Senator ANDERSON. In other words, you have continued to deliver to Mexico, year after year, more than the treaty called for?

Mr. DOMINY. There has continued to be available in the limotrophe section of the river water in excess of the treaty requirements.

Senator ANDERSON. I am going to go back and state it my way again, and see if you can answer it.

You have continued to deliver more in the river than the treaty calls for to Mexico?

Mr. DOMINY. We have the problem, as I have explained before. Senator ANDERSON. I am not trying to be critical of you, Mr. Dominy. I know you have a problem. Is it not a fact that Mexico has received-if you don't like the word "delivery," more water every year than the treaty called for?

Mr. DOMINY. That is exactly correct. Water has been available to Mexico in greater amounts than the treaty requirements.

Secretary UDALL. This, Senator, if delivered in accordance with certain schedules and certain times of the year in accordance with the treaty.

Senator ANDERSON. I want to put in the record the report of last year, which shows delivery of some 503,000 acre-feet more than they were entitled to. They received 2 million acre-feet while the poor Californians are going to be cut down to 3.2. It is regrettable. Mexico does very well.

Mr. DOMINY. We are building now, Mr. Chairman, the Senator Wash regulatory reservoir, which for the first time in history will give us the regulation at Imperial Dam to operate the river precisely. Senator ANDERSON. I would like to have the regulation start in at Glen Canyon Dam.

Mr. DOMINY. We have a 72-hour problem of loss of control of that river now. With the Senator Wash regulatory reservoir we will have almost hourly control because we can pump into it and release out on schedule.

Senator Moss. The schedule of water deliveries to Mexico will be placed in the record.

(The information requested is as follows:)

Scheduled flows to Mexico, arrivals and excess arrivals, 1963

Source: Telephonic communication with Mr. Ericson, International Boundary and Water Commission, San Diego field office, Dec. 2, 1963, and C. M. Smith, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Boulder City, May 13, 1963. Monthly hydrographic reports of the International Boundary and Water Commission.

1100 percent firm energy delivered in operating year ending May 31, 1959. delivered in operating year ending May 31, 1960.

85 percent firm energy

285 percent firm energy delivered in operating year ending May 31, 1960. 100 percent firm energy scheduled in June 1960 and reduced in September 1960 to releases for downstream requirements; 91 percent of firm energy delivered in operating year May 31, 1961.

Includes 40,000 acre-feet "Exgratus" water to Mexico.

491 percent firm energy delivered in operating year ending May 31, 1961. 76.5 percent firm energy delivered in operating year ending May 31, 1962.

$76.5 percent firm energy delivered in operating year ending May 31, 1962. 89 percent firm energy delivered in operating year ending May 31, 1963. Spring runoff in 1962 raised Lake Mead into flood control pool with elevation of 1,204.2 feet in July. As set forth in June 7, 1962, hearing Senate Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation, 267,640 acre-feet released from Lake Mead for sluicing purposes October 1962-February 1963 period. 181,590 acre-feet included in above 477,030 acre-feet represents release in October-December 1962 for this purpose.

89 percent firm energy delivered in operating year ending May 31, 1963. Current operations continuing on basis of downstream requirements only. As mentioned in footnote 4, above, sluicing water in January and February 1963 amounted to 86,050 acre-feet. Also included in 503,890 acre-feet excess delivery in 1963 is runoff of Sept. 17-25 storm of 68,000 acre-feet.

Senator ANDERSON. Now I object to this 1.5 million acre-feet. Again take out the record. I want to read the treaty.

In the event of extraordinary drought or serious accident to an irrigation district in the United States, thereby making it difficult for the United States to deliver the guaranteed quantity of the 1.5 million acre-feet per year, the water allotted to Mexico under paragraph (a) of this article shall now be reduced in the same proportion as consumptive uses in the United States are reduced.

Now, if you cut down the use to 7.5 million acre-feet, you reduce the consumption of the United States by half, don't you? Therefore, the obligation to Mexico is not a million and a half acre-feet, it is 750,000 acre-feet. If we are talking about how much Mexico is really getting in the treaty, we would get along better. I worry about the statement that Mexico gets it come what may, because it does not.

Secretary UDALL. Senator, you have stated the case and I don't think we will argue that point.

Senator BIBLE. Mr. Secretary, may I ask you just two quick questions.

No. 1, the central Arizona project feasibility is predicated upon the availability of how much water, 2.8 million acre-feet?

Mr. MCCARTHY. 1.2 million acre-feet for the central Arizona proj

ect.

Senator BIBLE. What is the minimum amount of acre-feet delivered to Arizona that will make that project feasible?

Secretary UDALL. The project is predicated on the availability of the 1.2 million acre-feet. Of course Arizona has the problem of its other existing uses naturally, and of the desire to use its full 2.8 million acre-feet, of which the central Arizona project is a part. Arizona has its internal problem.

Senator BIBLE. But with that component part, the feasibility is predicated upon the availability of 1.2 million acre-feet of water. Senator KUCHEL. Feasibility under a regional plan or the HaydenGoldwater bill?

Senator BIBLE. Oh, I would say the feasibility under the HaydenGoldwater bill as an independent project taking water from the Colorado River alone.

Senator GOLDWATER. Under any project?

Senator KUCHEL. Oh, but there is a different amount of water to be delivered under the Secretary's plan than under your bill.

Secretary UDALL. No; not for the central Arizona project.

Senator KUCHEL. No; not for the central Arizona project, but there are substantial other uses in Arizona proposed in the initial phase of your plan on top of the 1.2 for the central Arizona project itself. Secretary UDALL. Our obligation is to see that each State has its full amount. Arizona's share is 2.8 million acre-feet. If it has that full amount, it can take care of its existing uses and the proposed future uses including the central Arizona project. It is this simple.

Senator BIBLE. I understand you to say that the central Arizona project is based upon the availability of 1.2 million acre-feet of water. Secretary UDALL. This is the amount that is allocated for that project if the total Arizona uses of 2.8 million acre-feet are received. Senator BIBLE. I understand.

(Senator Kuchel later submitted a memorandum on feasibility; see appendix, p. 614.)

Senator KUCHEL. Just so the record is clear, what you are postulating in the plan with respect to additional or new uses of water from the Colorado River in your plan over and above the 1.2 to the central Arizona project?

Secretary UDALL. What we contemplate, Senator, is that Arizona and Nevada would use the full amounts to which they are entitled. Senator KUCHEL. What I mean, what are specifically additional or new demands in addition to 1.2?

Senator Moss. You have a million now.

Senator KUCHEL. But the new plans I ask for.

Secretary UDALL. Well, of course

Senator KUCHEL. 700,000 for Indians, for example.

Secretary UDALL. We laid it all out before.

Senator KUCHEL. For the purpose of the Senate, what are the additional new plans proposed for Arizona?

Mr. MCCARTHY. The plan does not outline specific projects which would use the remaining part of Arizona's share of the 2.8 million acre-feet. We do contemplate that there will be additional uses on Indian lands.

Senator KUCHEL. Of how much?

Mr. MCCARTHY. Over 400,000 acre-feet ultimately in the lower basin. I don't know exactly how much of that is in Arizona.

Secretary UDALL. Some of that is in California, some in Arizona. Senator Moss. Could you submit these answers to us for the record for the Senator?

Secretary UDALL. Yes.

(The information requested is as follows:)

The report on the Pacific Southwest water plan outlines new future uses of mainstream Colorado River water in Arizona in addition to the 1.2 million acre-feet required for the central Arizona project as follows:

Senator Moss. Very well. We must recess again. We thank you, Mr. Secretary.

Under Secretary Carr was here and had to leave earlier because of another commitment. I wanted the record to show that he was excused and did not just leave at that point.

We do thank you for this lengthy discussion of the problem. It has been of excellent help to the committee, and you are now excused. The committee will be in recess until Monday morning at 9 o'clock. We met last Saturday with the thought that perhaps we could finish this week but this is impossible so we won't meet on Saturday this time.

(Whereupon, at 10:03 a.m., the subcommittee was recessed, to be reconvened at 9 a.m., Monday, April 20, 1964.)

CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECTS

MONDAY, APRIL 20, 1964

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION

OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS,

Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 9 a.m., in room 3110, New Senate Office Building, Senator Frank E. Moss (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Senators Frank E. Moss (Utah), Quentin N. Burdick (North Dakota), Carl Hayden (Arizona), Thomas H. Kuchel (California), and Len B. Jordan (Idaho).

Also present: Senators Alan Bible (Nevada), and Barry Goldwater (Arizona).

Staff members present: Jerry T. Verkler, staff director; Stewart French, chief counsel; Roy Whitacre, professional staff member; Richard D. Andrews, minority counsel; and Bob Bendt, professional staff member.

Senator Moss. The subcommittee will come to order.

We expect some of the other members to arrive but under the pressure of time I think we had better move on.

Our first witness this morning will be Mr. Northcutt Ely, an attorney representing the Six Agency Committee of Water Users in the Lower Basin. I am sure that everyone on the subcommittee knows Mr. Ely as does everyone who works with water. We are delighted to have him come and appear before the subcommittee. We will hear you now, Mr. Ely.

STATEMENT OF NORTHCUTT ELY OF ELY, DUNCAN & BENNETT, ATTORNEYS, WASHINGTON, D.C.; ACCOMPANIED BY JEROME C. MUYS OF THAT FIRM, AND THOMAS M. STETSON, CONSULTING ENGINEER, LOS ANGELES, CALIF., ON BEHALF OF THE SIX AGENCY COMMITTEE OF CALIFORNA WATER USERS

Mr. ELY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am accompanied by my associate, Mr. Jerome C. Muys, on my right, and Mr. Thomas M. Stetson, a consulting engineer, of Los Angeles, to the left.

Senator Moss. We welcome you gentlemen.

Mr. ELY. The committee has before it the Hayden-Goldwater bill, S. 1658, to authorize the central Arizona project, and it also has before it the Pacific Southwest water plan proposed by Secretary Udall, although no bill on the latter subject has yet been introduced.