| OCR Text |
Show -5- Gila Project 1 Comprises Yuma Auxiliary (Unit B) North Gila Unit Wellton-Mohawk Division Yuma Mesa Unit Warren Act Deliveries 3 U.S. Exs. 10, 11 & 13; Calif. 11-C; Col. 13, Ariz. Ex. 186 4 Cols. 6,10, 13 & 19, Ariz. Ex. 186; Calif. Ex. 11-E 5 Information from Project Manager 6 Information from Project Manager 7 (6)-(5) 8 Col. 11, Ariz. Ex. 186, = 578.9 56.1 9 Insufficient data 10 Insufficient data 11 (8)-(13) 12 (ll)-(8) 13 Calif. Exs. 11-1, 11-C, 11-E, 11-B; Cols. 5, 9, 12, 15 & 18, Ariz. Ex. 186, = 4707 56.1 14 (13)-(8) 15 U.S. Exs. 8, 10, 11 & 13; and Cols. 6, 10, 13, 16 & 19, Ariz. Ex. 186; Calif. Ex. 11-E. Assumed the Warren Act uses would be the same as the weighted average of the rest. Method: Net acreage x consumptive use rate = use. Use ¦*¦ net acreage = consumptive use rate weighted. 16 (15)-(8) 17 (13)-(15) 18 (17)^(13) Yuma Project, Valley Division 3 U.S. Ex. 15 4 Col. 3, Ariz. Ex. 186 5 Information from Project Manager 6 Information from Project Manager 7 (6)-s-(5) 8 Col. 1, Ariz. Ex. 186, = 330.1 45.5 9 Insufficient data 10 Insufficient data 11 (8)-(13) 12 (ll)-s-(S) 13 Col. 2, Ariz. Ex. 186, = 213.5 45.5 14 (13)-(8) 15 U.S. Ex. 15 16 (15)-(8) 17 (13)-(15) 18 (17)-*-(13) |
| Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |
