My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC05927
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
17000-17999
>
WSPC05927
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:03:40 PM
Creation date
10/9/2006 5:34:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.100.10
Description
Colorado River - Interstate Litigation - Arizona Vs California
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
1/1/1991
Author
DOI-BOR
Title
AZ Vs CA - Compilation of Records - RE- Supreme Court Decree Dated 03-09-64 - Calendar Year 1990
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.
/
31
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 />OJ 1 J7 3 <br /> <br />The fonowing tabulations for calendar year 1990 show records of releases of uinstreal water pursuant to orders thereto, but not <br />diverted by the party ordering the sale, lnd the quantity of such water delivered to Hexlco in satisfaction cf the Hexican Treaty or <br />diverted by others in satisfaction of decreed rights. Also shown are quantities of such rejected water delivered to Hexico in excess <br />of treaty requirelents and quantities delivered to storage. The quantities delivered to storage were avai labie to reime fur "t,,, <br />use. <br /> <br />iater ordered but not diverted m analyzed daily for each diverter as the positive difference between the finally aporoved daily order <br />and the lean daily delivery requested on the day the diversion ~as Ilde, The lonthly quantlt ies shown on the tabulations are the SUI <br />of the daily oositive quantities. Final approval of daily orders was given in advance of the delivery date by the Slount of travel <br />tile involved in conveying the water frol the storage ooint to the diversion ooint on the lainstreal. To the extent oossible, .water <br />ordered but not diverted. was delivered to others in satisfaction of their rights. The quantities of such deliveries are shain en <br />the tabulation. <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />Deliveries of water to Hexico in satisfaction of the Hexican Treaty were scheduled based on Hexico's daily orders. Releases fro~ <br />storage iere scheduled in sufficient quantities, which when added to return flows, would leet Hexico's daily orders. Deiiveries of <br />water to Hexico in satisfaction of the treaty, therefore, were considered to have been made entirely frol reieases frol storage and <br />frol return flows SCheduled for that purpose and not frol water ordered but not diverted by other Colorado River water users, <br />Therefore. the tabulations show no "water ordered but not diverted' as being delivered to Hexico in satisfaction of the treaty. <br /> <br />To date, no orders are received for diversion frol the Colorado river in Nevada so no sheet is included for Nevada. The storage <br />capacity of lake Head is so large in relation to the present daily diversions frol the reservoir by Nevada that any .iater ordered <br />but not diverted" would be retained for future use and wouid have no significant effect on scheduling of daily operations of the <br />reservoir. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.