WSPC12622 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

000299 State of Arizona), and conserving or recovering groundwater that would be otherwise migrate outside the United States (Lower Colorado Water Supply Project Well Field, and authorized All-American Canal Lining Project) These concepts suggest that similar measures can be found in the Colorado River Basin to offset the bypass. Reclamation will coordinate with the appropriate basin states and Colorado River stakeholders on the specific proposal. Actual terms would need to be determined, and may include up-front option payments, costs to mitigate adverse environmental and/or social impacts and payments for the forbearance6 in the use of water. Potential Sources Of Replacement Water To Meet Title I Obiectives Section 101 (c) of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act contemplated that, in time, the reject stream from the YDP, Colorado River water used for the mitigation offish and wildlife habitat losses and any Wellton-Mohawk drainage water bypassed to the Santa Clara Slough to accomplish essential operations, would be replaced as a National Obligation. That Section ofthe Act provides guidance regarding the geographic location of actions to provide such a replacement supply. The Act indicates that such supplies cannof7 come from outside the Colorado River Basin. ~ The primary source of replacement water for flows in the Bypass Drain is expected to be from the Lower Basin agricultural water users, and recovery and return of Colorado River water that would otherwise be lost to Mexico as groundwater. About 4.9 million acre-feet per year of Colorado River water is used in the Lower Basin for agricultural purposes, which should provide opportunity for both the program and other water agencies to acquire ~ needed water. The use of off-stream storage in the Lower B~in Ju1d also be considered. ~ Opportunities in the Upper Basin, while a consideration, are ~~ OEHe be- mGI=C;:J f) problematic .due to issues related to tl:1e. Compact, administration of water use un~er state law, and antI-export statutes~ ~ \ I ....1...A.~.(r~ -~ ~.....,.t~ a~/~;_ Forbearance Al!reements: The program would annually acquire the temporary use of water through competitive solicitations. Based upon the transactions described in the section above and the potential to use non-system or local groundwater, it is estimated that program forbearance agreements can be acquired at costs in the range of $60 to $250 per acre-foot. Such a cost range, generally compares very favorably to the estimated cost of 6 As used in this document, the term "forbearance" means the temporary reduction of water use through a contract with an existing water user or water using entity. Such use would be temporary in nature and the associated water rights would not become Federal assets but would remain the property of the water user or water using entity. . 7 Section 101 (c), in part, reads as follows: Replacement of the reject stream from the YDP, Colorado River water used for the mitigation offish and wildlife habitat losses and any Wellton-Mohawk drainage water bypassed to the Santa Clara Slough to accomplish essential operations, except at times when there exists surplus water of the Colorado River under the terms of the Mexican Water Treaty of 1944, is recognized as a national obligation as provided in section 1512 of this title. Studies to ... provide adequate replacement water shall be limited to sources within the States of Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico and those portions of Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming which are in the natural drainage basin of the Colorado River." (43 U.S.S 1571(c)) 17