmo Creek (1)• San Juan (2)

Burns Bench Construction

Burns Bench Project, Jensen UT

Grand View Canal, Crawford CO

Red Cap ARRA Project, Duchesne UT

Uinta Basin, UT

Title II Salinity Control Program• 2008 Amendment

–Created the Basin States Program

• Basin States Program (BSP)–Reclamation administers the BSP in

consultation with the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory Council

–Amounts from the Basin Funds used for up-front cost sharing are now administered through the BSP.

Basin States Program (BSP)Reclamation administers the BSP with assistance from state agriculture agencies (SAG) and NRCS thru agreements– Projects will be selected thru a competitive process,

i.e. Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) or NRCS batching process.

– Projects that are too small for Basinwide Program and not eligible for NRCS’s EQIP.

– Ranked on cost effectiveness ($/ton) and other factors.

– Selected projects will be awarded agreements with the SAG or with Reclamation for construction of salinity control measures

Uinta Basin, UT

Habitat Replacement

Title II Salinity Control Program

Federal Programs• Bureau of Reclamation

– Lead Agency• U.S.D.A.

– Natural Resources Conservation Service• Bureau of Land Management

– Public Lands• Support Agencies

– Fish & Wildlife Service– Environmental Protection Agency– U.S. Geologic Service

Title II Salinity Control Program

Federal Agency

Tons of Salt per YearTarget

Control by 2030

Controlled as of 2011

Remaining to Control

Reclamation 907,000 570,000 337,000

USDA-NRCS 839,000 589,000 250,000

BLM 126,000 126,000 Unknown

Total 1,872,000 1,285,000 587,000

Reclamation Program

ProgramTons of Salt per YearTarget

Control by 2030

Controlled as of 2011

Remaining to Control

CRWQIP (Original Units)

401,000 351,000 50,000

Basinwide 506,000 219,000 287,000

Total 907,000 570,000 337,000