Laserfiche WebLink
criteria. She said if the seven basin states couldn't do it themselves, she'd make the decision. The <br />result was the December 2007 shortage criteria agreement signed by Interior Secretary Dirk <br />Kempthorne. <br />e. Elements of the Colorado River Shortage Criteria agreement. <br />1. If a shortage is declared based on Lake Mead levels, Arizona and Nevada take the <br />shorta~ <br />2. Operate Lake Mead and Lake Powell together. In the future, the lake levels of both Lake <br />Mead and Lake Powell will be operated conjunctively. Previously, in a drought, Lake <br />Powell would fall faster then Lake Mead but would fill faster coming out of the drought. <br />New provisions for exchan~in~ water rights and augmentation Mans. When the Uiuted <br />States Supreme Court settled how the Colorado River would be divided, it made no <br />provisions for exchanging water rights or providing augmentation plans. The Lower <br />Basin states relied on surplus water that Upper Basin states were not using, and did not <br />search for alternate sources of supply. Examples of such surplus sources now being <br />investigated include: <br />Reservoir on the All American Canal. Nevada has offered to build the Drop 2 <br />reservoir on the All American Canal, which delivers water to the hnperial Valley, in <br />exchange for 300,000 acre feet of storage over 20 years. It will capture water ordered <br />by the irrigators that they later say they don't want because of rain events. Previously, <br />this water flowed to Mexico. <br />ii. Lower Basin states can now create surplus through efficiency measures and store the <br />water in Lake Mead as Intentionally Created Surplus. <br />iii. Discussions can begin with Mexico about locating a desalination plant in that country <br />and exchanging water upstream. <br />iv. Lower Basin states are funding cloud seeding in the Colorado high country to <br />increase the snowpack. <br />f. Future development of Colorado water supplies. Scott Balcomb recommends against absolute <br />standards that eliminate all risk, so that water can only be appropriated in an amount equal to the <br />minimum level available in a drought year. He recommends finding interruptible uses, such as <br />transfers between cities and agricultural uses, and increased conservation efforts such as <br />reducing lawn watering. <br />g. Additional storage facilities. Balcomb noted that the engineering study by Tipton and Kalmbach <br />determined that the total storage needed for all Colorado rivers was 35 maf, and that existing <br />reservoirs already exceed that total. He does not believe additional storage is needed except in <br />certain strategic locations for local needs, since additional storage will cause additional <br />evaporation. <br />h. Risk of a Compact Call. Colorado needs to address how it would respond to a Compact Call. <br />Balcomb believes cities would respond by buying pre-1922 appropriated water rights, and resort <br />to condemning pre-1922 appropriations through its eminent domain powers. Since it could turn <br />I:AInterbasin Compact Cominittee~Basin Roundtables\Colorado~Minutes~Ivlumtes Tan 200 CBRT fuial.doc 3 4~2, <br />