Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Agenda Item 14e <br />January 23-24, 2002 Board Meeting <br />Page2of7 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Reclamation's current hydrologic determination of water available to the Upper Basin is only 6.0 <br />MAF, significantly less than the 7.5 MAF apportioned under the Colorado River Compact. <br />Colorado does not accept this determination, but has acquiesced to its use for water resource <br />planning and certain administrative purposes. Both New Mexico and Arizona have contractually <br />obligated all the water apportioned to them under the current hydrologic determination. New <br />Mexico's consumptive use of Colorado River water at build-out, including the Navajo-Gallup <br />Project, was initially estimated to be approximately 695,000 AF, New Mexico has just completed <br />a detailed review of their consumptive use values and now believes that Navajo-Gallup can be <br />completed within their apportionment under the current hydrologic determination of 6.0 <br />MAF. New Mexico estimates current consumptive uses are approximately 509,000 AFIYR and <br />that includes its share of CRSP reservoir evaporation. We are currently reviewing the revised <br />numbers and attempting to determine whether contract revisions are required. Arizona's <br />consumptive use of Colorado River water at build-out is estimated to be in excess of 50,000 AF, <br />Arizona's current consumptive uses are approximately 46,000 AFlYR. Thus, Arizona and <br />possibly New Mexico may need to rely on unused upper basin apportionment in Colorado and <br />Wyoming for contracting purposes, or have a contract with another instate water user to cover any <br />shortages, Such contract could take the form of a "Depletion Limit Guarantee" under which the <br />Navajo Nation would agree to operate its projects (Navajo-Gallup, Navajo Indian Irrigation Project, <br />Hogback-Cuedi and Fruitland) collectively in a manner that would not cause New Mexico to exceed <br />its apportionment under the current hydrologic determination. Alternatively, it may be possible for <br />uses in the Lower Basin to be accounted for as Lower Basin uses. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />This memorandum provides updated information on the policy questions posed by the <br />Navajo-Gallup Project that were outlined in our July 13th, September 14th and November 7th <br />memoranda to the Board, The questions have been restated for continuity and the substantive <br />updated information is in bold print. These questions have been discussed with the Attorney <br />General's Office and our analysis to date indicates the following, <br /> <br />I. The Colorado River Compact states explicitly that the consumptive use of water apportioned to <br />the Upper Basin is for uses exclusively in the Upper Basin. Similarly, the consumptive use of <br />water apportioned to the Lower Basin is for exclusive use in the Lower Basin, The term "Upper <br />Basin" as defined in Article 1I(f): <br /> <br />"Means those parts of the states of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming <br />within and from which waters naturally drain into the Colorado River System above Lee <br />Ferry, and also all Darts of said states located without the drainaf!e area of the Colorado <br />River System which are now or shall hereafter be beneficiallv served by waters diverted from <br />the system above Lee Ferry," <br /> <br />To illustrate, because water from the Colorado River Basin can be delivered to other parts of a <br />Colorado River Basin State, transmountain diversion projects like Colorado-Big Thompson, <br />Fryingpan-Arkansas, and San Juan-Chama are possible. The policy question is, can those states <br />situated partially in both the Upper and Lower Basins (Arizona, New Mexico and Utah) use . <br />Upper Colorado River Basin water in the Lower Colorado River Basin portion of the state? Staff <br />is not aware of any project of this type actually in place, However, New Mexico has proposed <br />