Laserfiche WebLink
<br />11 <br /> <br />t'- <br />"'t' <br />~ <br />).-.j servoirs constructed after 1929, to retain sufficient water to satisfy its <br />/C) <br />~J accrued debits. <br /> <br />A ceiling is set for New Mexico and for Colorado as to any excess <br />deliveries in any year. Article VI prevents either Colorado or New Mexico <br /> <br />from acquiring an accrued credit in excess of 150,000 acre feet, and even <br /> <br />this accrued credit can be lost by each state, either wholly or in part, <br /> <br />if the reservoir capacity of the project is so full that some of the water <br /> <br />must be released and cannot be held by a prOject reservoir further down- <br /> <br />stream. Thus, neither state is permitted to accumulate large amounts of <br /> <br />credit whi ch can be drawn Upon duri ng subsequent years. It forces each <br />state to utilize, as best it can, any excess water that might be present <br />. in the stream system for any given year. It also apparently stabilizes <br /> <br />the amount of water which New Mexico and Texas can expect to receive in <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />any given year, since it would be impossible for.a state to amass huge <br />water delivery credits and then effectively draw upon those credits to <br />meet future delivery requirements under the Compact. <br /> <br />An alternative rationale for limiting the amount of accrued credit has <br /> <br />also been proposed. Limiting the amount of accrued credits would prevent <br /> <br />unsound expansion of water development projects which otherwise might <br />result from the accumulation of large annual credits.12 Alternatively, <br /> <br />by permitting flexibility in the amount of accrued debits, Colorado could <br />continue to irrigate at the 1938 levels without undue hardship or curtail- <br />ment.13 <br /> <br />12Hinderlider, supra., at page 24. <br /> <br />13Ibid. <br /> <br />I <br />