My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC12492 (2)
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSPC12492 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:18:34 PM
Creation date
10/21/2007 8:11:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.101.10
Description
Colorado River Water Projects - Glen Canyon Dam-Lake Powell - Adaptive Management
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
10/6/1998
Author
Unknown
Title
Background and Principles for Negotiation - Special Interim Criteria for Releases of Water from Lake Mead During Phase I of the California 4-4 Plan - Various Drafts - 10-06-98 and 10-19-98
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.
/
16
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 />OCT-19-1998 08:47 FROM GLENWOOD BLUEPRINT <br /> <br />TO <br /> <br />13038664474 P.05/12 <br /> <br />ODD276 <br /> <br />to about 4.8 maf in. a normal year. Phase II would further reduce California's total demand to 4.4 <br />mafin a normal year. <br /> <br />Critical elements necessary to implement the 4.4 Plan include: 1) agreement between the <br />SDCW A and the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) to implement water conservation measures <br />within the IIDj 2) agreement between MWD and SDCW A for use ofthe CRA; and 3) agreement <br />by lID and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) for quantification of their respective <br />rights under the third priority. Quantification of Palo Verde lnigation District's rights under the <br />3(b) priority also needs to be discussed. lID, SDCWA and MWD have reached provisional <br />agreement on the first two elements. The CVWD/IID/Interior discussions on the third element <br />are ongoing. <br /> <br />The sLx states and the Secretary of the Interior have stated that~ if the 4.4 Plan is <br />implemented, they will consider the adoption of interim criteria by the Secretary that ",,'ill provide <br />to MWD and SDCW A greater security of supply through the CRA than currently exists, during <br />implementation of the 4.4 Plan. The MWD/SDCW A agreement is specifically conditioned on. <br />"The promulgation and application by the Secretary of the Interior (the "Secretary") of surplus <br />criteria, including river re-operations, that are sufficient, together with those other water supplies <br />that are under the control ofMWD, to assure that the Colorado River Aqueduct ("CRA") is full <br />at least through 2015." The six Colorado River Basin states were not involved in the <br />development of, and are not parties to, that agreement. <br /> <br />The 1968 Colorado River Basin Project Act, 9602(a), requires the Secretary of the <br />Interior to adopt criteria for the coordinated long-range operation of specified Colorado River <br />System reservoirs, including Lakes Powell and Mead. Such criteria were adopted by the <br />Secretary in 1970, and have not been modified since. Section 602(b) authorizes the Secretary to <br />modify the criteria "as a result of actual operating experience or unforseen circumstances, . . . to <br />better achieve the pwposes specified in subsection (a) of this section, but only after <br />correspondence with the Governors of the seven Colorado River Basin States and appropriate <br />consultation with such State representatives as each Governor may designate." The Criteria <br />recognize that the Secretary may modify the Criteria "from time to time," but will sponsor a <br />formal revie~ of the Criteria every five years. <br /> <br />Article ill of the Criteria establishes criteria for the operation of Lake Mead, including <br />criteria for normal, surplus and shortage determinations under the decree in Arizona v. <br />California. The decree in Arizona v. California establishes how much water will be apportioned <br />to each state in such conditions. The decree also provides in Article II(B)(6) that the Secretary <br />may release water apportioned to but unused in a state during any such year for consumptive use <br />in another state. <br /> <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.