Laserfiche WebLink
<br />\ <br />The StateS of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Governor'sRepresentatives on Colorado River Operations <br /> <br />October 7. 2004 <br /> <br />Herb Guenther <br />Director <br />Arizona Department of Water Resoun:es <br />500 N. 3rd Street <br />Phoenix, AZ 85004-3903 <br /> <br />GenUd R. Zimmerman <br />Executive Director <br />Colorado River Bo8td of Califomia <br />770 Fairmont Ave" Suite 100 <br />Glendale, CA 91203 <br /> <br />Pat Mulroy <br />, General Manager <br />Southern Nevada Water Authority <br />, 3700 W. Charleston Blvd. <br />, Las Vegas, NV 89153 <br /> <br />Richard Bunker <br />Chairman <br />Colorado River Commission of Nevada <br />, 3305 W. Spring Mountain Rd. #60' <br />Las Vegas, NV 89102 <br /> <br />Dear Colleagues: <br /> <br />The Colorado River Basin States have established a beneficial worlcing reiationship over the last, e <br />20 years. This relationship has allowed us to work together to successfully resolve difficult <br />problems such as California's overuse of its basic apportionment, intenltate water banking, and <br />, envirOnmental compliance. <br /> <br />We now face another, perhaps even more difficult, ch8l1enge. Declining reservoir levels have <br />raised fundamental issues as.sociated with the allocations established under the Colorado River <br />Compact, the Boulder Canyon Project Act as interpreted by the decr= in Arizona V. California, <br />and the Mexican Treaty. Qiven l()ng term hydrologic trends and increasing demands on the . <br />River, it is apparent these isSues will not go away, even if we' are blessed with a few years' of <br />favorable ronoff. Additionally, since the Secreiary will reassesa in April the Lake Powell release, <br />it is important that we coordinate soon on the Basin States' position with reapect to this review. <br /> <br />The fun~ental issue for the Upper Basin relates to whether a deficiency exists under Article' <br />m(c) of the Compact, which would "trigger an obligation of the Upper Basin to share in any such <br />deficiency. As you are aware, it has been our consistent position that because no such deficiency <br />has been shown to exist, the Upper Basin has no obligation in this regard. This position <br />implicates other questions concerning the Law of the River. Because of an abundance of water <br />supply and relative lack of delDand, it baa not been necessary to address these issue8 until now, <br /> <br />TecbnicallllpIeSeDtatives of the States have been meeting over the wt several months to discuss <br />River modeling and efforts to more efficiently use and manage water. However, the unresolved <br /> <br />. <br />