Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />002239 <br /> <br />IV. ProDosed Lake Mead Reservoir Interim Operatin2 Criteria <br />A. Introduction <br />The December 17,1997, Draft of the California 4.4 Plan outlined a proposal for Lake <br />Mead reservoir operations. The Six States agree with many of the concepts set forth in that <br />proposal. However, there are several areas in which those concepts deviate from the principles <br />discussed above and thus are in need of further definition, discussion and clarification. This <br />section briefly identifies those areas and proposed additional concepts. <br />The Draft California 4.4 Plan describes three levels of surplus criteria. Levell is a spill <br />avoidance strategy based on anticipated runoff. Level 2 is a strategy that attempts to keep the <br />Colorado River Aqueduct full during the transition period during which agricultural conservation <br />measures are being implemented within California. Level 3 is similar to Level 2, except that the <br />surplus supplies are more limited, and California is required to use additional alternate supplies <br />including dry year land fallowing and groundwater basin pumping options if it wishes to keep the <br />Aqueduct full. <br />The Six State proposal envisions a set of interim criteria for reservoir operation in which <br />the various levels are less distinct. The Six State proposal seeks to achieve a balance between the <br />need to release water to build storage space to avoid future flood control regulation dictated <br />releases and the need to carry over as much water in storage as possible to sustain future water <br />deliveries through droughts. Similar to the California proposal, the Six States are willing to <br />provide California with additional water for a specified period of time while conservation <br />measures are being implemented. The States believe that when California is successful in <br />implementing programs for conservation transfers to M&I uses it will be able to meet its future <br />needs within its basic 4.4 maf annual entitlement and, therefore, there will be no need to continue <br />the proposed form of interim reservoir operating criteria in the future. <br />Underlying all levels of the interim criteria is the commitment to attempt to meet the needs <br />of southern California municipal and industrial water users which are causing the state to use <br />more than its 4.4 maf basic apportionment. While this volume is exp~cted to reduce continuously <br />over time, it is still a significant amount of water, especially in the early years of the Plan's <br />implementation. The Six State proposal also includes water for municipal uses in Southern <br /> <br />6 <br />