Laserfiche WebLink
<br />...... -~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />Colorado River Advisory Council <br />January 26, 1999 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />baseline is essential for California agencies to implement the 4.4 Plan.! In December, the <br />Secretary announced that he was proceeding on "parallel tracks," allowing six months for the <br />finalization of the MOD and the adoption of new interim operating criteria for river operations.2 <br /> <br />In my last memorandum to you, I summarized the MOD, and indicated that MWD was <br />not a party to the agreement and had some concerns about it. As it turns out, MWD had very <br />significant concerns. Attached are copies of a MWD document entitled" Approaches to <br />Implementing Metropolitan's Policy Regarding Required Volume of Colorado River Water <br />Supplies," dated January 6,1999. In that document, you will note MWD poses two fundamental <br />questions about the very basis for the California 4.4 Plan: <br /> <br />· Should Metropolitan's Member Agencies be required to give up water and <br />'reasonable use claims and the right to pursue more appropriate allocation of <br />Colorado River water in order to secure the IID/SDCW A transfer and surplus <br />criteria to assure a full aqueduct? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Should the Secretary allocate publically subsidized water to agricultural users for <br />resale to urban users at a markup? <br /> <br />As you can imagine, raising these questions at this time caused quite a stir within <br />California. Attached is a letter of response from IID to MWD. Last week, in response to this <br />apparent meltdown in California, Secretary Babbitt met with the relevant agencies and board <br />, members. I understand he was not encouraging to MWD's position, and sought to keep the <br />MOD process on track. Also attached are some newspaper articles to give you a flavor of the <br />dynamics of these discussions. <br /> <br />ITotal California water use of Colorado River water is limited to 4.4 mafi'yr in normal <br />years. The first three priorities to this water, held by agricultural agencies, total 3.85 maf/yr. <br />The next two priorities, held by MWD, total 1.212 maf/yr. The major goal of the California 4.4 <br />Plan is to transfer conserved water from the third priority agricultural agencies to MWD, moving <br />MWD's demand to within California's normal year entitlement. <br /> <br />2Clearly, the issue of interim operating criteria is of critical importance to the other six <br />states. In October, the six states sent to California a document outlining background and <br />principles for negotiation of this criteria. In December, the six states sent to California a more <br />detailed paper outlining a proposal for interim operating criteria. These documents have been <br />provided to you, but if you would like additional copies, please let me know. <br />