WSP12456 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LJJ32;",7 Chronology Re: Colorado River Basin States Discussions on Long-Term Issues Page 2 6 Jun 91 21 Jun 91 24-25 Jun 8 Jul 91 13 Aug 91 1 9 Aug 91 28 Aug 91 8 Oct 91 6 Nov 91 11 - 1 3 Dec all of calendar year 1991 without causing consumptive use in the Lower Basin to exceed 7,500,000 acre-feet. Colorado River Management Work Group met, and in light of the 1991 Annual Operating Plan and the impending commencement of seven Colorado River Basin State discussions, major technical issues appeared to be definitions of risk, 602(a} storage, surplus and shortage. Colorado transmitted a draft conceptual framework for the seven Basin State discussions for consideration during the upcoming meeting among the States. Governors' Representatives met in Torrance, California and initiated dialogue on resolving long term issues. Each State expressed her needs and positions (examples: California wants a water bank; Colorado wants "consideration" in return for additional water for California; Arizona wants California to reduce her use of Colorado River water to her basic apportionment of 4,400,000 acre-feet). There was general agreement that the discussions can be fruitful, are necessary, and that California should prepare a formal proposal for consideration by the other States. Colorado River Management Work Group met. The discussions were largely statements of position with little consensus and little progress made towards developing an annual operating plan for Water Year 1992. Governors' Representatives and the Colorado River Management Work Group met and agreed to a Water Year 1992 Annual Operating Plan very similar to that adopted a year earlier. California transmits to the other Colorado River Basin States the proposal requested at the June 24- 25th meeting; entitled "Conceptual Approach for Reaching Basin States Agreement on Interim Operation of Colorado River System Reservoirs, California's Use of Colorado River Water Above its Basic Apportionment, and Implementation of an Interstate Water Bank." Governors' Representatives met in Denver to discuss the California "Conceptual Approach" document. With the exception of Nevada, the other States coolly receive the suggestion of an interstate water bank, but committed to continued dialogue on each element of California's proposal. The States agreed to transmit written comments to California on her "Conceptual Approach" by October 23rd. Colorado River Management Work Group met but unable to reach real agreement on what specific technical studies would be useful at this early juncture of the discussions among the States. Governors' Representatives met in Phoenix and California responded to the other States' comments on her "Conceptual Approach." California stated that all elements of the "Conceptual Approach" are part of a linked package put together to address all of the concerns of the other States while meeting California's needs; hence all of the elements of the "Conceptual Approach" need to be considered. California expressed her desire and intention to meet with each of the other States on a one-to-one basis to better understand and address the issues raised by each of the States in their comment letters, and to inform each State in detail as to the initiatives that California is undertaking to achieve greater water conservation, improve water management and address critical statewide water supply and allocation issues. Governors' Representatives met in Las Vegas and agreed to put the seven State discussions on hold until around March/April while the three Lower Basin States explore what can be done in the Lower Basin first (anc;i hence negate the issues associated with risk and potential harm to the Upper Basin States). The Lower -Basin States expressed a need to "get their own house in order" and pursue reaching greater consensus among themselves. The Upper Basin States were supportive of such a hiatus in the seven State discussions with the nervousness about this development lessened to some extent by assurances by the Lower Basin States to not attempt renegade efforts or end runs and agreement to update the Upper Basin States as those tri-party discussions proceed.