My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC03493
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
15000-15999
>
WSPC03493
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2009 8:18:11 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 3:58:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8283.100
Description
Colorado River Basin-Colorado River Computer Models-Colorado River Simulation System Reclamation
State
CO
Water Division
5
Date
8/19/1985
Author
Randy Seaholm
Title
CR Colorado River Simulation System CRSS-Corres Reports etc-1984-1985-Computation of 602A Storage in CRSM-CRSS for Simulation Purposes
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />002814 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />APPENDIX VII <br /> <br />VII.9 <br /> <br />DEPARTMENTAL ACTIONS ON COMMENTS FROM UPPER AND LOWER <br />DIVISION STATES ON PROPOSED CRITERIA FOR COORDINATED LONG- <br />RANGE OPERATION OF COLORADO RIVER RESERVOIRS PURSUANT TO <br />THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN PROJECT ACT OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1968 <br />(P.L. 90-537) <br /> <br />The title of the Operating Criteria has been modified slightly from "Coordinated Long.Range Operating <br />Criteria for Colorado River Reservoirs. . ." to "Criteria for Coordinated Long-Range Operation of Colorado <br />River Reservoirs, . ." to accord with the provisions of Section 602 (a) of p, L 90.537. <br /> <br />The second sentence of Ihe first paragraph of the Operating Criteria has been revised in ,\ccordance with the <br />Lower Division proposal that the word "Upper" be deleted from the phrase that the Operating Criteria are to <br />control the "operation of the storage reservoirs in the [Upper}' Colorado River Basin. ." since the reser- <br />voirs referred to are in both the Upper and Lower Basins. In the last sentence of the first paragraph, a Lower <br />Division suggestion was adopted that "consistent" be inserted in lieu of "consonant". In this same sentence an <br />Upper Division proposal was adopted that "contracts" be deleted, These changes are reflected as follows: <br /> <br />"The Operating Criteria will be administered [consonant] consistent with applicable Federal laws, [con. <br />tracts,] the Mexican Water Treaty, interstate compacts, and decrees relating to the use of the waters of the <br />Colorado River." <br /> <br />While "contracts" are pertinent in the context of the sentence. the deletion of the word makes this sentence <br />consistent with the provisions of Sections 601 (c) and 602 (a) of the Colorado Basin Project Act in which the <br />word "contracts" is not included. In this connection, the Upper Basin proposal to refer to the several Com- <br />pacts, the Mexican Water Treaty and court decrees as constituting "the law of the river" was not adopted <br />since the phrase "the law of the river" cannot be said to exclude "contracts". The Upper Division also pro- <br />posed that the import of Sub. article If(l!(O be incorporated in the preamble to the Operanng Criteria "in order <br />to express the indispensable reason" for the criteria. This refers to the necessity to assure that upper basin <br />consumptive uses not be impaired because of failure to stOre sufficient water to assure deliveries uncle:- S~c- <br />tion 602(a) (I) and (2) of P.L. 90.537. This proposal was not adopted because this provision is more <br />appropriately retained in its present pOSition as one of the factors to be considered by the Secretary in deter- <br />mining the quantity of Section 602(a) storage. <br /> <br />The Upper Division proposal with regard to the second paragraph of the Operating Criteria was adopted <br />because it is consistent with Section 602(b) of P.L. 90.537. This revises the provision that the Secretary <br />"reserves the right to modify the Operating Criteria" to provide that the Secretary "may" modify the <br />Operating Criteria, The Upper Division proposed addition that the formal review will include "participation by <br />State representatives as each Governor may designate" was added since this is also provided for in Section <br />602 (b) . However, the word "once" was deleted from the phrase "that the review would be made at least <br />(once] every five years" as being unnecessary. The statement that the participation in the review would in- <br />clude "such other parties and agencies as the Secretary may deem appropriate" was retained since this par- <br />ti,cipation is provided for in Section 602(b) with regard to the initial review of the proposed criteria and these <br />same parties should participate in the formal review thereafter. <br /> <br />To be consistent with the format of the balance of the Operating criteria, the second paragraph of Article I. <br />which previously was unnumbered. has been designated Subarticle 1(2). In Subarticle 1(1), which concerns <br />the Secretary's annual report of actual operation for the "preceding compact water year and the projected <br />operation for the current year", the Lower Division proposal that the reference to "current year" be changed <br /> <br />'Words in [bracketsl are deleted and words italicized are added. <br /> <br />,,,, <br /> <br />- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.