My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Correspondence 1991-1992 Including Draft MOU's
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
Correspondence 1991-1992 Including Draft MOU's
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2013 3:33:41 PM
Creation date
8/2/2012 3:35:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Correspondence 1991-1992 Including Draft MOU's
State
CO
Title
Correspondence 1991-1992 Including Draft MOU's
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Correspondence
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
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
DRAFT <br />Mr. Gerald R. Zimmerman <br />Executive Director <br />Colorado River Board of California <br />770 Fairmont Avenue, Suite 1000 <br />Glendale, CA 91203-1035 <br />Dear Mr. Zimmerman: <br />The State of wishes to thank you for the excellent work that <br />you and your member organization dial in completing the Conceptional Approach <br />document that we discussed on August 28, 1991. The document was well thought <br />out, responsive to our discussions of ,dune 24, 25 in Torrance, California and <br />very professionally prepared. We commend you and your staff for thy_ <br />efforts. <br />We support your concern about the United States not being responsive to the <br />Mexican Treaty obligation or the timely replacement of the Welton Mohawk drain <br />flows. We have also agreed to work with California and the other Basin States <br />thorough the process of development of Annual Operation Plans to identify ways <br />to use the water of the Colorado River in such a way as to provide optimal <br />benefits to the Seven Basin States. We do have concerns, however, about your <br />apparent definition of surplus conditions as defined in Paragraph I on page 8. <br />This definition could be interpreted to mean that only two conditions could <br />exist for the river system at present, i.e., "shortage" (Glen Canyon below <br />602(a) and Mead unable to meet 7.5 MAF plus Loner Basin Mexican obligation) <br />and "surplus ". Some range of reservoir conditions must exist that represent <br />"normal" conditions. These conditions must and will be determined through our <br />continued deliberations on the AOP process. <br />We appreciate your willingness to identify a magnitude and time frame for <br />California's capability of returning to 4.4 MAF deliveries from the Colorado <br />River under times of normal declarti.ons. California's over - deliveries for an <br />additional 20 -plus years may be longer than can be agreed to but we appreciate <br />your commitment to achieving a 75% reduction within eight years. <br />Your concept of escrow account distributions may be acceptable pending <br />determinations that we can accept such revenues without additional legislative <br />authorizations or invoking interstate commerce clause violation. Methods of <br />compensation, other than financial, should also be explored prior to finaliza- <br />tion of any such agreement. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.