Laserfiche WebLink
<br />G0245:1 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Second, the CA WCD letter expresses concern that Reclamation believes that it has no <br />alternative source of water to meet its Treaty obligations, and that if Reclamation were not allowed to <br />pump the Yuma Mesa water it would be required to release an equivalent amount of water from storage <br />for delivery to Mexico, CA WCD maintains that Reclamation should operate the YDP, and deliver the <br />treated Wellton-Mohawk water to Mexico, as Congress intended in the 1974 Colorado River Basin <br />Salinity Control Act <br /> <br />Third, CA WCD maintains that the "interim period" is concluded and that Reclamation is <br />obligated to stop bypassing the Wellton-Mohawk drain water and must operate the YDP now, IfYDP <br />becomes operational, Reclamation would become obligated to replace the reject brine stream, CA WCD <br />believes that this would be an appropriate use for the pumped Yuma Mesa groundwater pumpage, <br /> <br />Fourth, CA WCD is also concerned about potential impacts to Colorado River retum flow <br />calculations associated with the proposed application, The proposed application suggests that some of <br />the pumped water may be discharged into the Bypass Canal. CA WCD states that this water would then <br />not be counted against the Treaty obligation, CA WCD maintains that it is not to Arizona's benefit to <br />increase return flows which do not count toward the Treaty obligation, <br /> <br />Fifth, CA WCD identified several technical inaccuracies which they believe should be corrected <br />by Reclamation, These inaccuracies involve amounts of water pumped annually, and the term of the <br />proposed permit. <br /> <br />, <br />" <br /> <br />, <br />Finally, the CA WCD states that il is willing to forego a formal objection to the proposed <br />application for three reasons: (I) CA WCD accept~ the premise that most, if not all, of the proposed <br />pumpage would escape to Mexico as underflow above the accounting surface boundary; (2) CA WCD <br />understands the economic impacts of high-groundwater in the Yuma region, and supports the efforts <br />of the Y A WRMG to address this high groundwater problem; and (3) CA WCD believes that issuance <br />of the permil should be viewed as an "interim measure" while Reclamation transitions to full operation <br />of the YDP. <br /> <br />Reclamation's Letter to CA WCD Regarding Approval of Estimated Monthly Diversions for Calendar <br />Year 2002, May 13, 2002 <br /> <br />I received a copy ofa letter from Reclamation to CA WCD regarding CA WCD's revision of the <br />District's Calendar Year 2002 diversion from Lake Havasu into the Central Arizona Project aqueduct. <br />CA WCD revised the diversion estimate from the originally approved 1,517,000 acre-feet to 1,566,000 <br />acre-feet The modification was the result of projected increased deliveries to the Salt River Project <br />in the Phoenix metropolitan area because of the 'drought conditions, Additionally, Reclamation <br />acknowledges the State of Arizona's intent to divert the full 2,8 million acre-foot entitlement during <br />the calendar year, Reclamation states that the Secretary of the Interior will administer any unused <br />apportionment in a manner consistent with Article XI, Section I of the Interim Surplus Guidelines <br />Record of Decision and the Interim Surplus Guidelines (Federal Register: Volume 66, Number 17), <br /> <br />5 <br />