WSPC12491 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

O~ICT - 1 6-98 FR 1: 11:04 UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMM 0002:~6 P.0S Six State Proposal Straw Man Draft October 13, 1998 basic 4.4 mafannual apportionment, which is expected to be no later than 2015. 2) California must commit to implementing its 4.4 Plan as quickly as is practical. If, during the implementation phase of the Plan, it appears reasonable that the goal can be achieved more quickly that allowed for in the Plan, California must agree to take those steps reasonable to hasten achievement of the goal. 3) For the reasons discussed above, the federal government and California must ~\.""'- affirmatively recognize that there is a direct relation between the continuation of the ~ operating criteria and California's continued commitment and implementation of its plan to tyv . . reduce its Colorado River water use to 4.4 r serv01rs. At any point that there is demonstrated a diminishment or lack of commitment by California to achieve its goal as quickly as is practical, the more liberal oper.ating criteria must be terminated. :r~,w-. O(W""~'^'& 4) ~N-sW'plus criteria cannot be adopted without a clear understanding among the Colorado River Basin States and the United States of how the River will be operated during l>JU.r~~ periods of water shortage. The interim s111plus-criteria may diminish the amount of water in _ _I/Oi1-$ storage in Colorado River(~ thus may increase the risk oj water shortages on the river. While -f{M. l~LW\ ~~ California will gain the greatest benefit under mare HaeMI sw,lus criteria, it is at less risk from shortages than the other Lower DWision States. Therefore, it is inherently unfair to Arizona and Nevada to adopt interi;~~teria without an understanding of how shortage~ on the River will be managed. Water shortage management must be understood so that those states may ~~ adequately analyze the increased risks they would face from the these interim ~s criteria. 4