My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC06881
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
19000-19999
>
WSPC06881
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:08:12 PM
Creation date
10/9/2006 6:07:26 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
1/1/1990
Author
DOI-BOR
Title
AZ Vs CA - Compilation of Records - RE- Supreme Court Decree Dated 03-09-64 - Calendar Year 1989
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.
/
34
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 />The following tahulations for calendar year 1989 show records of releases of mainstream water pursuant to orders thereto. hut not diverted by the party ordering <br />the sane, and the quantity of such water delivered to Mexico in satisfaction of the Mexican Treaty or diverted by others in satisfaction of decreed rights. <br />Also shown are quantities of such rejected water delivered to Mexico in excess of treaty requlrenents and quantities delivered to storage. The quantities <br />delivered to storage were available to release for future use. <br /> <br />Water ordered but not diverted was analyzed daily for each dlverter as the positive difference between the finally approved daily order and the nean daily <br />delivery requested on the day the diversion was made. The nonthly quantities shown on the tabulations are the sum of the daily positive qu,ntities. Final <br />approval of daily orders was given in advauce of the delivery date by the anount of travel tine involved in conveying the water fron the storage point to the <br />diversion point on the nainstrean. To the extent possible. "water ordered but not diverted" was delivered to others In satisfaction of their rights. Tbe <br />quantities of such deliveries are shown on the tabulation. <br /> <br />Deliveries of water to MeKico in satisfaction of the Mexican Treaty were scheduled based on Mexico's daily orders. Releases from storage were scheduled in <br />sufficient quantities. which when added to return flows, would neet MeKico's daily orders. Deliveries of water to MeKico in satisfaction of the treaty, <br />therefore. were considered to have been nade entirely from releases from storage and fron return flows scheduled for that purpose and not fren water ordered <br />but not diverted by other Colorado River water users. Therefore, the tabulations show no "water ordered but not diverted" as being delivered to Mexico in <br />satisfaction of the treaty. <br /> <br />To date, no orders are received for diversion from the Colorado river in Nevada so no sheet is included for Nevada. The storage capacity of Lake Mead is so <br />large in relation to the present daily diversions fron the reservoir by Nevada that any "water ordered but not diverted" would be retained for future use and <br />would have no significant effect on scheduling of daily operations of the reservoIr. <br /> <br />22 <br /> <br />o <br />= <br />.... <br />~_.. <br />.... <br />rv <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.