Faction Sheet on Current Water News

Document: News from The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Fact Sheet on Current Water News - Spring, 1965, March 22, 196

Document Concerning Resolution

Document: Metropolitian Water District of Souther California resolution, 1965? (photocopy

Faction Sheet on Current Water News

Document: News from The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Fact Sheet on Current Water News - Spring, 1965, March 22, 1965, page 7-2- feeder with the District's existing treatment plants at La Verne in Los Angeles County and near Yorba Linda in Orange County. Another new treatment plant is planned for construction in the Pasadena area after about 1980. The Foothill Feeder will consist mainly of tunnels as much as 20 feet in diameter with some of them more than seven miles long. Contracts for parts of the Feeder will be let this year. These will be financed out of the District's general fund and its existing bonding capacity. Another basic feature of the proposed new system will be a line called the Second Lower Feeder which will extend from the existing treatment plant near Yorba Linda southwest to the vicinity of Anaheim and then west through northern Long Beach to Torrance, with connections along the way to reinforce service from existing MWD pipelines. A third new large-capacity distribution line designated the Sepulveda Feeder will head south from the Balboa treatment plant. After crossing the San Fernando Valley, it will extend by tunnel through the Santa Monica Mountains and then across the Santa Monica Bay area to the Palos Verdes Hills, again with connections to existing lines. The Sepulveda Feeder System will also include lateral pipelines extending both to the southeast to serve Burbank and Glendale and to the west to serve District agencies in northwestern Los Angeles County and in Ventura County. Still another major construction project outlined in the report will be the Inland Feeder System which may include a third new treatment plant southeast of the city of Riverside. The plant would be supplied initially through a connection with the East Branch of the California Aqueduct. The main Inland Feeder will start at Rialto at a junction with the Foothill Feeder, extend south to the Riverside treatment plant, then southeast to Perris Reservoir, terminus of the East Branch Aqueduct. A line will also run west from the treatment plant to the Corona area. Also an integral part of the Inland Feeder will be a line reaching east from Perris Reservoir to connect with the MWD's existing San Diego Aqueduct near San Jacinto. This aqueduct has sufficient capacity for its first 20 miles from San Jacinto to Auld Valley to handle the Northern water. However, from Auld Valley, where a reservoir is planned, a new 20-mile-long pipeline will be built to connect with the facilities of the San Diego County Water Authority south of the county boundary. # # # (SEE ATTACHED MAP OF PROPOSED NEW DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM.) 3/22/65Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,540,735 byte

Faction Sheet on Current Water News

Document: News from The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Fact Sheet on Current Water News - Spring, 1965, March 22, 1965, page 2Arizona vs. California The legal battle that has been going on for a decade between Arizona and California over Colorado River water rights appeared to be nearing an end when, on June 3, 1963, the U. S. Supreme Court handed down a decision partially adverse to California which would result in an ultimate loss to California of a portion of its supply of Colorado River water. Petitions to the Court for rehearing were denied on September 21, 1963, and a decree entered therein on March 9, 1964. It has been estimated that any serious loss to California could not occur for 12 to 15 years. It will take at least that long for Arizona to obtain Congressional authorization for and to build the Central Arizona Project which would divert water that is now coming to California. Furthermore, any loss in the next 25 years of even half of Metropolitan's Colorado River supply will be offset by the increase from 1,500,000 to 2,000,000 acre-feet annually in its entitlement to Northern California water and by the completion of the second barrel of the Owens River Aqueduct by the City of Los Angeles. This second barrel will import an additional 150,000 acre-feet annually. It is essential to note that the Supreme Court left undecided the basic issue of how to resolve the question of shortages in the mainstream of the river. MWD maintains that, in accord with fundamental tenets of Western water law, existing projects in California should be protected up to a maximum of 4.4 million acre-feet annually against the demands of new projects in times of shortage. The provision of such a safeguard would be entirely harmonious with the Court's decree, which left the allocation of shortages up to the Secretary of the Interior and the Congress. # # # 10-28-64Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,070,203 byte

Document Concerning Resolution

Document: Metropolitian Water District of Souther California resolution, 1965? (photocopy), page 1WHEREAS, the Colorado River Board of California, after careful study and consultation with interested groups, has adopted the following Resolution: "The Colorado River Board recommends that if the Central Arizona Project is to be authorized, that authorization should be contained in a Pacific Southwest Plan, as one of the following three interrelated provisions: "1. Authorization for the construction, operation and maintenance of works to import not less than 2.5 million acre feet annually into the main stream of the Colorado River below Lee Ferry, as the first stage of a regional importation plan adequate to protect existing economies and provide water for filling Upper Basin reservoirs and refilling Lake Mead, as well as providing water for the Central Arizona Project. The congressional authorization may be made conditional, as has been done in several other statutes, on the promulgation by the President or Secretary of the Interior of findings of feasibility. A portion of the cost, fairly related to the relief of shortages occasioned by the Mexican Treaty burden, should be non-reimbursable. "To the extent that importation of water into the Colorado River System is necessary in order to make sufficient water available for release, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to Article II (B) (1) of the decree of the United States Supreme Court in Arizona v. California, et al., to satisfy 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, respectively, the Secretary shall make such imported water available to the holders of contracts with the United States for the storage and delivery of main stream water in those states at the same cost, and on the same terms, as would be applicable if main stream water were available for release in the quantities required to supply such consumptive use. "2. Authorization for construction of the Central Arizona Project, with a diversion capacity of 1.2 million acre feet as planned, subject to the following condition. "3. The Secretary of the Interior shall administer Article II (B) (3) of the Supreme Court's decree (which relates to the insufficiency of water to supply 7.5 million acre feet in consumptive use), as follows: diversions for the Central Arizona Project shall be limited to the extent necessary to assure the availability of water to satisfy 4.4 million acre feet of consumptive use in California, plus the satisfaction of present perfected rights in Arizona and Nevada and the satisfaction of the government's contracts with water users in those two states made before passage of the Act, until the President proclaims that works have been completed and are in operation, which are (i) capable of continuously delivering water in aggregate annual quantities of not lessEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 2,300,624 byte

Fact Sheet on Current Water News

Document: News fom the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Winter - 1966, page 15 Proposed Expansion of Metropolitan Water District Distribution System for Delivery of State Project WaterEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 793,601 byte

Faction Sheet on Current Water News

Document: News from The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Fact Sheet on Current Water News - Spring, 1965, March 22, 1965, page 6Distribution Works for Northern Water A bond issue of $850 million to finance the major part of a huge new tunnel and pipeline system required to distribute Northern California water will be submitted to the voters of the Metropolitan Water District at the June, 1966, state primary election. That decision was made on March 9, 1965, by Metropolitan's Board of Directors on the basis of a report proposing a construction program costing an estimated total of$1.2 billion to convey the vast quantities of Northern water to the District's member agencies on the arid coastal plain. The report was submitted by Robert A. Skinner, MWD general manager and chief engineer, and is under continuing study by committees of the Board. Skinner said approval of the bond issue is not expected to result in any significant increase in the District's tax rate which now amounts to 14 cents per $100 of assessed valuation. He said that District revenues will be going up substantially as total assessed valuation rises and gradual boosts in water rates go into effect. The District's voters in 1931 approved a$220 million bond issue for construction of the Colorado River Aqueduct. In 1956, the electorate authorized the District to issue short-term "W" bonds to complete expansion of that aqueduct system. A total of $77 million of "W" bonds has been issued. The proposed works to handle Northern California water would consist of more than 300 miles of tunnels and pipelines, new treatment plants and related facilities. They would be built during the next two decades and would take care of the growing water needs of the District areas in the six counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Ventura until at least 1990 and in some cases until the year 2020. By 1990, the District's population is expected to reach 17,000,000. Its present population is 9,500,000 -- half that of the entire state. The major element of the projected new distribution system will be the Foothill Feeder, a 94-mile-long "backbone" line. It alone will cost more than$500 million. The Foothill Feeder will start at Castaic Reservoir in the Tehachapis, terminus of the West Branch of the State's California Aqueduct, and will have the capacity at that point to convey MWD's full contract allotment of Northern water -- 2,000,000 acre-feet annually. It will extend south to the proposed Balboa treatment plant in the northern part of the San Fernando Valley where Balboa Boulevard intersects the Golden State Freeway. The plant will have an initial capacity of 400 million gallons a day. From the Balboa plant, the Foothill Feeder will swing east, first along the north slope of the Verdugo Mountains and then along the south face of the San Gabriel Mountains to the outlet of the Devil Canyon power plants of the State's East Branch Aqueduct in San Bernardino County. Branch lines will connect the more..........Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,714,452 byte

Faction Sheet on Current Water News

Document: News from The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Fact Sheet on Current Water News - Spring, 1965, March 22, 1965, page 4MWD-State Water Contract The Metropolitan Water District entered into a contract with the State of California on November 4, 1960, for the ultimate delivery of 1,500,000 acre-feet of water annually from the initial unit of the State Water Development Program, popularly known as the Feather River Project. Metropolitan's contract constituted the prototype for all other such contracts between the State and other water agencies; 30 such contracts have been executed. In early 1963, the California Supreme Court filed a unanimous decision upholding the validity of MWD's water contract with the State. This cleared the way for the sale of the $1.75 billions in bonds approved by the State's voters in November, 1960, to finance the water program. Four blocks of these bonds--a total of$350 million worth--have been sold thus far. In December, 1963, Metropolitan's Board formally exercised its option for its proportionate share of State Project water that had not been contracted for, and also requested that its entitlement be increased by allocation of any supply remaining after exercise of similar options by the other contractors. In line with this action, the MWD Board in June, 1964, approved a proposed amendment to its contract with the State increasing its maximum annual entitlement of Northern California water from 1,500,000 to 2,000,000 acre-feet. Of this increase, nearly 300,000 acre-feet will result from honoring the Board's action in December exercising its option and requesting any water not optioned by other contracting agencies. In addition, however, the State has announced an increase in the project yield from 4,000,000 to 4,230,000 acre-feet annually. The balance of the District's additional 500,000 acre-feet will come from the increased yield. Officials of the State, MWD and other contracting water agencies signed the amended contracts on September 28. The 500,000 additional acre-feet for MWD and the proposed expansion of Los Angeles City's Owens River Aqueduct will offset any loss in the District's Colorado River water supply which may result in the next 25 years from the U. S. Supreme Court decision on Colorado River water rights. The increase in the size of the California Aqueduct to deliver the additional 500,000 acre-feet annually to the District will cost it about $170 million and will raise the District's share of the cost of the aqueduct system from 66 to about 75 per cent. The first water from Northern California is expected to be brought over the Tehachapis in the early 1970s. The total cost of the State Water Project is now estimated at$2.2 billion. # # # 2-16-65Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,436,973 byte

Document Concerning Resolution

Document: Metropolitian Water District of Souther California resolution, 1965? (photocopy), page 2-2- than 2.5 million acre feet into the main stream below Lee Ferry, (ii) from sources outside the natural drainage area of the Colorado River System which are adequate, in the President's judgment, to permanently supply such quantities, (iii) without adverse effect upon the satisfaction of the foreseeable water requirements of the states from which such water is imported into the Colorado." WHEREAS, the ideas suggested by the Colorado River Board represent a new approach to the solution of the issues confronting Colorado River water users and is made in a spirit of friendship and good will towards the State of Arizona and the proponents of the Central Arizona Project, and WHEREAS, there is no question but that the solution to the problems of the Colorado River is the augmentation of its supply from sources outside the basin, and the development of a truly comprehensive regional plan which will benefit both the Upper and Lower Basins, offer advantages to the areas from which water is imported, and assist in resolving the problems faced by our friends in Mexico, and WHEREAS, the proposal of the Colorado River Board conforms to the principle of the protection of existing uses and permits those who rely upon the Colorado River to move forward with the development of the projects so essential to their economics; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California does hereby endorse this resolution adopted by the Colorado River Board of California; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors does hereby respectfully urge each member of the California delegation in Congress to support proposed legislation incorporating this proposal.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 2,124,404 byte