BOARD01417

• Board Meeting Date: 5/24/1999
• Description: WSP Section - Colorado River Basin Issues - Upper Colorado River Commissioner's Report - Historic and Continuing Interest of the Upper Basin in Preserving Secure Interstate Allocations
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

.

represented both a reiteration of positions taken since 1991, as well as the establishment of a six state
alliance to force California into compliance with its obligations under the Law of the River. The letter
expressed the willingness ofthe six states to discuss liberalized interim surplus criteria if California were
willing to commit to a defined and enforceable program to reduce its water use to its 4.4 maf
apportionment."

"

e

Immediately following the six state letter, Secretary Babbitt addressed the situation in a speech
in Las Vegas. The Secretary underscored the concerns expressed in the six state letter, and announced
several actions he would take:

I. The Secretary instructed the Bureau of Reclamation to work with IID to quantifY beneficial
use within lID. This action would serve to limit deliveries to IID, and establish a baseline for the
quantification of conservation savings that could be transferred to Met. Coincidentally, the Bureau
denied lID's request for water deliveries in 1997.

2. He instructed the Bureau to develop targeted management regulations in the Lower Basin.
These regulations would focus on intrastate water marketing and implementation of the Arizona Water
Bank.

3. He announced his desire to clarifY the relative rights of agricultural agencies in California, to
resolve the Coachella/IID dispute.

4. He announced his intent to proceed with the development of surplus criteria, but stated he
would defer finalizing any such guidelines pending the development of a California strategy to reduce its
dependence on surplus water.

e

"The letter, dated December 9,1996, stated in part as follows: "We are concerned that California agencies
appear to be assuming that the Secretary of Interior will continue to approve surplus declarations for the foreseeable
future, allowing continued use in California in excess of 4.4 maf. This assumption appears to exist despite the
reduction in unused entitlements in Arizona and Nevada, and increasing water use in the Upper Basin. Our concern
is heightened by current disagreements among California water agencies, and the lack of any coordinated program
for California to reduce its use of Colorado River water to 4.4 mafin normal years.

We are available to engage in serious discussions toward the development of multiple year surplus and shortage
criteria, that will meet, for an interim period only, at least part of the demand for surplus water in the Lower Basin,
and will allow for more secure water planning and more efficient use in the United States. These discussions must
be preceded by, and based upon, California's commitment to enter into a defmed, enforceable program to reduce its
dependence on Colorado River water over its basic entitlement, in a way that avoids undue risk of shortage to the
other Basin States. Weare also interested in moving forward with the steps necessary to implement the interstate
storage component of the Arizona Water Ban1e However, the states are extremely concerned with proposals in
California to bank surplus system water within Lake Mead in a "top water bank" or a "transitional water bank."

If we cannot proceed on this basis, our states will continue to review Colorado River operations on a year-to-year
basis. Under this approach, conditions change rapidly. However, it is possible that a surplus condition will not be
justified in 1998. Therefore, we will expect use of Colorado River water in California will be reduced to or toward
4.4 mafin 1998, if the Secretary makes a normal or limited surplus declaration."

e