My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12578
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSP12578
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:16:39 PM
Creation date
8/1/2007 8:43:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.300.40.A
Description
Colorado River Basin - Legislation-Law - Compacts - Colorado River Compact
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
7/1/1986
Author
John U Carlson - Alan E Boles Jr
Title
Contrary Views of the Law of the Colorado River - An Examination of Rivalries Between the Upper and Lower Basins - John U Carlson and Alan E Boles Jr - 07-01-86
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.
/
96
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 />001465 <br /> <br />this and prior figures in doubt. The sibert Report announced <br />that the gauging methods at Yuma had been defective.l02 It <br /> <br />calculated that the actual average annual flow at Black <br /> <br />Canyon had been 12,250,000 acre-feet, and, after adding <br /> <br />estimated Upper Basin depletions of 2,275,000 acre-feet, <br /> <br />projected the virgin flow at Lee's Ferry at lS m.a.f.103 The <br />sibert Report did not account for the inflow of tributaries <br /> <br />between Black Canyon and Lee's Ferry. More importantly, it <br />cautioned that it had taken particular care to make its <br /> <br />"estimates conservative and safe."104 In any event, Congress <br /> <br />was not at all deterred by the estimate, which though <br /> <br />significantly reduced from previous figures, nonetheless <br /> <br />still equalled the apportionments set forth in Article III(a) <br /> <br />of the Compact. <br /> <br />b. Bearing the Risk of Mistake <br /> <br />The more challenging question is not whether a mistake <br /> <br />occurred, but whether the Upper Basin bore the risk of the <br /> <br />mistake. <br /> <br />A party bears the risk of a mistake when <br /> <br />(a) the risk is allocated to him by <br />agreement of the parties, or <br /> <br />(b) he is aware, at the time the <br />contract is made, that he has only limited know- <br />ledge with respect to the facts to which the <br />mistake relates but treats his limited knowledge <br />as sufficient, or <br /> <br />(c) the risk is allocated to him by the <br />court on the ground that it is reasonable in the <br />circumstances to do so. <br /> <br />RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS ~154 <br /> <br />-40- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.