BOARD00519 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Agenda Item 26 - Gallup-Navajo Project May 19-20, 2003 Board Meeting Page 6 of 10 its apportiomnent under the current hydrologic determination. Alternatively, we could consider any uses in the Lower Basin be accounted for as Lower Basin uses regardless of the source (Discussed and not acceptable to Lower Basin interests). . Discussion This memorandum provides updated information on the policy questions posed by the Navajo-Gallup Project that were outlined in our July 13, September 14, November 7, 2001 and January 11,2002 memoranda to the Board. The questions have been restated for continuity and the substantive updated information is in bold print. These questions have been discussed with the Attorney General's Office and our analysis to date indicates the following. 1. The Colorado River Compact states explicitly that the consumptive use of water apportioned to the Upper Basin is for uses exclusively in the Upper Basin. Similarly, the consumptive use of water apportioned to the Lower Basin is for exclusive use in the Lower Basin. The term "Upper Basin" as defined in Article II(t): "Means those parts of the states of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming within and from which waters naturally drain into the Colorado River System above Lee Ferry, and also all parts of said states located without the drainage area of the Colorado River Svstem which are now or shall hereafier;be beneficiallv served by waters divertedfrom the system above Lee Ferry. II . To illustrate, because water from the Colorado River Basin can be delivered to other parts of a: Colorado River Basin State, transmountain diversion projects like Colorado-Big Thompson, Fryingpan-Arkansas, and San Juan-Chama are possible. The policy question is, can those states situated partially in both the Upper and Lower Basins (Arizona, New Mexico and Utah) use Upper Colorado River Basin water in the Lower Colorado River Basin portion of the state? Staff is not aware of any project of this type actually in place. However, New Mexico has proposed the Navajo-Gallup Project and Utah has discussed a pipeline from Lake Powell to the St. George area in the Virgin River Basin. The Virgin River flows directly into Lake Mead. Guidance on this question is based on close reading of Articles II and Article III of the Colorado River Compact. Article III(a) of the Colorado Riyer Compact states: . "There is hereby apportioned from the Colorado River System in perpetuity to the Up/Jer Basin and to the Lower Basin; res/Jectivelv the exclusive beneficial consumptive use of 7,500,000 acre feet of water per annum, which shall include all water necessary for the supply of any rights which may now exist. " In response to past water marketing proposals, most of the Colorado River Basin states have, at least implicitly, interpreted this provision as meaning that each Basin's apportiomnent is for beneficial consumptive use exclusively within that Basin. This interpretation is buttressed by Article VIII, which states: "Present perfected rights to the beneficial use of waters of the Colorado River System are unimpaired by this compact. Wheneve~ storage capacity of 5,000,000 acre feet Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Financing. Stream and Lake Protection Water Supply Protection. 'Conservation Planning .