226894 research outputs found
Sort by
Water Resources of Wineglass Ranch & Associated Properties, Yavapai County, Arizona - Summary and Conclusions
No full textDocument: "Water Resources of Wineglass Ranch & Associated Properties, Big Chino & Little Chino Valleys, Yavapai County, Arizona, Summary & Conclusions," by Samuel F. Turner & Paul A. Manera, March 13, 1964, page 2Chino Valley is divided into two areas by Sullivan Lake and the Verde River which drains Sullivan Lake. Big Chino Valley extends northwest from Sullivan Lake with a drainage area extending north and northwest of the town of Seligman and Williamson Valley is a secondary drainage area extending to the west and southwest and empties into Big Chino Wash a few miles north of Sullivan Lake. The southern portion of the valley is composed of Little Chino Valley whose primary drainage is Granite Creek which starts to the south and southwest of Prescott.
There are four major water-producing strata in the Chino Valley Area. These strata are not continuous over the entire area as faulting has divided the area into several isolated subunits. The uppermost unit is the Recent alluvium which is a thin layer of soil, silt, sand and gravel deposited along the washes. This material varies in thickness from 50 to 200 feet. Underlying the Recent alluvium and exposed over much of the area away from the washes is the Quaternary alluvium composed primarily of clays, probably of lake-bed origin. These clays contain some thin sand layers in places. The thickness of the Quaternary alluvium varies from 50 feet to 400 feet. The Tertiary volcanic series underlies the Quaternary alluvium. This series is composed of basalt, cinders, volcanic conglomerate, volcanic ash, and layers of volcanic sands and gravels. This is the major water-producing zone now developed in Little Chino Valley. In places the volcanic material is extremely porous and probably contains cavities and openings, in addition to being fractured by faulting. The fourth and deepest hydrologic unit of the area is the Redwall and possibly Martin Limestones which are present beneath the Supai formation on the northeastern margin of the valley. This material has been penetrated by a number of the deep oil well tests of the area. Some of these deep tests are now used as water wells.
There is a small area near Del Rio Springs which has sufficient artesian pressure to cause flowing wells. The source of this artesian water is the Tertiary volcanic series which is confined by the overlying lake-bed clays.
The specific capacity of one well in Section 26, T 18N., R. 3W. (pumpingtest by Turner and Associates) was 24 gallons per foot of drawdown. This appears to be a typical specific capacity for the wells in the area which produce from the Tertiary volcanic series. Specific capacities of wells which penetrate faulted and broken volcanics are extremely high. This is illustrated by the pumping test results for a well in Section 21, T. 16N., R. 2W. which penetrates the faulted volcanics. This well produced 1,100 gpm (gallons per minute) with two feet of drawdown. Similar results were obtained from a well in Section 27, T. 18N., R. 2W. which penetrated the Redwall limestone. Production from this well was 1,600 gallons per minute with one foot of drawdown. Specific capacities in the later range are typical of cavernous limestones.
2Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,333,887 byte
Letter Responding to Request for Views of the Department of the Army on S. 1658, A Bill
No full textLetter: From Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Army for Civil Functions, to Kermit Gordon, Apr 1, 1964, page 3and Marble Canyon Reservoirs for the period 1975-2024 are estimated to average 10.5 million acre-feet annually, of which an average of 700,000 acre-feet represents spill. In each of these cases the releases at Glen Canyon are said to reflect appropriate deductions for future water uses in the Upper Colorado River Basin. On the basis of a 10.5 million acre-foot release and spill, the average availability of Colorado River water should be well above the 7.5 million acre-foot level. The utilization of the demonstrated availability of water would mean the use of an alternative flow schedule and would affect features of the plan to develop additional supplies of water. To firm up the 10.5 million acre-foot release probably would require long-term storage in Glen Canyon Reservoir, Lake Meade or elsewhere in the basin with possible adverse effects on hydroelectric power production. The report presents no basis for independent evaluation of this type of arrangement as an alternative.
An important feature of coordinated, comprehensive water resources planning is the development and use of a sound concept of water demand and supply. Both the effect of increasing the cost of water use and possible changes in water-using technology should be taken into account. Further, water deficiencies aggregated for the region fail to consider problems of water interchange between major areas of water supply and demand. To illustrate the point, the inference was drawn from the preceding paragraph that the 7.5 million acre-foot level could be met. Yet it can be shown that the plan fails to meet the projected 1975 requirements for the California and Arizona portions of the region by 495,000 and 540,000 acre-feet per annum, respectively. Consequently, more detailed analysis is recommended to determine the amount and location of water need.
Furthermore, the plan proposes the early construction of facilities to be used jointly by the Federal Government and the State of California to transport water over the Tehachapi Mountains in California. The basis for early scheduling of this feature of the plan is the estimated saving of $100,000,000 in construction costs. However, the capacity and the date of use of these facilities are unknown. In fact, this bill authorizes the studies to determine this information. Because of these uncertainties it would seem prudent that the construction of this feature be delayed. The "Mean Measure of Use" procedure is used to apportion the joint costs, thus allocating 60 percent of the costs to the Federal Government. Inadequate data, however, are presented to determine whether this procedure is equitable in terms of the respective benefits.
The plan fails to clearly specify the criteria which determine the scheduling of investment in relationship to the Development Fund. The use of the Fund will vary greatly, depending upon which criteria are selected. For example, will emphasis be given to developing water for
3Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,758,008 byte
Congressional Record - Senate
No full textDocument: Congressional Record, "Protecting The Present Users of Lower Colorado River Water," April 25, 1964, page 11964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD_SENATE 8823
feet, should title VI be enacted into law, the terms and conditions upon which Federal aid would be extended for a variety of purposes which would be subjected to new requirements.
There is no question but that the Congress has full authority to impose conditions upon the extension of Federal aid. Congress has always done so. Only those who meet whatever conditions are specified in the statute authorizing the program are entitled to receive aid under it.
As I have said, Congress has always imposed such conditions. Only Congress should do so. We should not delegate the authority to determine the conditions of eligibility for aid. This is a legislative responsibility, one of the responsibilities which our constituents chose us to exercise.
Our Government is one in which the authority is divided between three coordinate branches. The powers granted to the legislative branch, the judicial branch, and the executive branch by the Constitution are such as to provide a system of checks and balances. Of all the power granted to Congress, the power of the purse is by far the most important. It is the power that has been most zealously and jealously guarded by Congress down through the years.
In recent years Presidents have requested that Congress give to the Executive what has been called the item veto, authority which would permit the President to veto one part of an appropriation bill without destroying the validity of other items in it. Congress has never even come close to granting such authority to the President. It has refused to do so out of a realization that such action would constitute a serious diminution of congressional power over the expenditure of funds.
The authority which would be conveyed by title VI is in some respects more far reaching than would be an item veto. If enacted into law, title VI could be so administered as to constitute a geographic veto, with the executive department making the determination as to those geographic areas in which money would be spent and those in which it would not.
I emphasize again that title VI sets forth no standards at all as to what constitutes discrimination. It does not undertake to specify the acts which would be prohibited, nor does it set forth the conditions which would have to be met to make a recipient eligible to continue receiving Federal aid. There are no indexes either for those who would administer the law or for the courts.
Under title VI, as now drafted, the standards and the guidelines would be developed by the executive department. Should title VI be enacted, the Congress will have delegated to the Executive a significant measure of congressional control over the expenditure of funds. There are those who assert that in recent years there has been a trend toward a shift of power from the Congress to the Executive. There is some basis for such an assertion. If Congress should now delegate to the Executive the authority
No. 81--5
to specify the conditions upon which Federal funds would be expended, the trend will be accelerated. If we take such action in the name of civil rights, for what other purposes will we be called upon to do it again?
I am not here undertaking to raise a constitutional question. Other Senators have suggested that title VI constitutes an attempt at an unconstitutional delegation of the power to legislate. Whether the delegation of authority is so extensive as to contravene the Constitution is open to question. There is no question in my mind, however, that to delegate such authority to the President, as contemplated in title VI of the pending bill, would be most unwise.
I hope that the remarks that I have made today will not be interpreted as indicating hostility to a reasonable civil rights bill. On the contrary, I supported the civil rights bills of 1957 and 1960. I hope the pending bill will be so modified that I can conscientiously support it. I cannot do so in its present form.
Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me for a question?
Mr. GORE. I yield.
Mr. ERVIN. I should like to say that the Senator from Tennessee has made the most accurate analysis of title VI which could possibly be made.
Mr. GORE. I am very grateful for that generous statement.
Mr. METCALF. Mr. President, will the Senator from Tennessee yield to me for a moment?
Mr. GORE. I yield.
Mr. METCALF. The Senator from Tennessee has made a contribution to the debate in laying before the Senate the questions he has raised as to the legislative language and the legislative intent of title VI. I compliment the Senator from Tennessee for the very able statement he has made.
Mr. GORE. I thank my friend very sincerely.
Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the substitute amendment offered by the majority leader, the Senator from Montana [Mr. MANSFIELD], and the minority leader, the Senator from Illinois [Mr. DIRKSEN], to the amendment proposed by the able and distinguished junior Senator from Georgia [Mr. TALMADGE], on behalf of himself, the able and distinguished junior Senator from Virginia [Mr. ROBERTSON], the able and distinguished junior Senator from South Carolina [Mr. THURMOND], and myself.
The proposed substitute amendment is a very queer amendment. It would be rather peculiar in its contents and implications if it were offered as a separate piece of proposed legislation or as an amendment to any bill other than the pending bill. But its peculiarity is very much multiplied when it is offered as an amendment to a bill which professes to be opposed to segregation and discrimination. The substitute amendment would engage in segregation itself. I make that statement because it would first place all people accused in cases charging criminal contempt into one class by themselves, and by so doing it would segregate them from all other litigants in the courts of the United States. I am fundamentally opposed to segregation of that class or kind because I believe that any system of law which makes any pretense to be an instrument for the administration of justice would have as its most basic requirement that all laws should apply alike to all men in like circumstances.
The pending bill not only takes a certain group or certain category of litigants and segregates them from all other litigants in the courts of the United States, but it also practices discrimination against them after it has segregated them.
It discriminates against the accused charged with criminal contempt in civil rights cases by denying them a right--and a most substantial right--which the Constitution of the United States gives, and which all of the Members of the Senate would be willing to give, by common consent, to persons charged with the most reprehensible crimes known to the law.
I have to confess that I am unable to understand why there should be any reluctance on the part of any Senator of the United States to give to people a right which belongs to murderers, burglars, rapists, counterfeiters, narcotic peddlers, persons charged with treason against their country, and common thieves, simply because those persons happen to be charged with criminal contempt in civil rights cases.
However, the amendment in the nature of a substitute is in complete harmony with the other provisions of the bill, which contains 55 pages, and constitutes the most monstrous blueprint for governmental tyranny ever presented to a Congress of the United States.
However, the proposed amendment, in the nature of a substitute, is in complete harmony with the other provisions of the pending bill. The bill is based upon the strange thesis that the best way to promote the civil rights of some Americans is to rob all Americans of civil rights equally as precious, and to reduce the supposedly sovereign States to meaningless zeros upon the Nation's map. That is the way in which the pending bill would operate.
It has been the boast of Americans in all their generations that this country believes in freedom of the individual. The bill is designed to rob all Americans of some of their most precious economic, legal, personal, and property rights.
It is a part of an intemperate movement backed by some people who are sincere but misguided, and by others who are merely exploiting the supposed beneficiaries of the bill.
It is a movement in entire harmony with the regulations recently adopted by the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, regulations which undertake to rob all residents of the District of Columbia of the legal right to select the persons to whom they shall sell their property or the persons to whom they shall rent their property.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 24 bit, 3,639,905 byte
Cover Letter - Salt River Project
No full textLetter: From R.J. Mullin, to Orren Beaty, April 24, 1964SALT RIVER PROJECT
P.O.BOX 1980
PHOENIX I, ARIZONA
SALT RIVER PROJECT
April 24, 1964
VICTOR I. CORBELL, PRESIDENT FLOYD N. SMITH., VICE PRESIDENT R. J. MCMULLIN, GENERAL MANAGER
Mr. Orren Beaty
Assistant to the Secretary
Department of Interior
Washington, D.C.
Dear Orren:
Enclosed is a print of a front-page story appearing in the Arizona Republic on April 16 regarding the Central Arizona Project water hearings which have been taking place in Washington.
I think you will find the statement of our esteemed Senator Goldwater which appears in the second paragraph to be most enlightening. This statement has caused a psychological trauma among the Goldwater followers in Arizona who have been automatically trained to run up the 'hate Udall' banners every time the Pacific Southwest Water Plan is mentioned. Now to find Goldwater embracing the regional approach throws everything into a state of confusion.
The remainder of the article actually does not support the statement. It would appear to me that Barry really meant "the solution is not the Southwest Water Plan...."
I was talking to Stewart the other day on the telephone and made reference to the article. He had heard of it and had not seen it so I promised to send a copy along for your information.
With warmest personal regards.
Cordially,
R. J. MCMULLIN
RJM/rf
Enclosures (2)Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 24 bit, 2,565,735 byte
S. 2760, A Bill
No full textDocument: S. 2760, A Bill To authorize coordinated development of the water resources of the Pacific Southwest, and for other purposes, April 22, 1964, page 22
1 to authorize the coordinated development of the power
2 resources of the Lower Basin in order to furnish power for
3 pumping water into and in conveyance works, and for sale
4 as a means of financial assistance to the projects herein
5 authorized and to those which the Congress may hereafter
6 authorize for the importation of water into the Colorado
7 River Basin.
8 SEC. 102. COMPONENTS OF THE PACIFIC SOUTHWEST
9 PROJECT.-The Pacific Southwest project shall consist of
10 the following components:
11 (1) The transmountain division, to consist of such
12 projects as the Congress may hereafter authorize for con-
13 struction, pursuant to the investigation and report author-
14 ized by title III, to import water into the Colorado River
15 Basin.
16 (2) The main stream reservoir division, to consist of
17 Bridge Canyon Dam and Marble Canyon Dam, their power-
18 plants, transmission lines, and related facilities, authorized
19 for construction in title IV. To these shall be added Hoover
20 Dam, Davis Dam, and Parker Dam, their powerplants,
21 Government-owned transmission lines associated therewith,
22 and related facilities, after existing statutory amortization re-
23 quirements with respect to each of them have been satisfied,
24 all as provided in title IV.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,798,835 byte
S. 2760, A Bill
No full textDocument: S. 2760, A Bill To authorize coordinated development of the water resources of the Pacific Southwest, and for other purposes, April 22, 1964, page 77
1 section 207 (d) for repayment of the cost of construction of
2 works that the Congress may hereafter authorize to import
3 additional supplies of water into the Colorado River Basin.
4 SEC. 206. CONTRACTS.-(a) The Secretary is author-
5 ized to enter into contracts for the storage and delivery of
6 water, and repayment of the cost of works allocated to irriga-
7 tion and municipal and industrial water supply, meeting the
8 revenue requirements of section 205, in accordance with the
9 Reclamation Project Act of 1939: Provided, That contracts
10 relating to municipal water supply may be made without
11 regard to the limitations of the last sentence of section 9 (c)
12 of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (53 Stat. 1194;
13 U.S.C. 485h (c) ) : Provided further, That contracts for the
14 storage and delivery of water originating in the Colorado
15 River system and diverted from the main stream of the Colo-
16 rado River in the Lower Basin shall conform to section 5 of
17 the Boulder Canyon Project Act.
18 (b) The Secretary is authorized to enter into contracts
19 for the sale of electric power and energy, meeting the revenue
20 requirements of section 205, in accordance with the Recla-
21 mation Project Act of 1939 as amended: Provided, That the
22 period thereof, in the Secretary's discretion, may extend to
23 fifty years, and may be accompanied by a right of renewal.
24 SEC. 207. REVENUES To BE CREDITED TO DEVELOP-
25 MENT FUND; DISPOSITION.-(a) There shall be paid intoEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,709,491 byte
S. 2760, A Bill
No full textDocument: S. 2760, A Bill To authorize coordinated development of the water resources of the Pacific Southwest, and for other purposes, April 22, 1964, page 1212
1 maintenance of such projects; and recommendations,
2 conforming to paragraph (b), for development of the
3 water resources of the river basins from which such
4 water would be imported, adequate to supply the ulti-
5 mate requirements of the areas of origin of such water,
6 in addition to supplying the quantities proposed to be
7 imported into the Colorado River Basin.
8 (b) The planning of all such importation work shall be
9 subject to the following conditions : (i) diversions shall be
10 subordinate to all existing and anticipated future needs with-
11 in the watersheds of origin, including the retention of water
12 in the watersheds of origin if estimates of future needs prove
13 insufficient; (ii) financial assistance from the development
14 fund shall be available for the construction of any future
15 projects in the watersheds of origin if such assistance is not
16 otherwise provided; and (iii) additional costs of future
17 projects, caused by the preemption of lower cost water
18 sources which otherwise would benefit the areas of origin,
19 shall be offset by assistance from the development fund to
20 the extent that the costs chargeable to such projects would
21 be no greater than if there had been no export to the Colo-
22 rado River Basin.
23 (c) The Secretary shall consult the Pacific Southwest
24 Regional Water Commission, created by title XI, and shall
25 submit his report to the affected States, in the basins ofEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,785,704 byte
S. 2760, A Bill
No full textDocument: S. 2760, A Bill To authorize coordinated development of the water resources of the Pacific Southwest, and for other purposes, April 22, 1964, page 1515
1 SEC. 402. DISPOSITION OF POWER.- (a) Power and
2 energy generated at Bridge and Marble Canyon powerplants
3 shall be made available, at cost, for pumping water into
4 and in the central Arizona aqueduct, referred to in title V,
5 and into and in such aqueducts for the importation of water
6 into the Colorado River Basin as the Congress may hereafter
7 authorize as part of the transmountain division, referred to in
8 title III. The project accounts shall show, as costs asso-
9 ciated with the storage and delivery of water transported
10 by each such aqueduct, respectively, the cost of production
11 and delivery of power and energy so made available to that
12 aqueduct, including appropriate pro rata shares of amortiza-
13 tion, operation, and maintenance expense.
14 (b) Power and energy generated at Bridge and Marble
15 Canyon powerplants in excess of the requirements of para-
16 graph (a) shall be sold or exchanged by the Secretary of
17 the Interior in accordance with the criteria stated in title
18 II, at such points on the transmission system referred to in
19 section 401 as may be agreed upon. The revenues there-
20 from shall be paid into the development fund.
21 SEC. 403. AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATION.-
22 The appropriation of not to exceed $750,000,000 from the
23 development fund is hereby authorized for the construction
24 of the works authorized by this title.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,842,631 byte
S. 2760, A Bill
No full textDocument: S. 2760, A Bill To authorize coordinated development of the water resources of the Pacific Southwest, and for other purposes, April 22, 1964, page 2323
1 plants, and other works necessary to serve irrigated and
2 irrigable lands along and adjacent to the Virgin River; a
3 dam on the Santa Clara River near Gunlock, Utah, and
4 other works necessary to serve irrigated and irrigable lands
5 along and adjacent to the Santa Clara River and on Ivins
6 Bench; and hydroelectric plants and transmission facilities
7 at the Virgin City Dam and at such other points as are
8 desirable. The area of lands not having a previous history
9 of irrigation to be included in the division shall not exceed
10 twelve thousand acres. The Dixie division shall be coordi-
11 nated with the Cedar City water development program which
12 includes the diversion of the waters of Crystal Creek into the
13 Kolob Reservoir, and after completion of the Dixie division
14 said waters of Crystal Creek and of the natural watershed
15 of said Kolob Reservoir shall be exported for use of Cedar
16 City and vicinity in accordance with an agreement entered
17 by Cedar City and Iron County, Utah, on the 26th day
18 of August 1953, with Kolob Reservoir and Storage Asso-
19 ciation, Incorporated, and Washington County, Utah.
20 SEC. 602. SALINE WATERS.-The Dixie division shall
21 include such facilities for the disposition of saline waters of
22 La Verkin Springs as are necessary in the opinion of the
23 Secretary to insure the delivery of water at downstream points
24 along the Virgin River for water users in the States of
25 Arizona and Nevada of suitable quality for irrigation, or pro-Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,775,614 byte
Possibility of Bringing Import Water Directly to Colorado River
No full textDocument: Possibility of Bringing Import Water Directly to Colorado River, 4/15/64 (photocopy)4/15/64
Possibility of Bringing. Import Water
Directly to Colorado River
Attorney General Mosk indicated that import water might be rerouted directly to the Colorado River rather than distributed directly within California at a savings of 800 million in revenues which would not be realized if the import water were delivered to the Colorado River. On the other hand, there would be benefits to be realized from increasing the water quality of Colorado River flows through diversion to the river.
The advantages and comparative costs of each route need more detailed study and analysis. This is fully contemplated in the Pacific Southwest Water Plan. Should it be found more desirable and economic to bring import water directly to the Colorado River, it could only improve, not detract from, the overall Pacific Southwest Water Plan.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 790,604 byte