Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" ,- J <;) <br />,L-J...v <br /> <br />It will be noted that operation under <br />Minute No. 218 required a makeup from <br />storage release in 1971 of approximately 31,- <br />300 acre-feet. During the last six years of op- <br />eration, this makeup water has cost the <br />United States a total of 232,400 acre-feet, or <br />an average of 38,700 acre-feet of water per <br />year. <br />Mexico also requested the bypass of addi- <br />tional Wellton-Mohawk drainage waters <br />when diversions at Morelos Dam were great- <br />er than 900 cfs. This voluntary bypass of 48,- <br />100 acre-feet was requested by Mexico to fur- <br />ther improve the quality of water diverted at <br />Morelos Dam, Without this voluntary <br />bypass, the United States operations under <br />Minute No. 218 would have resulted in an ' <br />annual average salinity during the sixth year <br />of 1,245 ppm, a reduction of 33 ppm over the <br />fifth year average. Because of Mexico's <br />voluntary bypass of additional drainage wa- <br />ter, the annual average salinity of actual di- <br />versions by Mexico during the sixth year <br />equalled 1,161 ppm. <br />About 66 percent of the water reaching <br />Mexico during 1971 came from River storage <br />above Imperial Dam and the remaining 34 <br />percent from return flows to the River below <br />Imperial Dam. The largest source of return <br />flows is from the drainage waters of the Well- <br />ton-Mohawk Project, the average salinity of <br />which was about 3,680 ppm in 1971. This <br />represented a reduction of about 110 ppm <br />from the 1970 figure. Plate 9 shows the salin- <br />ity and flow of the Wellton-Mohawk Outfall <br />Drain and the Colorado River at Imperial <br />Dam and at the Northerly International <br />Boundary with Mexico, <br />The International Boundary and Water <br />Commission report summarizes river opera- <br />tion under Minute No, 218 for the last six <br />years as follows: <br />1. 14There has been a reduction in the average annual <br />salinity of waters made available to Mexico at the <br />northerly boundary under United States opera- <br />tions of Minute No, 218, from 1,375 ppm in 1965 to <br />1,245 ppm in 1971, an average decrease of about 22 <br />ppm per year," <br />2, "There has been a reduction in the average annual <br />salinity of the total annual quantity of Well ton- <br /> <br />Mohawk drainage water discharged in the convey- <br />ance channel, from 4,680 ppm in 1965 to 3,680 ppm <br />in 1971." <br />3, "There has been a reduction in the average annual <br />salinity of the total annual quantity of South Gila <br />drainage waters discharged to the river channel, <br />from 2,510 ppm in 1965 to 2,320 ppm in 1971." <br /> <br />Mexico has also been working on facilities <br />to reduce the impact of Colorado River salin- <br />ity on its lands. The rehabilitation of the <br />Mexicali Valley irrigation and drainage sys- <br />tem, initiated in June 1969, continues to <br />progress. At the close of 1971, about 107 miles <br />of canals were lined and about 167 miles of <br />drains were constructed or rehabilitated, 63 <br />wells were installed and 119 wells were <br />reconstructed. <br />The United States State Department rep- <br />resentatives were present at the previously <br />described meeting with Department of the <br />Interior officials on July 30, 1971, to indicate <br />the international aspects of the Colorado Riv- <br />er Salinity Control Program. Because of the <br />State Department's interest in providing a . <br />solution to the quality of Mexico's water <br />deliveries, that department expressed strong <br />support for the Colorado River Salinity Con- <br />trol Program. <br /> <br />State of Colorado Water Quality Standards <br /> <br />During 1971, the Board staff reviewed the <br />newly adopted water quality standards for <br />the State of Colorado, which became effec- <br />tive on September I, 1971. Changes in the <br />standards from those adopted by Colorado on <br />May 15, 1968, are minimal. The new stand- <br />ards include an "Anti-degradation" state- <br />ment which reads as follows: <br />Waters of the state, the quality of which exceeds <br />the limits set in these standards, will be maintained <br />at existing quality unless and until it can be demon- <br />strated to the state that a change in quality is justi- <br />fied to provide necessary economic or social <br />development. In that case, the best practicahle de- <br />gree of waste treatment to protect the current clas- <br />sification of such waters will be required. The <br />appropriate federal authority will be provided with <br />information, from time to time, required to dis- <br />charge his responsibilities under the Federal Water <br />Pollution Control Act, as amended. <br /> <br />31 <br />