| OCR Text |
Show CHAPTER XII COLORADO RIVER BASIN PROJECT ACT SEPTEMBER 30, 1968 A. Background The Supreme Court of the United States issued its Opinion in Arizona v. California et al., on June 3, 1963. Among other things, the Opinion established Arizona's right to 2.8 maf per year of Colorado River mainstream water if sufficient water is available to satisfy 7.5 maf of annual consumptive use from mainstream waters in the Lower Basin without regard to Lower Basin tributaries. B. S.1658 - 88th Congress to Authorize CAP On June 4, 1963, the day after the Supreme Court Opinion, Senators Hayden and Goldwuter of Arizona introduced S.1658 which would authorize construction of the Central Arizona Project (CAP) (see Appendix 1201 for its text). CAP's principal works would include Bridge Canyon Dam; Maxwell Dam; Buttes, Hooker and Charleston Dams; and the Tucson and Salt-Gila Aqueducts. Bridge Canyon would furnish power for pumping CAP water and its revenues would help defray the costs of CAP. S. 1658 provided for repayment of reimbursable costs within 50 years, established an interest rate for costs allocable to commercial power and municipal and industrial water supply, provided for public recreational facilities, fish and wildlife conservation, area redevelopment, and retained the existing "Law of the River." The bill did not provide for the later controversial provisions such as augmentation of the mainstream supply nor did it include Marble Canyon Dam or any part of a Basin-wide development plan. Identical bills were introduced in the House by Arizona's Congressman. However, Secretary of the Interior Udall publicly advocated a regional plan of which CAP would be a part. Hearings on S. 1658 were held before the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation on August 27 and 28 and October 1 and 2, 1963. It was contemplated that only officials of the Department of the Interior would appear initially to discuss economic and engineering details of CAP but that later hearings would more fully develop the record. Subcommittee Chairman Senator Moss of Utah noted that the Bureau of Reclamation's 1947 original planning report for CAP had been updated with funds advanced to Reclamation by Arizona in January 1962, though the report had not yet been cleared by the Department, and that a fact sheet based on that report was before the Committee. Changes in some details of the report had been made because of developments since the original bill; e.g., several sediment control dams were eliminated because construction of Glen Canyon Dam made them unnecessary; whereas, in 1947 only 1 percent of CAP water was estimated for municipal and industrial use, in 1962, approximately 33 percent of CAP water was estimated for M&I use because of population increases; and Bridge Canyon Dam was redesigned as a thin arch structure. The percentage of M&I water increased even more by 1968. > The proponents of the bill emphasized that Arizona's economy with its fast growing population was threatened with disaster unless additional water was available; that CAP was a rescue operation and would not irrigate new lands; that municipal and industrial uses exceeded the available water supply; and the ground-water pumping of 3.5 maf per year exceeded the annual recharge of 1.0 maf and could not continue. C. Permits for Bridge Canyon and Marble Canyon Dams Although Arizona had initially filed in 1939 for a permit to build Bridge Canyon Dam, the Arizona Power Authority (APA) sought a permit in August 1958 from the Federal Power Commission (FPC) for construction of Bridge Canyon and Marble Canyon Dams on the Colorado River. The City of Los Angeles also sought a license for Bridge Canyon Dam. Interior opposed both applications as inconsistent with its Pacific Southwest 195 |
