7416 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CHAPTER VIl (2) The application of "probabilities" must not unreasonably impair annual consumptive uses of water In the Upper Division States; that the existing studies assumed an unreasonably slow rate of growth in the Up- per Basin and for that reason showed no shortages in the Upper Basin. (3) The delivery of water to the Lower Basin shall in no manner be "categorized" for satisfaction of the Mexican Treaty. With 8.23 maf of annual releases and an allowance of 20,000 acre-feet of inflow between Lake Powell and Lee Ferry (Paria River), the Lee Ferry flow would be 8.25 maf; this also happens to be the total of 7.5 maf plus 750,000 acre-feet (the annual average of 75 maf in 10 years plus one-half of the 7.5 maf Mexican Treaty water). Thus, future operators could mistakenly relate these figures to Articles M(c) and (d) of the Compact. Unless there is early reliable augmentation of the water supply in the river system, the Upper Division will have to seek an accounting of all Lower Basin water uses and a determina- tion of each Basin's responsibility for filling the Mexican Treaty burden; I. e., a lawsuit. (4) Reservoirs of the Upper and Lower Basins should be operated on a comparable basis. It questioned the uses of elevation 1083 for Lake Mead instead of its "minimum power pool" which is at elevation 895. (5) The Upper Division States have an interest in the determination of consumptive uses and losses in the Lower Basin. (6) Certain words used in the criteria need to be defined; e.g., "excess," "surplus," and "spill." (7) "Flexibility" in the criteria is needed. (8) The date of commencement of operations under the criteria should be specified. (9) The date each year on which water stored in Lake Powell and Lake Mead will be equalized should be specified in the criteria. (10) Precedents involving Upper Division obligations must not become established under the Operating Criteria; e.g., unrealistically slow rate of water resource development in the Upper Basin and a lower ultimate consumptive use than the Upper Division States believe is attainable. L Other Comments On December 1, 1969, California filed written comments on the major issues; e.g., the Filling Criteria should continue; that Congress so intended in passing Section 502 of Public Law 90-537 which provides for repayment to the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund for moneys "heretofore or hereafter" expended therefrom to meet the Hoover deficiency payments; there is no conflict between the Operating Criteria and the storage portion of the Filling Criteria; that no rule curve is needed and, if used, should be based on a "90.5 percent probability" rather than a "98.4 + percent probability," a most extreme critical period of record; that Section 602(c) of the Basin Project Act states that Section 7 of the Colorado River Storage Proj- ect (CRSP) Act shall be administered in accordance with the Operating Criteria and Section 7 states that the CRSP power facilities are to be operated in conjunction with other Colorado River powerplants so as to pro- duce the greatest practicable amount of power and energy which is not consistent with use of a high rule curve; and dealing with releases from Lake Mead in excess of 7.5 maf and releases under shortage conditions. L 1 Final Task Force Meeting On November 24, 1969, the participants met at Denver, Colorado, and discussed the positions advanced by each. The discussion centered on the operational studies; the drawdown of Lake Mead below elevation 1090; the need for a rule curve to govern storage in the Upper Basin reservoirs; continuation of the Filling Criteria and the impact on the Upper Basin of the deficiency payments (see Report of Task Force, Chairman J. R. Riter, dated December 12, 1969, to all participants). The Task Force had completed its assignment as of that date. J Secretary's Proposed Criteria On December 16, 1969, Secretary Hickel transmitted the Departmenes proposed .Operating Criteria to the Governors of the seven Basin States. His letter reviewed the purpose of the criteria;-I.e., to provide for A-6