226894 research outputs found
Sort by
Letter - The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
No full textLetter: From R.A. Skinner, General Manager and Chief Engineer, The Metropolitan Water District, July 13, 1964, page 2supplementary source of water for use by Metropolitan in its service area. Conferences on these matters have been held also with consulting engineering firms.
Under date of June 26, 1964, a communication, copy attached, was received from the Under Secretary of the Interior setting forth, in general terms, suggestions for the conduct of the study, as follows:
1. The purpose of the study would be to determine the engineering and economic feasibility and preliminary design of a combination plant to produce in the range of 50 to 150 million gallons of water per day and 150 to 750 megawatts of electric power.
2. The cost and duration of the study would be agreed upon before we proceed, and the cost would be shared equally among Metropolitan, the Atomic Energy Commission and Interior.
3. The Government, represented by Interior and the Atomic Energy Commission, would contract with Metropolitan which would, in turn, contract for the study to be conducted by a firm selected by Metropolitan. This study contract would be approved by Interior and the Atomic Energy Commission. The scope of work and other significant aspects relating to the study would be delineated in our contract with Metropolitan.
4. The study contract to be administered by Metropolitan would cover the following specific terms
2.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 2,626,882 byte
Letter Concerning S. 502, H.R. 9752, and the "Swidler Amendment"
No full textLetter: From R.J. McMullin, General Manager, Salt River Project, to John E. Smith, Chairman, Arizona Power Authority, July 14, 1964, page 3SALT RIVER PROJECT
Mr. John E. Smith
Page 3
July 14, 1964
authorization of the Central Arizona Project as an element of the Pacific Southwest Water Plan, or separately, as the case may be, it would be unthinkable to take any position which would or could impede that authorization.
We must therefore take the position of urging our delegation in the House to move H.R. 9752 to a vote in the House, and subsequent approval by the President. Only in this way do we believe that Arizona's interests will be fully protected.
Yours very truly,
R. J. McMullin
General Manager
RJM/ed
cc: Honorable Stewart L. Udall
Honorable Carl Hayden
Honorable Barry Goldwater
Honorable John Rhodes
Honorable Morris K. Udall
Honorable George Senner
Honorable Paul Fannin
Honorable Floyd Dominy
Mr. Rich Johnson, President
Central Arizona Project
Mr. Wayne Akin, Chairman
Arizona Interstate Stream Commission
Mr. A. B. West, Regional Director
Region 3, Bureau of ReclamationEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 2,732,327 byte
Personal and Confidential Letter Concerning Water Meeting and Water Issues
No full textLetter: From Stewart Udall, to Paul Fannin, May 18, 1964 (carbon copy), page 2-2-
As matters now stand, it is my opinion that APA is playing Russian roulette with Arizona's water future by persisting in the prosecution of the application. I feel I must express my fears to you privately now, on the hope that while there is still time Arizona, by its own volition, will have the application withdrawn.
Sincerely.
/s/ Stewart
Stewart L. Udall
Secretary of the Interior
Honorable Paul Fannin
Governor of Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona
bc: Senator Hayden
W. R. Mathews
SLU: akl
Secy. desk copy
Secy. File
Secy. cron.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 2,672,950 byte
S. 1658, Amendment
No full textDocument: 88th Congress, 2nd Session, S. 1658, Amendment, 1964, page 5-5-
(2) Investigate alternative sources in the State of California and elsewhere as a means of supplying water to meet the current and anticipated water requirements in the Lower Colorado River Basin, and prepare preliminary plans to accomplish such purpose. In planning any works to import water into the Lower Colorado River Basin, the Secretary shall give due consideration to existing and future needs within the areas and states of origin of the imported water and the means of offsetting the additional costs of future projects within said areas and states of origin caused by the preemption of the lower cost water sources that otherwise would have benefited said areas and states of origin, including the use of the Development Fund for this purpose.
(3) Investigate projects within the Lower Colorado River Basin, including projects on tributaries of the Colorado River, where undeveloped water supplies are available or can be made available by replacement or exchange.
(b) The Secretary shall submit annually to the Congress reports covering the investigations required by subsection (a) and, within five years from the effective date of this Act, the Secretary shall recommend to the Congress projects for authorization pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (a) and shall submit feasibility reports on such projects. Said recommendation and feasibility reports shall include projects designed to provide water for the Lower Colorado River Basin to assist in meeting that Basin's long-range needs and, in any event, sufficient to meet deficiencies between the quantities required to supply water for the annual consumptive use of 2,800,000 acre-feet in Arizona, 4,400,000 acre-feet in California and 300,000 acre-feet in Nevada and the quantities available in the mainstream of the Colorado River for such uses as determined by the Secretary.
Sec. 4. In order to inititate the Lower Colorado River Basin Project, herein referred to as the "Project", and to further the comprehensive development of the water resources of the Lower Colorado River Basin the Secretary shall:Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 24 bit, 2,708,863 byte
Statement of Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner of Reclamation, Before the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate on S. 1658
No full textDocument: Statement of Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner of Reclamation, Before the Subcommittee on Irrigation & Reclamation, Committee on Interior & Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate on S. 1658, page 20extending from the Salt River to Picacho reservoir in Pinal County, would have a capacity of 1,275 c.f.s.
The final portion of the aqueduct system would be a closed conduit extending from near Picacho reservoir to the city of Tucson to deliver 100,000 acre-feet of water annually to augment that city's municipal and industrial water supply. The Tucson aqueduct would have a capacity of 150 c.f.s. and be 56 miles in length. It would include a series of pumping plants with a total static lift of an additional 920 feet. The total length of the backbone canal system from the Colorado River to Tucson would be about 341 miles, and the total static lift of the final increment of water reaching that city would be 2,081 feet.
In the 1947 report, Salt River water would have been diverted from Saguaro Reservoir above Stewart Mountain Dam and conveyed through the Granite Reef aqueduct to the southern part of the service area in exchange for Colorado River water delivered to the Salt River Project at Granite Reef Dam. In the updating studies this proposed exchange arrangement has been eliminated, and water would be supplied to the Salt-Gila aqueduct directly from the Granite Reef aqueduct. This change was made possible through relocation of a portion of the Granite Reef aqueduct around the Phoenix metropolitan area.
The operation of the Central Arizona Project canal system would be integrated with the Salt River Project storage system
20Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 983,569 byte
Statement of Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner of Reclamation, Before the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate on S. 1658
No full textDocument: Statement of Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner of Reclamation, Before the Subcommittee on Irrigation & Reclamation, Committee on Interior & Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate on S. 1658, page 25Colorado River water made by the Secretary of the Interior's contract to deliver to Arizona 2.8 million acre-feet annually for beneficial consumptive use, not diminished by tributary uses, out of the first 7.5 million acre-feet of main stream water available for lower basin consumptive use. The Supreme Court further held that the Secretary had discretion to apportion water short-ages. It should be noted that a formal decree has not been issued and that the State of California has been permitted by the Court to file a petition for rehearing.
The runoff of the Colorado River and its tributaries is probably the most important factor affecting the availability of water for distribution to the Lower Basin States. The year-by-year variable flow will be controlled by the Colorado River dams; however, the cyclic periods of high and low runoff must necessarily produce either spills partially lost to the service areas in the United States, or periods of deficiency.
Upper Basin development, and the abilities of the Lower Basin to reduce nonbeneficial channel losses by channelization, to effect phreatophyte control, and salvage subsurface ground-water flows, are also factors of consideration.
Conservative estimates of the Colorado River water available to the Lower Basin States, using a period of subnormal runoff (1930-62), and a rather optimistic estimate of buildup of Upper Basin uses, indicate that the Lower Basin States will have a Colorado River water supply in excess of 7.5 million acre-feet prior to 1975. Should a minimal water supply condition prevail
25Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,006,924 byte
Statement of Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner of Reclamation, Before the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate on S. 1658
No full textDocument: Statement of Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner of Reclamation, Before the Subcommittee on Irrigation & Reclamation, Committee on Interior & Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate on S. 1658, page 32Area redevelopment benefits are something new in name which have been added to Reclamation projects since Senate Document 97 was issued. This represents employment dollars that would be paid to workers coming from the local depressed areas during the construction years and for several years thereafter for operation of the project facilities. Many of these people would be Indian laborers who have demonstrated their abilities for such type activities. Our records indicate that during the construction of Glen Canyon Dam about 7 percent of the labor force was Indian.
The financial feasibility of the project is just as favorable. the total estimated project cost is about 100 million is required for distribution facilities which conceivably might be financed by other funds. 999,474,000 to be allocated among the project functions. The reimbursable portion of these costs can be repaid within 50 years as required by Reclamation Law.
The costs of the project have been allocated by the Separable Costs-Remaining Benefits method, which assures that no function served will pay more than its benefits or the cost of providing a single-purpose alternate project to provide equivalent benefits, whichever is lesser. By using this method, the construction costs were allocated as follows:
32Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 891,649 byte
Letter - Office of the Governor; Santa Fe, New Mexico
No full textLetter: From Jack M. Campbell, to Senator Clinton P. Anderson, April 6, 1964 (photocopy), page 1STATE OF NEW MEXICO
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
SANTA FE
JACK M. CAMPBELL
GOVERNOR
April 6, 1964
The Honorable Clinton P. Anderson
United States Senate
3311 New Senate Office Building
Washington, D. C.
Dear Senator Anderson:
By letter dated March 24, 1964 Senator Henry M. Jackson, Chairman of the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee advised me that the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation has scheduled a public hearing on April 9 and 10 on the Pacific Southwest Water Plan and on S 1658, a bill to authorize the Central Arizona Project.
You will recall that by letter dated July 12, 1963 S. E. Reynolds, New Mexico State Engineer, advised you that the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission acted to recommend that you not support S 1658 unless certain amendments were made. These amendments would have had the effect of deferring the construction of Central Arizona Project works other than Bridge Canyon dam, reservoir, power plant and electrical power transmission facilities, until agreements satisfactory to the Secretary of the Interior were concluded between the States of Arizona and New Mexico regarding the uses of Gila River water and operating criteria for the Hooker and Buttes reservoirs that would be constructed in New Mexico and Arizona as a part of the project. In the same letter Mr. Reynolds advised you that the Interstate Stream Commission recommended similar amendments to S 1360, a bill to authorize the Buttes dam and reservoir as a unit separate from the Central Arizona Project.
On July 9, 1963 I addressed a letter to Secretary Udall with copies to Governor Paul Fannin, Governor Edmund Brown and Governor Grant Sawyer. In this letter I discussedEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,589,875 byte
Joint Statement on the Pacific Southwest Water Plan and on S. 1658
No full textDocument: Joint Statement on the Pacific Southwest Water Plan and on S. 1658, A Bill to Authorize the Central Arizona Project, by Claud S. Mann, page 2the Central Arizona Project as a principal unit of the Water Plan and recommends the authorization of the Hooker Dam and Reservoir unit in New Mexico as an integral part of the Central Arizona Project.
The Gila River system drains about 5600 square miles in New Mexico. It rises at about 11,000 feet in timbered and mountainous terrain and descends to about 3600 feet as it flows into Arizona. A major portion of the basin in New Mexico is included in the Gila and Apache National Forests.
The economy in the Gila and San Francisco River areas in New Mexico is sustained by small, irrigated acreages combined with cattle grazing operations and supplemented by seasonal timber operations, and other nonfarm employment, fishing, hunting, and other recreation activities are of growing economic importance.
Historically, the mining of gold, silver, and copper contributed substantially to the economy of the area. This segment of the economy has declined since the turn of the century but the Kennecott Copper Corporation still carries on a large copper mining and milling operation just outside the Gila River Basin near Silver City. This
2Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,277,696 byte
Joint Statement on the Pacific Southwest Water Plan and on S. 1658
No full textDocument: Joint Statement on the Pacific Southwest Water Plan and on S. 1658, A Bill to Authorize the Central Arizona Project, by Claud S. Mann, page 9all of the best evidence could not be accumulated and presented in a precise manner, may account for the fact that the Special Master found much of New Mexico's evidence as to present uses unconvincing. The net result, we sincerely feel, is that the proposed decree would result in drastic reductions of actual present uses with a profound effect on the going economy of the Gila River Basin in New Mexico.
In view of what has been said under this heading we urge that, if the proposed decree is not to be modified to substantially increase the present uses allowed New Mexico, an opportunity be given for New Mexico to present further evidence of actual present uses. Such evidence would be in the form of a hydrographic survey, including aerial photographs and engineering field checks, presented as the Special Master may direct. The State has already asked for bids for aerial mapping of the Gila and San Francisco River drainage areas in New Mexico, and can be prepared to present evidence of the nature described within a year.
Thereafter under date of July 1, 1960, the Special Master sent a letter to "all counsel" in the case portions of which are quoted as follows:
New Mexico has requested an opportunity to present further evidence of actual present uses in that state of water from the Gila River System. I shall meet with Attorneys for New Mexico, Arizona, and perhaps also, the United States on July 11, 1960 to discuss the question of the extent of New Mexico's present use of water from the Gila River System, and my decision on New Mexico's request is, pending that meeting deferred. (emphasis ours)
Attorneys and engineers representing New Mexico and
9Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,551,423 byte