Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ -- ~ <br />1'" r, <br />uv'. <br />o <br /> <br />ery records below Parker Dam for 1970-71. <br />This table shows that 146,338 acre-feet, or 2.3 <br />percent, of the total water ordered on the <br />Lower Colorado River was not taken. Of this <br />amount, 96,762 acre-feet were delivered to <br />storage, 47,173 acre-feet were taken by oth- <br />ers, and 2,403 acre-feet were delivered as ex- <br />cess to Mexico. California users did not take <br />about I percent of the quantity ordered. Ari- <br />zona users did not take about 5 percent of <br />their orders. <br /> <br />Criteria for Coordinated Operation <br />of Colorado River Reservoirs <br /> <br />The Board's 1969 Annual Report lists the <br />major features of the criteria for the coor- <br />dinated long-range operation of Lake Mead <br />and the Colorado River Storage Project Act <br />reservoirs which were proposed by the Sec- <br />retary of the Interior in accordance with Sec- <br />tion 602 of PL 90-537, The Board's 1970 An- <br />nual Report discusses the adoption of the <br />criteria by the Secretary of the Interior on <br />June 8, 1970, and the criticism of the criteria <br />by the states of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, <br />and Wyoming, and the Upper Colorado Riv- <br />er Commission. <br />On February 27,1971, the Upper Colorado <br />River Commission adopted a resolution <br />which strenuously protested the provisions <br />of the criteria, particularly the use of an ob- <br />jective of a minimum annual release of 8.23 <br />million acre-feet per year from Lake Powell. <br />The resolution stated that this objective "vio- <br />lates the spirit of the Colorado River Com- <br />pact and places upon the upper division <br />states an obligation not intended under said <br />Compact", The resolution also reaffirmed <br />the position expressed by the Governors of <br />the four Upper Basin States in their letter of <br />March 30, 1970, This letter also included ob- <br />jections to other parts of the criteria and to <br />the Secretary's decision to continue the 1962 <br />Glen Canyon Filling Criteria, The letter fur- <br />ther stated that the States do not waive, <br />"their rights individually or collectively to <br />resort to any other forms of recourse avail- <br />able". In this letter the Governors urged the <br />Secretary to reverse his decision refusing to <br />reimburse the Upper Colorado River Basin <br /> <br />Fund for costs incurred in connection with <br />impairment of capacity and energy resulting <br />from lowering Lake Mead below elevation <br />1,123 feet during the early Lake Powell fill- <br />ing period in 1964 and 1965. <br /> <br />First Annual Reservoir Operation Report <br /> <br />Section 602(b) of P,L. 90-537 requires, be- <br />ginning January I, 1972, and yearly thereaf- <br />ter, the Secretary of the Interior to transmit <br />to the Congress and to the Governors of the <br />Colorado River Basin States, a report de- <br />scribing the actual operation under the <br />Mead-Powell operating criteria for the pre- <br />ceding compact water year and the projected <br />operation for the current year, On October <br />15, 1971, the Bureau of Reclamation sent to <br />the Board for review and comment a draft <br />copy of the first annual operating report enti- <br />tled "Operation of the Colorado River, 1971- <br />1972". <br />The Chief Engineer, in a letter to the Bu- <br />reau dated October 20, 1971, commented on <br />several aspects of the report. The primary <br />comment was on the method of computing <br />Upper Basin reserve storage required by Sec- <br />tion 602 (a) of P.L. 90-537. This section pro- <br />vides for the storage of that quantity of Colo- <br />rado River water in Upper Basin reservoirs <br />which is reasonably necessary to assure Com- <br />pact deliveries without impairment of annu- <br />al consumptive uses in the Upper Basin. <br />The October 15 draft used a method of <br />computing required 602 (a) storage which, if <br />followed in the future, would be extremely <br />detrimental to Lower Basin interests, <br />Enough 602 (a) storage was provided to meet <br />Compact deliveries during the most critical <br />dry period on the Colorado while maintain- <br />ing minimum power pools in Upper Basin <br />reservoirs. <br />The October 20 letter pointed out that P.L. <br />90-537 and the Operating Criteria refer to the <br />prevention of impairment of Upper Basin <br />consumptive uses, and cannot be construed <br />to allow protection of the Upper Basin pow- <br />er pool thereby causing Lower Basin short- <br />ages. The letter also stated that, based on the <br />Bureau's hydrologic analyses performed in <br /> <br />19 <br />