My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP10706
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
10001-10999
>
WSP10706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:14:22 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:28:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.200.05.G
Description
Hoover Dam/Lake Mead/Boulder Canyon Project
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
7/1/1976
Author
CWCB
Title
Synopsis of Major Documents and Events Relating to the Colorado River
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />l!: <br />N <br />roo <br />N4 <br /> <br />'" <br />'- <br /> <br />(1) Authorized the Central Arizona Project. This project, <br />now under construction, involves the construction of <br />p~ps, canals and reservoirs to convey water from <br />Lake Havasu on the lower Colorado River into the <br />Central Arizona area (Phoenix area, and perhaps the <br />Tucson area also). While the legislation does not so <br />,tate, the amount of water intended to be diverted is <br />1.2 million acre-feet annually, if this amount is avail- <br />able. It is doubtful that this amount will ever be <br />available and it most certain!y will not be available <br />when the Upper Basin reaches its full authorized <br />depletion. <br /> <br />(2) As against the Central Arizona Project, guarantees the <br />state of California 4.4 million acre-feet of water <br />annually. This guarantee was California's price for <br />supporting the legislation. Through this proVision, <br />California avoids the most serious effects of the <br />Supreme Court decision. As matters now stand, the state <br />of Arizona gained little, if anything, as the result of <br />the Supreme Court decision, in terms of ultimate water <br />supply. <br /> <br />(3) Five participating projects in Colorado and one in Utah <br />were authorized for construction. For the Colorado <br />projects} the legislation prescribes that "as nearly as <br />practicaDle" they shall be completed not latet' than the <br />date of the first delivery of water from the Central <br />Arizona Project. <br /> <br />) <br />(4) Title VI of the act contains various provisions which <br />were insisted upon by the Upper Basin states in an <br />attempt to clarify some of the ambiguous provisions of <br />the Colorado River Compact. A principal provision of <br />that title is contained in Section 602(a) as follows: <br /> <br />"SEC. 602 (a) In order to comply with and carry <br />out the prOvisions of the Colorado River Compact, the <br />Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, and the Mexican <br />Water Treaty, the Secretary shall propose criteria for <br />the coordinated long-range operation of the reservoirs <br />constructed and operated under the authority of the <br />Colorado River Storage Project Act, the Boulder Canyon <br />Project Act, and the Boulder Canyon Project Adjustment <br />Act. To effect in part the purposes expressed in this <br />paragraph, the criteria shall make provision for the <br />storage of water in storage units of the Colorado River <br />storage project and releases of water from Lake Powell <br />in the following listed order of priority: <br /> <br />. (1.[;, <br />to"" { <br />I ::;',UI! <br /> <br />(1) releases to supply one-half the deficiency <br />described,in articl7 II1(c) of the Colorado River <br /> <br />-18- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.