Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00315:~ <br /> <br />Page 52 <br /> <br />Table V-2. Projected Average Annual Colorado River Water Use <br />Under Alternative Demand Conditions (Thousands of Acre-Feet) <br /> <br />Case 1: With Existing Institutions <br />(A) Current Demands <br />Shortages <br />Natural Enhanced <br />Demand Flows Flows <br /> <br />Demand <br /> <br />Upper Basin <br /> <br />Agriculture <br />M & I <br />Energy <br /> <br />2 <br />o <br />o <br /> <br />3687 <br />968 <br />605 <br /> <br />2890 <br />449 <br />113 <br /> <br />2 <br />o <br />o <br /> <br />Lower Bas i n <br /> <br />o <br />o <br />309(2) <br /> <br />5154 <br />2100 <br />1226 <br /> <br />o <br />o <br />305(2) <br /> <br />Non-CAP Ag 5211 <br />CAP 764 <br />California M&I(l) 1226 <br />NV and Non-CAP <br />M & I 305 0 <br />1. MWD total, including excess. <br />2. Shortage occurs in excess deliveries. <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />492 <br /> <br />Case 2: Without Existing <br /> <br />Institutions <br />(A) Current Demands <br />Shortages <br />Natural Enhanced <br />Flows. Flows <br /> <br />Demand <br /> <br />Demand <br /> <br />Upper Bas in <br /> <br />Agriculture 2890 <br />M & I 449 <br />Energy 113 <br /> <br />3 <br />o <br />o <br /> <br />3687 <br />968 <br />605 <br /> <br />3 <br />o <br />o <br /> <br />Lower Basin <br /> <br />Non-CAP Ag <br />CAP <br />California M&1 <br />NV and Non-CAP <br />M & I <br /> <br />5211 <br />764 <br />1226 <br /> <br />o <br />o <br />o <br /> <br />5154 <br />2100 <br />1226 <br /> <br />o <br />o <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />492 <br /> <br />305 <br /> <br />(B) Full Development <br />Shortages <br />Natural Enhanced <br />Flows Flows <br /> <br />6 <br />2 <br />10 <br /> <br />6 <br />2 <br />10 <br /> <br />17 <br />75 <br />592(2) <br /> <br />14 <br />65 <br />591(2) <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />(B) Full Development <br />Shortages <br />Natural Enhanced <br />Flows Flows <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />114 <br />11 <br />32 <br /> <br />95 <br />11 <br />31 <br /> <br />114 <br />o <br />5 <br /> <br />88 <br />o <br />3 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />entitlements, under any interpretation of the compacts, and thus there has been <br /> <br />no need to deal with the question of shortage. However, competition within the <br /> <br />Lower Division is now appearing with the completion of the Central Arizona <br /> <br />Project, and California is being forced to reduce its excess diversions, under <br /> <br />the terms of Arizona v. California. Furthermore, there is great concern in all <br />