AZ vs. CA:23 California Exhibits, Vol. XXIII; Nos. 6001-6003H; 6101-6170; 6501-6507; 7000-7004; 7300-73077000-7004; 7300-7307

page 14

provided by Arizona or an agency or subdivision thereof, the Department of the Interior, as permitted by the Reclamation laws, will take all necessary steps to ascertain if Bridge Canyon Dam and related facilities can be constructed, and, if found authorized, construction thereof will be undertaken in accordance with the plans set forth in said House Document 136. The energy required to pump water from Lake Havasu to the Granite Reef Aqueduct and from thence to the places of use in Arizona will be received from hydroelectric power generated at Bridge Canyon Dam or from some other hydroelectric power plants, or, If no hydroelectric power is available, then from a plant or plants generating electricity by the use of steam. (e) Arizona has spent to date approximately $400,000.00 In study, investigation and planning for the diversion of waters from the main stream of the Colorado River into Central Arizona. For the same purpose, the United States Bureau of Reclamation has expended approximately $750 ,000.00* XXII A The ultimate controversy which exists between the plaintiff and the defendants arises from assertions by defendants Inconsistent with plaintiff's claim (1) to 2,800,000 acre-feet of water per annum in perpetuity of the 7,500,000 acre-feet of main stream water apportioned to the Lower Basin by Article III (a) of the Compact, (2) to the right to Increase Its use from the main stream by 1,000,000 acre-feet of water per annum pursuant to the apportionment In Article III (b) of the Compact and the provisions of the California Limitation Act, subject to the claims, If any, ol the State ot Nevada thereto, (3) to the right to 14