My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01078
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01078
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:29:14 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:07:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.110.60
Description
Colorado River Water Users Association
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
1/1/2002
Author
CRWUA
Title
2002 Annual Report and Membership Directory
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Annual Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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 />2002 in Review <br /> <br />The imponance of additional storage took front stage in <br />Wyoming. Construction of the High Savory Dam rnoved <br />closer to cornpletion and the Wyoming legislature approved <br />feasibility study funding for the Church Reservoir site and <br />Viva Naughton Reservoir expansion. The State of Colorado <br />joined Wyorning to identify reservoir sites in the Little Snake <br />River drainage. <br /> <br />In Utah the Diamond Fork system of the Central Utah <br />Project reached another milestone with the holing through <br />of the Tanner Ridge Tunnel. When completed the tunnel <br />will help transpon an average of 160,000 acre feet of water <br />from Strawberry Reservoir in the Colorado River Basin to <br />Utah Lake in the Great Basin. <br /> <br />Conservation emerged as the top priority for Nevada. <br />Recognizing the dire conditions, water resource managers <br />developed a regional drought plan which was subsequently <br />adopted by local water agencies. Adoption of this plan and <br />increased conservation should minimize Nevada's need to <br />draw on its groundwater reserves locally and in Arizona. On <br />the infrastructure side, the River Mountains Water <br />Treatment Facility became operational, increasing systern <br />capacity, redundancy and flexibility. <br /> <br />In California, effons to line the All American and Coachella <br />canals continued. The design work to line eanhen portions of <br />the Coachella Canal - 33.2 miles - was nearly complete, with <br />a construction contract to be awarded as early as mid 2003. <br />Construction is expected to take three years to complete. <br /> <br />Lining the Coachella Canal will save approximately 31,000 <br />acre-feet of Colorado River water annually, most of which <br />will remain at Lake Havasu for diversion to coastal <br />California through Metropolitan Water District's Colorado <br />River Aqueduct. <br /> <br />In November, the Imperial Irrigation District, Metropolitan <br />Water District of Southern California and Reclamation exe- <br />cuted an Advance Funding Agreement. The goal of the <br />November agreernent is to initiate preliminary work on the All <br />American lining project. A newly formed three-rnember coor- <br />dinating committee will address environrnental issues before <br />23 miles of the canal are lined. The lining project will eventu- <br />ally save 67,700 acre-feet of Colorado River water a year. <br /> <br />In April, urban water leaders in southern California and <br />southern Nevada heralded the latest efforts to intercept per- <br />chlorate-contaminated groundwater entering the Colorado <br />River. Since October, the new remediation system installed <br /> <br />under the direction of the Nevada Division of <br />Environmental Protection has been intercepting groundwa- <br />ter laden with perchlorate, an oxygen-rich salt known in <br />high concentrations to affect they thyroid gland. Preliminary <br />estimates indicate the system will remove a large percentage <br />of perchlorate currently entering the Las Vegas Wash, a trib- <br />utary that empties into Lake Mead. <br /> <br />Additional key events: <br />2002 was the first year Interim Surplus Guidelines were used <br />as part of the Annual Operating Plan process to determine <br />water releases from Lake Mead. Secretary of Interior Gail <br />Norton declared a "Full Domestic Surplus" condition for <br />2002, allowing both Nevada and California to take water <br />above their basic entitlements. Arizona also had a right to <br />surplus water but did not request any. All of the surplus <br />water was for domestic use; no surplus water was made avail- <br />able for agricultural contractors. <br /> <br />In November, Secretary Norton supplemented the 2002 <br />Annual Operating Plan, authorizing the Bureau of <br />Reclamation to release additional water to the Imperial <br />Irrigation District, Coachella Valley Water District and Palo <br />Verde Irrigation District. The districts requested water above <br />the amounts approved in the 2002 AOP. The authorization <br />was granted with the condition that a district repay any over- <br />use if final accounting showed a district exceeded its origi- <br />nally-approved amount. Final use numbers were not avail- <br />able by the end of 2002. <br /> <br />The 2003 AOP, signed by the Secretary in December 2002, <br />contains two possible options for Water Year 2003 opera- <br />tions. First, if California entities signed a Quantification <br />Settlement Agreement by the end of December 2002, anoth- <br />er "Full Domestic Use" water surplus would be declared in <br />accordance with the Interim Surplus Guidelines. Second, if <br />the QSA was not signed by the deadline, the more liberal <br />portions of the Guidelines would be suspended, and a "nor- <br />mal" determination would govern Lake Mead releases in <br />2003. <br /> <br />The agreement was not signed by the deadline, so the <br />Guidelines were suspended. With the resulting "normal" <br />determination (4.4 MAF to California, 2.8 MAF to Arizona, <br />and 0.3 MAF to Nevada), no surplus water will be available. <br />This effectively reduces California's 2003 water order by <br />approximately 620,000 acre-feet and Nevada's 2003 water <br />order by approximately 37,000 acre-feet. Arizona's order was <br />not reduced, as it requested only its basic annual entitlement <br />of 2.8 MAE <br /> <br />4 Colorado River Water Users Associafion <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.