Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br /> <br />WESTERN <br />STATES <br />WATER <br />::::_~-- <br /> <br />E\'JE,O <br />~1~\~~~ <br /> <br />'/'Ja\er <br />co\olacl~oo Boarcl <br />co('\sef'13 <br /> <br />February 24, 1995 <br />Issue No. 1084 <br /> <br />. ill <br /> <br /> <br />;ll"c <br />I_Ase <br />. F <br />! , <br />'Il <br />:E <br /> <br />recycled aper <br />conserve water <br /> <br />THE WEEKLY NEWSLETTER OF THE WESTERN STATES WATER COUNCIL <br /> <br />Creekview Plaza, Sirlte Ao201/942 East 7145 So. / Midviue, Utah 84047 / (801) 561-5300 / FAX (801) 255-9642 <br />,. ..-0, .. _ . <br /> <br />Chairman - Larry Anderson; Executive Director'- Craig Bell; Editor - TonyWmardson;' Typist - Carrie Cutvin <br /> <br />WATER RESOURCES <br /> <br />Colorado River Basin <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The Lower Colorado River Basin Technical <br />Committee recently issued a progress report on its <br />activities and discus.sions. The Technical Committee <br />was created in an attempt to find a mutually acceptable <br />solution to the region's growing water demands among <br />Arizona, California and Nevada and Colorado River <br />Indian tribes, as well as the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation <br />and water users. It was established subsequent to <br />preliminary meetings involving,ll1!! sev~n ColOl"<ldaRiver <br />Basin States.and the Ten Tribes Partnership. The <br />Technical Committee (TC) includes representatives of <br />the Arizona Department of Water Resources, the <br />Colorado River Board of California, the Colorado River <br />Commission of Nevada and Southern Nevada Water <br />Authority, the I mperial I rrigation District, Metropolitan <br />Water District of Southern California, Central Arizona <br />Water Conservation District, and \^Jelto:1-Mohawk <br />Irrigation and Drainage District. <br /> <br />The TC has met ofte'n since laS! Octobe,r .anq has <br />identified four guiding principles: (1} no soh,JtlQi1Will <br />result in any permanElOt change in a state's basic <br />apportionment of water under the Law of the River, and <br />changes in individual water entitlements must be on a <br />voluntary basis; (2) proposed solutions will focus on <br />achieving maximum use of the Lower Basin water <br />supply; .(3) implementable solutions must include <br />appropriate mitigation or compensation for adverse <br />impacts to other states and third parties; and (4) though <br />not likely over the near-term, measures to augment the <br />basin's water supply deserve future consideration. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />In addition to the above principles, the TC has <br />identified a number of critical needs to be addressed <br />within the development of a regional solution to water <br /> <br />shortages. Briefly, those needs are; (1) '~i'full Colorado <br />. River Aqueduct for .southern Califomia; (2) an increased <br />water-supply. for'southernNevada;(3) some means to <br />allow' entities to. make cpmpensi;ltiori for inadvertently <br />using more than ..their water supply entitlements; (4) <br />drought protection: particularly in Arizona; (5) a long- <br />term water supply to meet the. federal gOilernmenfs . <br />water quality obligation to Mexico'; (6) a mechanism to . <br />address other potential water supply needs; and (7) a <br />way for tribes to fully develop and benefit from the use of <br />their water resources. <br /> <br />. Of note, the Committee is discussing a number of <br />potential elements to a regional solution incluping the <br />development of water banking .and reservoir <br />management opportunities, interstate' transfers, tribal <br />water transfers and otheraiternatives. Water banking <br />opportunities. include mainstem, off-mainstem and <br />ground water recharge. Banking of "conserved" water is <br />also under discussion. Within Lake Mead, the TC is <br />discussing changes to allow both top-water and middle- <br />water banking, subject to certain restrictions. Lake <br />Mead would alsp playa role in allowing some flexibility <br />to addreSs inadvertent oilerruns in excess of an entity's <br />anI1U;ilentitlement, as well ,as proposals for defining and <br />allocating . water' use given any future surplus or <br />shortage. A number of alternatives are being studied <br />and modeled, and a number of issues have yet to be <br />resolved: including the declaration of "surplus," the <br />definition of "conserved/saved" water and its <br />measurement, allocating unused apportionments, <br />ensuring certainty and reliability, establishing an <br />accounting methodology for transfers, identifying <br />adverse impacts and appropriate mitigation, detennining <br />to what extent unused apportionments may be <br />transferred to another state, establishing a Lower <br />Division States' forum and defining its responsibilities <br />and authority, and the types of water to be marketed. <br />The TC has recommended continuing meetings to refine <br />and revise a regional solution, continuing modeling <br />