Laserfiche WebLink
<br />003100 . . <br />7he Compact defines the Colorado River Basin, the Upper Basin, the <br />Lower Basin, and the States of the Upper Division and the States <br />of the Lower Division. The Canpact then apportions uses of water <br />:"l'om the Colorado River system to the Upper Basin and to the Lower <br />Basin, in Articles III(a) and (b). These articles apportion a total <br />of $.5 maf/yr. of beneficial consumptive uses to the Lower Basin, <br />and 7.5 maf/yr. to the Upper Basin. . <br /> <br />In Article III(c), the Compact recognizes the possibility .of a <br />future Treaty with Mexico and states that if such a Treaty is entered <br />into, the water deliveries shall be supplied first from the waters <br />which are surplus over and above the apportiorL11ent of uses in Articles <br />III(a) and III(b) (16 maf/yr.) and, if the surplus is insufficient, <br />then the burden of any deficiency shall be borne. equally by the <br />Upper and Lower Basin~ and that the states of the Upper division . <br />shall deliver at Lee ferry water to sup~ly one-half of the deficiency~ <br /> <br />In Article III(d), the States of the Upper Division are required <br />to deliver an aggregate .of 75 rnaf over any period of ten consecutive <br />years, or an average of 7.5 maf/yr. at Lee Ferry. <br /> <br />Thus, it is seen that the Compact apportions uses and specifies <br />delivery obligations. The delivery obligations take precedence over <br />the apportionment of uses, which may be fulfilled if the water is <br />a,ailable. If after complying with the delivery obligations, there <br />is insufficient water in the system for the apportioned uses, the <br />uses cannot be made. <br /> <br />By comparing the virgin flow estimate of 14 maf/yr. with the <br />deli'rery obligations in Articles III(c) and III(d), it can be seen <br />that the Upper Basin would be limited to a maximum use of Colorado <br />River water of about 5.75 maf/yr., if it must provide one-half of <br />the Mexican Treaty delivery obligation, or about 6.5 maf/yr. if it <br />does not have to supply any water for that obligation. The States <br />of the Upper Division contend tPBt there is a surplus of water in <br />the Colorado River system and that they are not required to release <br />any water to meet the Mexican Treaty obligation. The States of the <br />Lower Division contend that there will be no surplus in future years <br />add the Upper Basin share of the ~~xican Treaty delivery obligation <br />\'iould be one-half of the total obligation of 1. 5 naf/yr. plus one- <br />!-:alf of the losses incurred in delivering the water from Lee Ferry <br />to r;Iexico. <br /> <br />C8~ orado River Basin IPr~ject Act <br />~ <br /> <br />This Act, identified as Public Law 90-537, was enacted by <br />Congres~ on September 30, 196$. Section 202 of the Act states as <br />follows "The Congress declares that the satisfacti on of the require- <br />nents of the Mexican Water Treaty from the Colorado River constitutes <br />a national obligation which shall be the first obligation of any water <br />augmentation project planned pursuant to Section 201 of this Act and <br />authorized by the Congress." Section 202 concludes by stating that, <br /> <br />C-19 <br /> <br />J,;. ,>~ <' <br />