My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01751
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01751
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:32:37 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:38:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8275.100
Description
Legislation and Litigation -- SALINITY -- Federal Legislation
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
3/4/1974
Title
Concurring Statement of Grand Valley Irrigation Company etc -- and the Colorado River Water Conservation District to the Subcommittee on Water and Power -- on HR 12165
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.
/
4
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 />N <br />....- <br />00 <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />.:~-~.~\ <br /><~:t~ <br /> <br />-.>l.~: <br /> <br />The various water supply organizations in the Grand Valley generally <br /> <br />support the concept of H. R. 12165, but believe some modification of the <br /> <br />language in Section 202 (2) should be made or that the apparent conflict <br /> <br />between Section 202 and 205 (l) should be clarified. Requiring by law <br /> <br />(Section 202 (2) ) that canals and ditches be combined into fewer facilities <br /> <br />could cause many legal, financial and operational problems where the <br /> <br />various systems are separately owned and ope'rational procedures have been <br /> <br />long established. There should be language in the bill which would assure <br /> <br />protection of existing property rights and continued autonomy of individual <br /> <br />companies if they so desire. The requirements that the local companies and <br /> <br />associations assume all obligations for operation, maintenance and achieve- <br /> <br />ment of maximum salinity reduction in the Colorado River could place an <br /> <br />unlimited and unreasonable financial burden on the various water organiza- <br /> <br />Hons. Unexpected failures could occur in expensive concrete linings and <br /> <br />structures, requiring repair or replacement at private expense, or it might <br /> <br />be arbitrarily determined that "maximum" salinity reduction was not being <br /> <br />achieved and additional expenditures of unspecified magnitude could be <br /> <br />required. To minimize these uncertainties and because Colorado River <br /> <br />salinity is a basin wide problem and the guarantee to Mexico expressed <br /> <br />in Minute 242 of the Boundary & Water Commission is a federal obligation, <br /> <br />we urge that the Subcommittee add amendatory language that the water users <br /> <br />costs for operation and maintenance will not be increased. <br /> <br />We believe it should be emphasized that residents of the Grand <br /> <br />Valley will realize benefits from this legislation only to t~e extent that <br /> <br />-3- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.