december 28, 2017 notice of regular meeting of · pdf file10.01.2018 · december...

December 28, 2017

NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE COLORADO RIVER BOARD

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the call of the Chairperson, Dana B. Fisher, Jr., by the undersigned Executive Director of the Colorado River Board of California that a regular meeting of the Board Members is to be held as follows:

The Colorado River Board of California welcomes any comments from members of the public pertaining to items included on this agenda and related topics. Oral comments can be provided at the beginning of each Board meeting; while written comments may be sent to Mr. Dana B. Fisher, Jr., Chairperson, Colorado River Board of California, 770 Fairmont Avenue, Suite 100, Glendale, California, 91203-1068.

Requests for additional information may be directed to: Mr. Christopher S. Harris, Executive Director, Colorado River Board of California, 770 Fairmont Avenue, Suite 100, Glendale, CA 91203-1068, or 818-500-1625. A copy of this Notice and Agenda may be found on the Colorado River Board’s web page at www.crb.ca.gov. A copy of the meeting agenda, showing the matters to be considered and transacted, is attached.

Christopher S. Harris Executive Director

Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Ontario Gateway Hotel Mt. View Salon A/B 2200 E. Holt Blvd. Ontario, CA 91761 Tel: 909-975-5000

Regular Meeting COLORADO RIVER BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

Wednesday, January 10, 2018 10:00 a.m.

Ontario Gateway Hotel

Mt. View Salon A/B 2200 E Holt Blvd. Ontario, CA 91761

At the discretion of the Board, all items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be deliberated upon and may be subject to action by the Board. Items may not necessarily be taken up in the order shown. 1. Call to Order 2. Opportunity for the Public to Address the Board (Limited to 5 minutes)

In accordance with California Government Code, Section 54954.3(a)

3. Administration a. Consideration and approval of the Minutes of the Meeting held December 13,

2017 (Action) b. Draft “Rules & Regulations of the Colorado River Board of California” (Action) c. Informational presentation of Draft “Historical Membership of the Colorado

River Board of California”

4. Water Supply and Operations Reports a. Colorado River Basin Report

b. State and Local Reports 5. Staff reports regarding Colorado River Basin Programs

a. Status of development of the Lower Basin Drought Contingency Plan b. Informational presentation on “Agreement Establishing Programmatic Funding

for Colorado River Basin Weather Modification” c. General announcements

6. Executive Session

An Executive Session may be held by the Board pursuant to provisions of Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code and Sections 12516 and 12519 of the Water Code to discuss matters concerning interstate claims to the use of Colorado River system waters in judicial proceedings, administrative proceedings, and/or negotiations with representatives from other states or the federal government.

7. Other Business Next Board Meeting: February 14, 2018

Ontario Gateway Hotel Mt. View Salon A/B 2200 E. Holt Blvd. Ontario, California 91761 (909) 975-5000

Minutes of Meeting COLORADO RIVER BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

Wednesday, December 13, 2017 A meeting of the Colorado River Board (Board) of California was held on Wednesday, December 13, 2017.

Committee Members and Alternates Present Dana B. Fisher, Jr., Chairman (PVID) Norma Sierra Galindo (IID Alternate) Christopher Hayes (DFW Designee) David Vigil (DFW Alternate) Jeanine Jones (DWR Designee) Peter Nelson (CVWD)

John Powell, Jr. (CVWD Alternate) Glen D. Peterson (MWD) David R. Pettijohn, Vice-Chairman (LADWP Alternate) Jack Seiler (PVID Alternate) Doug Wilson (SDCWA)

Committee Members and Alternates Absent

James Hanks (IID) Hank Kuiper (Public Member)

Mark Watton (SDCWA Alternate)

Others Present

Steve Abbott Vikki Dee Bradshaw Allen Cerliste Dan Denham Karen Donovan Christopher Harris Gail Farber Brad Hiltscher Michael Hughes Steve Kasower Kara Mathews Jan Matusak Dan Moquiln Vic Nguyen Jessica Neuwerth

Mike Pacheco Roger Patterson Bill Pommering Sergio Quiros Randy Record Ivory Reyburn Alex Rodrigues Shanti Rosset Joel Scalzitti Marcia Scully Tina Shields Lauren Steely Joe Vanderhorst Meena Westford Jerry Zimmerman

2

CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Fisher announced the presence of a quorum and called the meeting to order at 10:07 a.m. OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE BOARD

Chairman Fisher invited members of the audience to address the Board on items on the

agenda or matters related to the Board. Hearing none, Chairman Fisher moved to the next item on the Agenda.

Chairman Fisher introduced Ms. Brenda Burman, the new commissioner of the U.S.

Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and Mr. Terry Fulp, the Regional Director of Reclamation’s Lower Colorado Region. Ms. Burman thanked Reclamation’s staff for the continuing excellent work and support. Chairman Fisher congratulated Commissioner Burman on her recent confirmation. Chairman Fisher also introduced Mr. Don Barnett, Executive Director for the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum, who provided an update on salinity control program accomplishments in 2017 and upcoming activities for 2018.

ADMINISTRATION

Chairman Fisher asked for a motion to approve the November 15, 2017 meeting minutes. Mr. Pettijohn moved that the minutes be approved, seconded by Ms. Jones, and with unanimous consent, the November 15, 2017 meeting minutes were approved. COLORADO RIVER BASIN WATER REPORTS

Executive Director Harris reported that as of December 4th, the water level at Lake Powell was 3,625.07 feet with 14.31 million-acre feet (MAF) of storage, or 59% of capacity. The water level at Lake Mead was 1,081.17 feet with 10.11 MAF of storage, or 39% of capacity. As of December 3rd, the total system storage was 32.33 MAF, or 45% of capacity, which is about 2.75 MAF more than the total system storage at this time last year.

Mr. Harris reported that the observed Water Year-2017 unregulated inflow into Lake Powell was 11.91 MAF, or 110% of normal and the April to July inflow into Lake Powell was 8.17 MAF, or 114% of normal. The November observed inflow and December forecasted inflow into Lake Powell was 0.39 MAF, or 82% of normal, and 0.36 MAF, or 99% of normal,

3

respectively. Mr. Harris reported that the current basin snowpack is 65% of normal and the precipitation for Water Year-2018 to date is 59% of normal.

Mr. Harris reported that precipitation in October was exceptionally dry throughout the Basin. In November, precipitation was also dry throughout the Basin, with the exception of the Upper Green River basin. Mr. Harris displayed a graphic by Reclamation illustrating the benefits of various water storage and conservation programs such as Mexico’s Deferred Delivery, Intentionally Created Surplus (ICS) and the Pilot System Conservation Program (PSCP) over the last ten years. Mr. Harris remarked that without these various programs and agreements, Lake Mead’s elevation would have reached a shortage trigger elevation in 2014.

Mr. Harris reported that through November 30th, Brock and Senator Wash reservoirs captured 98,290 AF and 96,343 AF, respectively. He also reported that the excess deliveries to Mexico through December 5th were 16,424 AF. As of December 12th, the total bypassed flows to the Cienga de Santa Clara in Mexico were 94,034 AF.

State and Local Reports

Mr. Harris reported on the ongoing drought conditions in the western United States, noting that Montana’s drought has subsisted for nearly a year. He also noted that dry conditions are present along the south coast and inland desert regions of California and the southwestern desert regions of the U.S.

Ms. Jones, representing the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), reported that the state’s reservoir storage is in good condition due to the very wet conditions last year. She noted that the state typically receives a significant portion of its total precipitation during the months of December, January, and February, and remarked that December has been very dry to date. Ms. Jones reported that California has only received one large atmospheric river this water year to date. Ms. Jones displayed an image of a forecast that showed the likelihood of atmospheric rivers reaching California, which was created using an experimental forecasting model developed by Scripps Institution of Oceanography at U.C. San Diego. She stated that the model did not show anything of significance in the upcoming forecasts. Ms. Jones noted that investments in similar tools and models will help improve forecasting, particularly in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Ms. Jones stated that the Upper Basin entities could learn a lot from more than $40 million in investments California has made to improve forecasting and data gathering, such as the installation of the Atmospheric River Observatory. Ms. Jones explained that improving forecasting in the Upper Colorado River Basin can be accomplished through the installation of similar observation systems that could monitor atmospheric rivers that come up through Baja and Southern California and make its way up to the Upper Colorado River Basin. In addition, she stated that improving the classification of storm types and tracks, percentage of rainfall, and annual rainfall created by the systems would also help improve the current forecasting system. Ms. Jones noted that the latter option is the least expensive.

4

Mr. Peterson, representing the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), reported that MWD has continued to store water. Mr. Peterson explained that there was no excess capacity on the East Branch of the State Water Project and MWD would not be able to move water through that system. Mr. Peterson stated that MWD is also replenishing its groundwater storage in Coachella, noting that a record amount of water has been stored this year. He added that water use has increased due to the warm temperatures in the fall.

Vice-Chairman Pettijohn, representing the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), remarked that one reason MWD was able to add a lot of water to its groundwater storage was due to the very significant precipitation in the Eastern Sierra, providing a huge regional benefit to MWD agencies. Mr. Pettijohn reported that last year was the wettest on record in its system, allowing LADWP to spread a record amount of 230,000 AF in the Owens Valley, and noted that it is unlikely that LADWP would ever benefit from the recharge due to pumping restrictions in Owens Valley. Mr. Pettijohn noted that about 20,000 AF of water was turned out onto the Owens Valley Dry Lake Bed, which could endanger hundreds of millions of dollars of dust mitigation investments on Owens Lake. But Mr. Pettijohn noted that LADWP was able to spread the water and not cause any damage to its investments. Water Year-2015 was the driest period within the 100-year old period of record and just two years later, the L.A. Aqueduct system experienced the wettest year on record. Mr. Pettijohn reported that current precipitation is 52% of normal as of December 13th.

Board member Nelson, representing the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), reported that CVWD will be celebrating its 100th year anniversary in 2018. Mr. Nelson provided a recap of the CVWD’s activities over the past year. CVWD has imported about 350,000 AF of water into its groundwater basin, with about 170,000 AF yielded from its State Water Project allocation and the remaining amount from MWD’s advance deliveries. Mr. Nelson stated that CVWD is designing a third aquifer replenishment facility which will be installed in Palm Desert. Mr. Nelson reported that CVWD is involved in a tribal lawsuit. The tribe is seeking reserved rights to groundwater. Mr. Nelson stated that CVWD believes that the groundwater belongs to everyone and noted that CVWD has been providing the water supply to the tribe as well as other agencies. Mr. Nelson stated that the economy of CVWD and the tribe are dependent on their water supply.

Mr. Nelson reported on CVWD’s ongoing chromium six issues, stating that the district will be signing a significant agreement for chromium treatment. Mr. Nelson remarked that he hopes the Colorado River Basin salinity control program will be able to find an equally cost-effective and effective technology as CVWD was able to do for chromium treatment.

Mr. Nelson reported that CVWD is still conserving water, noting that CVWD spent over $16 million on conservation programs and replaced 14 million square feet of turf. He added that the district is utilizing more smart controllers to regulate water automatically which aided the district in conserving more than twenty percent of water use. Mr. Nelson reported on the status of

5

the district non-potable water connections, stating that the district is continuing to connect golf courses and large commercial facilities to recycled water. He stated that CVWD has petitioned the State Water Resources Control Board to treat another 5,000 AF of water which would have otherwise gone into the Salton Sea. CVWD proposes to upgrade its facilities to produce non-potable recycled water for beneficial use in agricultural and other applications. Mr. Nelson stated that CVWD is always supportive of recycling water and using it for beneficial purposes.

Mr. Wilson, representing the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), requested that CRB staff develop a table and/or graphic displaying California’s consumptive use and Intentionally Created Surplus (ICS) put and take values since the Interim Guidelines were implemented in 2007.

STATUS OF COLORADO RIVER BASIN PROGRAMS

Lower Basin Drought Contingency Plan

Mr. Harris reported that the Upper and Lower basins met on December 6th to discuss the Drought Contingency Plans (DCPs) and address Upper Basin comments on the Lower Basin DCP. Mr. Harris noted that the group is initiating a similar process for the Lower Basin review of the Upper Basin DCP. An additional document, currently called the Companion Agreement, is also being drafted and will serve as a Basin States’ agreement on the implementation of the two separate DCPs. Mr. Harris reported that some parties believe federal legislation will be required for the agreements, which could be a time-consuming process. However, Mr. Harris noted that the goal is still to have the Lower Basin DCP finalized for implementation by August 2018.

Minute No. 323

Mr. Harris reported that two of the workgroups established by the recently completed Minute No. 323 had held their first meetings. Additionally, Mexico planned to notify the United States that the 124,000 AF of conserved water stored in Lake Mead under Minute No. 319 will be transferred to the United States, on or about December 14th, and that Reclamation has distributed a letter indicating how the conserved water will then be credited to the ICS accounts of the funding parties by December 31, 2017.

Mr. Harris reported that the Environmental Work Group (EWG) of Minute No. 323 met on November 30th in San Ysidro, California. The EWG is tasked with overseeing the use of 210,000 AF of water and $18 million dollars of funding secured for environmental purposes under the minute. Mr. Harris noted that the group was in the process of developing its annual water delivery and monitoring plans, and project eligibility criteria.

Mr. Harris also noted that the Desalination Work Group met on December 8th in San Ysidro, California. The group is currently focused on developing a scope-of-work for a

6

feasibility study of potential desalination operations on the Gulf of California, including potential sites, information needs, and environmental concerns. Mr. Harris reported that the work group includes California agency representatives from MWD, San Diego County Water Authority, and Colorado River Board. The scope-of-work for the feasibility assessment is expected to be completed by March 2018.

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program

Mr. Don Barnett, Executive Director of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum), provided an update on the status of the Salinity Control Program. The 2017 Triennial Review on water quality standards were adopted by the Forum in October. This would be the 14th time the Forum and the states have come together to review the salinity standards on the Colorado River. The standards consist of the numeric criteria and the plan of implementation to stay below the criteria. The plan will add 63,500 tons of salinity control over the next three years and 332,000 tons of new salinity control by 2035.

Mr. Barnett reported that the Forum had achieved 1.33 million tons of salinity control through 2017. As a result of the salinity control program, the salinity measured in downstream gages have been reduced by more than 100 milligrams per liter. Although the program has been effective in reducing salinity levels, the economic damages to downstream users are still significant. The current downstream damages of $450 million dollars would increase to almost $575 million dollars per year if the program ceased.

Mr. Barnett reported that the current Farm Bill is set to expire at the end of September 2018. The program receives the most significant amount of funding for salinity control projects through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) in the Farm Bill. Therefore, the Forum will be closely watching development of the 2018 Farm Bill and will advocate for continuing authorization and full funding of the EQIP program.

Mr. Barnett reported on the Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund (Lower Basin Fund). Annual contributions to the Lower Basin Fund paid by power users in California and Nevada come out to about $8.3 million dollars per year, although annual demands on the fund amount to about $9.6 million dollars per year. The result is a $1.3 million dollar per year deficit in the Lower Basin Fund. Mr. Barnett reported that the deficit has been occurring for several years and thus there is a current deficit of about $12.7 million dollars. With $7.1 million dollars in the account, the net deficit is $5.6 million dollars. Mr. Barnett summarized that there is a need to increase the Lower Basin Fund by about $2.8 million dollars per year to pay off the deficit. He added that this deficit is a concern of the Reclamation regional directors and that a Forum subcommittee has been working several years on this issue to find acceptable resolutions.

Mr. Barnett updated the Board on the status of the Paradox Valley Unit. Reclamation is currently preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) report to identify and select a preferred alternative to replace the existing well. Over the past 18 months, Reclamation has been

7

looking into the Zero Liquid Discharge technology as an alternative. After a Request for Proposal (RFP), Reclamation selected two contractors. One contractor proposes to utilize sophisticated thermal dynamic processes to change brine into fresh water and solid disposable salt; the other contractor will use a solar trough to evaporate the brine with super-heated oil that leaves the solid salts behind. Both contractors are currently fabricating their equipment and are in the final permitting stages. The demonstration processes are expected to be mobilizing in the Paradox Valley in January 2018, and be up and running in February. Due to the need to perform demonstration projects to validate the technology, the EIS schedule is delayed and a Draft EIS and Record of Decision will not be available until Summer of 2019 and Spring of 2020, respectively.

Mr. Barnett reported on the Pah Tempe Springs project, which is north of St. George, Utah. If implemented, the Pah Tempe Springs project has the potential to control about 80,000 to 90,000 tons of salt per year. Mr. Barnett reported that the program is currently in the fourth phase of the study with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) drilling and characterizing the fault system. The drilling began just after Thanksgiving and will probably continue until end of January 2018. After this final study phase, the next step would be looking at salt disposal alternatives. Mr. Barnett indicated that he will keep the Board posted on future efforts on this project.

Mr. Barnett reported on a proposed USGS study to determine water quality trends and analysis in the Colorado River Basin. The results from such a study would be helpful in understanding the cause of salinity trends independent of the salinity control program. In addition, the study results will assist in understanding salinity trends and the underlying drivers of the trend, which may prove helpful in informing future salinity discussions with Mexico related to the implementation of Minute No. 323.

On the salinity economic damage model, Mr. Barnett reported that a lot of work and help from the basin states have been provided for Reclamation to update the model. In an effort to improve the model, Reclamation released an RFP in October to find qualified consulting services. No responses were received, and Reclamation is set to go out into the open market for thirty days to continue searching for a qualified contractor to update the model.

Status of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program

Ms. Neuwerth reported that the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program will hold its Annual Reporting meeting January 23-25, 2018 in Phoenix, Arizona. The Annual Reporting meeting provides researchers the opportunity to update stakeholders on recent research and monitoring. This year also offers the first chance to discuss new experimental opportunities established in the Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) EIS.

Ms. Neuwerth also noted that the National Park Service had initiated an Environmental Assessment (EA) to consider management options for nonnative aquatic species below Glen

8

Canyon Dam. The EA will look at many different tools that can be used to manage invasive populations, such as the brown trout and green sunfish that have caused difficulty in recent years.

Status of the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program

Ms. Neuwerth reported that a notice was published in the Federal Register in late November, notifying the public of an amendment to the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program (LCR MSCP) permit, adding the northern Mexican gartersnake as a covered species. Ms. Neuwerth noted that the LCR MSCP Steering Committee would take action on the amendment at its next meeting. Additionally, Ms. Neuwerth reported that the LCR MSCP will hold its two annual research meetings in January 2018.

In response to a question from Mr. Wilson, Ms. Neuwerth noted that the addition of the northern Mexican gartersnake would not increase the cost to LCR MSCP funders or increase the amount of habitat the program is required to create. The newly added species would only necessitate some new management and restoration practices.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Mr. Harris reported that Ms. Brenda Burman was confirmed by the full Senate on

November 16th and sworn in by Secretary Zinke. The Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works has advanced the nomination of Ms. Kathleen Hartnett to be the Chair of the White House's Council on Environmental Quality, and has also gone to the full Senate for an up or down vote. Mr. Harris also reminded the agencies to get the names of the proposed participants in the CRB’s government committee.

Mr. Peterson requested to put on the agenda for the next meeting the work product and

recommendations from the government committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Nelson, and Mr. Harris took a role call on the motion that resulted in 6 Yes and 1 No. ADJOURNMENT

With no further items to be brought before the Board, Chairman Fisher adjourned the

meeting at 10:59 a.m.

1

RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE

COLORADO RIVER BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

A. Establishment of Rules and Regulations 1. These rules and regulations are adopted pursuant to Water

Code Section 12517 and supersede the present “Rules of Procedure and Regulations of the Colorado River Board of California” adopted February 2, 1940, and amended August 6, 1947, October 3, 1951, January 4, 1961, September 20 and November 8, 1978, and June 12, 1985, which are hereby repealed.

B. Operational Procedures

1. The Chairperson shall preside at the Board meetings. 2. Every year, at its November meeting, the Board shall select

one of its members to serve as Vice Chairperson. In the absence of the Chairperson, the Vice Chairperson shall preside at the Board meetings.

C. Meetings 1. The Board shall hold a regular meeting on the Wednesday

following the second Tuesday of each month at 9:30 a.m. or at any other time set by the Board. If the date of a regular meeting shall fall on a holiday, the Board shall either select a special meeting date or decide to forego its regular meeting for that month.

2. The Board may hold special meetings, either in lieu of its regular meeting or in addition thereto.

3. Meetings shall be held at any place the Chairperson or a majority of the members of the Board designate.

4. Notices of all Board meetings, regular and special, shall be sent to all members of the Board and to members of the public that have requested such notice in writing, at least ten days prior to such meeting. Such notice shall contain an agenda listing each item to be considered at the meeting, pursuant to Government Code Section 11125(a). In addition, notices of special meetings called in lieu of regular meeting shall be given to each member prior to the time fixed for the regular meeting if that time is earlier than fixed for the special meeting.

5. Any and all business may be transacted at a special meeting. 6. Any regular or special meeting of the Board may recess from

the day to day or from time to time without further notice other

2

than as provided in this section until the business thereof shall be completed; provided that no recess may be taken beyond the time of the next regular meeting of the Board. A copy of a notice of recess shall be conspicuously posted immediately on or near the door of the place where the meeting was held.

7. A majority of the members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Each member of the Board shall have one vote. A majority of the members present is necessary to take action on behalf of the Board. Any number less than a quorum may adjourn any meeting or recess any meeting from day to day or from time to time.

8. When minutes of a meeting have been delivered to the members, the same shall be present for approval and/or amendment at the next subsequent regular meeting, and it shall not be necessary to read such minutes into the record.

D. Staff

1. The Board’s Executive Officer shall be its Executive Director, to be selected by the Board in accordance with the rules of the State Personnel Board and the Department of Personnel Administration.

2. Expect as a specifically provided by resolution, the Executive Director may delegate the performance of any or all of his or her functions, but each delegations(s) shall not affect his or her responsibilities.

3. In accordance with applicable state and civil service procedures, the Executive Director shall appoint other employees, as may be necessary.

4. The Executive Director is the Board’s exempt position and shall be selected as provided by Section 12540 of the Water Code.

5. All employees, except the Executive Director, shall be subject to all rules and regulations established by the State for and on behalf of State employees including, but not limited to, standards of deportment, hours of work, compensation, holidays, and vacations. The Executive Director shall be subject to all rules and regulations established by the State for those employees whose positions are exempt from the State Civil Service.

Unanimously adopted September 20, 1978. Amended November 8, 1978. Updated in 1985 to reflect changes in agency head position. Amended September 15, 1992.

1

RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE

COLORADO RIVER BOARD OF CALIFORNIA

A. Establishment of Rules and Regulations 1. Adoption of Rules. These rules and regulations are adopted

pursuant to Water Code Section 12517 and supersede the present “Rules of Procedure and Regulations of the Colorado River Board of California” adopted February 2, 1940, and amended August 6, 1947, October 3, 1951, January 4, 1961, September 20, and November 8, 1978, and June 12, 1985, and September 15, 1992, which are hereby repealed.

2. Conflict in Rules and Statutes. If there is any conflict between these Rules and Regulations and the Government Code or the Water Code, the Government Code or the Water Code shall prevail.

B. Operational Procedures

1. Chairperson. Pursuant to Water Code section 12525, the Chairperson is, ex officio, the “Colorado River Commissioner. The Chairperson shall preside at the Board meetings., and who is, pursuant to Water Code Section 12525, ex officio the “Colorado River Commissioner.”

2. Election of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. The Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson shall be elected from among current members of the Board, excluding the Directors of the Department of Fish and Wildlife and Water Resources or their designees, via nomination and a roll-call vote of the Board. Election of officers shall be generally coincident with the effective term of the California Governor.

3. Terms of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. The Chairperson shall serve at the pleasure of the Board. The terms of the Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson shall be for four years.

1. Absence of Chairperson. In the absence of the Chairperson, the Vice Chairperson shall preside at the Board meetings.

2.4. Every year, at its November meeting, the Board shall select one of its members to serve as Vice Chairperson. In the absence of the Chairperson, the Vice Chairperson shall preside at the Board meetings.

C. Meetings

2

1. Regular Meetings. The Board mayshall hold one regular meeting per month. It will hold a regular meetings on the Wednesday following the second Tuesday of each month at 10:009:30 a.m. or at any other time set by the Board or at least three members of the Board (Water Code section 12541(a)). If the date of a regular meeting shall fall on a holiday, the Board shall either select a special meeting date or decide to forego its regular meeting for that month.

2. Special Meetings. The Board may hold special meetings, either in lieu of its regular meeting or in addition thereto. To the extent allowed by the Government Code, any and all business may be transacted at the special meeting. Special meetings may be held at the call of the Chairperson or three members of the Board.

3. Meeting Location. Meetings shall be held at any place the Chairperson or a majority of the members of the Board designate.

4. Meeting Notices. Notices of all Board meetings, regular and special, shall be sent to all members of the Board and to members of the public that have requested such notice in writing, at least ten days prior to such meeting. Such notice shall contain an agenda listing each item to be considered at the meeting, pursuant to Government Code Section 11125(a). In addition, notices of special meetings called in lieu of regular meeting shall be given to each member prior to the time fixed for the regular meeting if that time is earlier than fixed for the special meeting.

5. Meeting Recesses. Any and all business may be transacted at a special meeting.

6.5. Any regular or special meeting of the Board may recess from the day to day or from time to time without further notice other than as provided in this section until the business thereof shall be completed; provided that no recess may be taken beyond the time of the next regular meeting of the Board. A copy of a notice of recess shall be conspicuously posted immediately on or near the door of the place where the meeting was held.

6. Quorum. A majority of the members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Each member of the Board shall have one vote. A majority of the members present is necessary to take action on behalf of the Board. Any number less than a quorum may adjourn any meeting or recess any meeting from day to day or from time to time.

7. Board Actions. Action taken by the Board shall be conducted via a motion, a second, and concluded by a roll-call vote.

8. Meeting Minutes. When minutes of a meeting have been delivered to the members, the same shall be present for approval and/or

3

amendment at the next subsequent regular meeting, and it shall not be necessary to read such minutes into the record.

D. Staff

1. Executive Director. The Board’s Executive Officer shall be its Executive Director, to be selected by the Board in accordance with the rules of the State Personnel Board and the Department of Personnel Administration.

2. Delegation of Duties. Expect as a specifically provided by resolution, the Executive Director may delegate the performance of any or all of his or her functions, but each delegations(s) shall not affect his or her responsibilities.

3. Appointment of Employees. In accordance with applicable state and civil service procedures, the Executive Director shall appoint other employees, as may be necessary.

4. Exempt Position. The Executive Director is the Board’s exempt position and shall be selected as provided by Section 12540 of the Water Code.

5. Rules pertaining to Employees. All employees, except the Executive Director, shall be subject to all rules and regulations established by the State for and on behalf of State employees including, but not limited to, standards of deportment, hours of work, compensation, holidays, and vacations. The Executive Director shall be subject to all rules and regulations established by the State for those employees whose positions are exempt from the State Civil Service.

Unanimously adopted September 20, 1978. Amended November 8, 1978. Updated in 1985 to reflect changes in agency head position. Amended September 15, 1992. Proposed Amendment January 10, 2018

Jan 02, 2018

LOWER COLORADO WATER SUPPLY REPORT River Operations

Bureau of Reclamation

Questions: [email protected](702)293-8373

http://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g4000/weekly.pdfContent Elev. (Feet 7-Day

PERCENT 1000 above mean Release

CURRENT STORAGE FULL ac-ft (kaf) sea level) (CFS)

LAKE POWELL 58% 14,056 3,622.74 12,200

* LAKE MEAD 39% 10,225 1,082.57 10,300

LAKE MOHAVE 91% 1,645 641.04 7,700

LAKE HAVASU 90% 559 446.87 4,200

TOTAL SYSTEM CONTENTS ** 54% 32,014

As of 01/01/2018

SYSTEM CONTENT LAST YEAR 49% 29,459

* Percent based on capacity of 26,120 kaf or elevation 1,219.6 feet.

Salt/Verde System 61% 1,402

Painted Rock Dam 0% 0 530.00 0

Alamo Dam 11% 111 1,110.86 25

NEVADA 242

SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER SYSTEM 220

OTHERS 22

CALIFORNIA 4,018

METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 665

IRRIGATION DISTRICTS 3,233

OTHERS 120

ARIZONA 2,515

CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT 1,414

OTHERS 1,101

TOTAL LOWER BASIN USE 6,775

DELIVERY TO MEXICO - 2017 (Mexico Scheduled Delivery + Preliminary Yearly Excess1) 1,517

OTHER SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION

UNREGULATED INFLOW INTO LAKE POWELL - DECEMBER MID MONTH FORECAST DATED 12/15/2017

MILLION ACRE-FEET % of Normal

OBSERVED WATER YEAR 2017 11.905 110%

OBSERVED APRIL-JULY 2017 8.173 114%

NOVEMBER OBSERVED INFLOW 0.387 82%

DECEMBER INFLOW FORECAST 0.330 91%

Upper Colorado Basin Salt/Verde Basin

WATER YEAR 2018 PRECIP TO DATE 56% (4.9") 4% (0.3")

CURRENT BASIN SNOWPACK 57% (3.8") 5% (0.1")1 Delivery to Mexico forecasted yearly excess calculated using year-to-date observed and projected excess.

** TOTAL SYSTEM CONTENTS includes Upper & Lower Colorado River Reservoirs, less Lake Mead exclusive flood control space.

Forecasted Water Use for Calendar Year 2017 (as of 12/29/2017) (values in kaf)

Dec 29, 2017 07:50:25 AM

ARIZONA, CALIFORNIA, NEVADA, MEXICOFORECAST OF END OF YEAR CONSUMPTIVE USEFORECAST BASED ON USE TO DATE AND APPROVED ANNUAL WATER ORDERS 1

(ACRE-FEET)

Use Forecast Approved Excess toTo Date Use Use 2 Approval

WATER USE SUMMARY CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017

ARIZONA 2,500,706 2,514,889 2,515,708 -819CALIFORNIA 3,998,648 4,018,089 3,999,807 18,282NEVADA 242,881 241,999 300,000 -58,001

STATES TOTAL 3 6,742,235 6,774,977 6,815,515 -40,538

MEXICO IN SATISFACTION OF TREATY (Including downward delivery) 1,502,951 1,516,874 1,500,000 16,874TO MEXICO AS SCHEDULED 1,486,319 1,500,000MEXICO IN EXCESS OF TREATY 16,632 16,874BYPASS PURSUANT TO MINUTE 242 98,830 100,053

TOTAL LOWER BASIN & MEXICO 8,344,016 8,391,904

1Incorporates April USGS monthly data and 80 daily reporting stations which may be revised after provisional data reports are distributed by the USGS. Use to date and Forecast Use incorporates September monthly data for users reporting monthly, and is estimated for users reporting annually.2These values reflect adjusted apportionments. See Adjusted Apportionment calculation on each state page.3Includes unmeasured returns based on estimated consumptive use/diversion ratios by user from studies provided by Arizona Department of Water Resources, Colorado River Board of California, and Reclamation.

Graph notes: January 1 forecast use is scheduled use in accordance with the Annual Operating Plan's state entitlements, available unused entitlements, and over-run paybacks. A downward sloping line indicates use at a lower rate than scheduled, upward sloping is above schedule, and a flat line indicates a use rate equal to schedule. Lower priority users such as CAP, MWD, and Robert B.Griffith may adjust use rates to meet state entitlements as higher priority use deviates from schedule. Abrupt changes in the forecast use line may be due to a diversion schedule change or monthly updating of provisional realtime diversions.

CY 2017 LOWER COLORADO REGION

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

210,000

220,000

230,000

240,000

250,000

260,000

270,000

280,000

290,000

300,000

310,000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

Nevada Forecast

2,300,000

2,400,000

2,500,000

2,600,000

2,700,000

2,800,000

2,900,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

Arizona Forecast

3,600,000

3,700,000

3,800,000

3,900,000

4,000,000

4,100,000

4,200,000

4,300,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

California Forecast

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

Bypass Forecast

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

Mexico in Excess Forecast

140,000

145,000

150,000

155,000

160,000

165,000

170,000

175,000

180,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

Yuma Mesa Division Forecast

290,000

300,000

310,000

320,000

330,000

340,000

350,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

CRIT AZ Forecast

1,050,0001,070,0001,090,0001,110,0001,130,0001,150,0001,170,0001,190,0001,210,0001,230,0001,250,0001,270,0001,290,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

AZ Others Forecast

230,000

235,000

240,000

245,000

250,000

255,000

260,000

265,000

270,000

275,000

280,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

Wellton-Mohawk Forecast

180,000

190,000

200,000

210,000

220,000

230,000

240,000

250,000

260,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

YCWUA Forecast

1,100,000

1,200,000

1,300,000

1,400,000

1,500,000

1,600,000

1,700,000

1,800,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

CAP Forecast

6,300,0006,400,0006,500,0006,600,0006,700,0006,800,0006,900,0007,000,0007,100,0007,200,0007,300,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

Lower Basin Forecast

1

Dec 29, 2017 07:50:25 AM U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION LOWER COLORADO REGION

ARIZONA WATER USERSFORECAST OF END OF YEAR CONSUMPTIVE USEFORECAST BASED ON USE TO DATE AND APPROVED ANNUAL WATER ORDERSArizona Schedules and ApprovalsHistoric Use Records (Water Accounting Reports)

Excess to Excess toUse Forecast Estimated Estimated Diversion Forecast Approved Approved

To Date Use Use Use To Date Diversion Diversion DiversionWATER USER CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017ARIZONA PUMPERS 14,688 14,746 14,746 --- 22,758 22,848 22,848 0LAKE MEAD NRA, AZ - Diversions from Lake Mead 85 86 86 --- 85 86 86 0LAKE MEAD NRA, AZ - Diversions from Lake Mohave 202 203 203 --- 202 203 203 0DAVIS DAM PROJECT 2 2 2 --- 36 36 36 0BULLHEAD CITY 6,744 6,789 7,884 --- 10,374 10,472 12,720 -2,248MOHAVE WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 593 595 595 --- 883 886 886 0BROOKE WATER LLC 236 237 237 --- 353 354 354 0MOHAVE VALLEY IDD 17,461 17,568 20,171 --- 32,335 32,534 37,359 -4,825FORT MOJAVE INDIAN RESERVATION, AZ 34,558 34,714 42,390 --- 63,995 64,286 78,500 -14,214GOLDEN SHORES WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT 299 300 300 --- 445 447 447 0HAVASU NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 3,307 3,314 3,563 --- 27,550 27,636 41,820 -14,184LAKE HAVASU CITY 7,662 7,716 8,835 --- 12,359 12,446 14,250 -1,804CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT 1,404,352 1,414,389 1,300,614 --- 1,404,352 1,414,389 1,300,614TOWN OF PARKER 405 407 403 --- 847 852 922 -70COLORADO RIVER INDIAN RESERVATION, AZ 300,297 301,312 333,166 --- 596,529 599,878 647,016 -47,138EHRENBURG IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION 226 227 227 --- 317 318 318 0CIBOLA VALLEY 1 16,201 16,265 16,265 --- 22,663 22,753 22,753 0CIBOLA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 9,096 9,111 12,741 -3,630 14,670 14,694 20,550 -5,856IMPERIAL NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 2,086 2,110 3,019 -909 3,365 3,404 4,868 -1,464BLM PERMITEES (PARKER DAM to IMPERIAL DAM) 998 1,002 1,002 1,535 1,541 1,541CHA CHA, LLC 818 822 1,367 --- 1,262 1,269 2,100 -831BEATTIE FARMS 421 425 724 --- 648 654 1,110 -456YUMA PROVING GROUND 499 501 507 --- 499 501 507 -6GILA MONSTER FARMS 3,721 3,746 5,297 --- 6,580 6,627 9,156 -2,529WELLTON-MOHAWK IDD 246,384 247,161 278,000 -30,839 370,241 372,394 415,035 -42,641BLM PERMITEES (BELOW IMPERIAL DAM) 88 88 88 0 133 134 134 0CITY OF YUMA 13,334 13,453 15,381 -1,928 22,864 23,080 26,370 -3,290MARINE CORPS AIR STATION YUMA 1,352 1,359 1,409 --- 1,352 1,359 1,409 -50UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD 24 24 24 --- 48 48 48 0UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 921 925 960 --- 921 925 960 -35YUMA UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 125 126 151 --- 170 171 200 -29DESERT LAWN MEMORIAL 61 61 61 --- 87 87 87 0NORTH GILA VALLEY IRRRIGATION DISTRICT 12,423 12,437 12,031 --- 43,673 43,915 44,200 -285YUMA IRRIGATION DISTRICT 33,269 33,432 40,905 --- 62,768 63,116 74,500 -11,384YUMA MESA IDD 125,639 126,123 123,069 --- 195,653 196,859 214,066 -17,207UNIT "B" IDD 21,764 21,806 20,778 --- 28,177 28,274 29,800 -1,526FORT YUMA INDIAN RESERVATION 1,374 1,379 1,379 --- 2,112 2,120 2,120 0YUMA COUNTY WATER USERS' ASSOCIATION 218,096 219,005 243,141 --- 341,643 343,675 377,000 -33,325COCOPAH INDIAN RESERVATION 857 885 3,889 --- 1,140 1,184 5,950 -4,766RECLAMATION-YUMA AREA OFFICE 38 38 38 --- 38 38 38 0RETURN FROM SOUTH GILA WELLS

TOTAL ARIZONA 2,500,706 2,514,889 2,515,648 3,295,662 3,316,493 3,412,881

CAP 1,404,352 1,414,389 1,414,389ALL OTHERS 1,096,354 1,100,500 1,215,034 1,902,104 2,112,267YUMA MESA DIVISION, GILA PROJECT 171,331 171,992 171,610 382 303,890

ARIZONA ADJUSTED APPORTIONMENT CALCULATIONArizona Basic Apportionment 2,800,000System Conservation Water - Pilot System Conservation Program 2 -19,292Creation of Protection Volume - Reclamation 3 -80,000Creation of Protection Volume - CAWCD 4 -185,000Total State Adjusted Apportionment 2,515,708Excess to Total State Adjusted Apportionment -819

Estimated Allowable Use for CAP 1,415,208

CY 2017

NOTES: Click on Arizona Schedules and Approvals above for incoming diversion schedules and approvals.

3System Conservation Water to be conserved by the Gila River Indian Community pursuant to SCIA No. 17-XX-30-W0620, which will remain in Lake Mead to benefit system storage. Reclamation intends to apply a portion of this volume of water toward its commitment under the 2014 Memorandum of Understanding for Pilot Drought Response Actions.4By letter dated June 28, 217, CAWCD notified Reclamation of its intent to not divert 185,000 AF of AZ unused apportionment in 2017 to effect a voluntarily contribution to Lake Mead. This water will remain in Lake Mead to benefit system storage.

1Includes the following water users within the Cibola Valley: Cibola Valley IDD, Mohave County Water Authority, Arizona Game and Fish Commission, GSC Farms, LLC, and the Hopi Tribe.2System Consevation Water to be conserved by the City of Bullhead City, the Colorado River Indian Tribes and the Tohono O'odham Nation pursuant to executed System Conservation Implementation Agreements. This water will remain in Lake Mead to benefit system storage.

NOTE: ● Diversions and uses that are pending approval are noted in red italics.● Water users with a consumptive use entitlement - Excess to Estimated Use column indicates overrun/underrun of entitlement. Dash in this column indicates water user has a diversion entitlement.● Water user with a diversion entitlement - Excess to Approved Diversion column indicates overrun/underrun of entitlement. Dash in this column indicates water user has a consumptive use entitlement.

1


CALIFORNIA WATER USERSFORECAST OF END OF YEAR CONSUMPTIVE USEFORECAST BASED ON USE TO DATE AND APPROVED ANNUAL WATER ORDERSCalifornia Schedules and ApprovalsHistoric Use Records (Water Accounting Reports)


To Date Use Use Use To Date Diversion Diversion DiversionWATER USER CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017CALIFORNIA PUMPERS 1,674 1,681 1,681 --- 3,029 3,041 3,041 0FORT MOJAVE INDIAN RESERVATION, CA 7,248 7,275 8,996 --- 13,470 13,520 16,720 -3,200CITY OF NEEDLES (includes LCWSP use) 1,140 1,152 2,098 -946 1,899 1,914 2,528 -614METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT 664,469 665,425 542,927 --- 667,338 668,317 545,596 ---COLORADO RIVER INDIAN RESERVATION, CA 3,155 3,168 3,168 --- 5,228 5,249 5,249 0PALO VERDE IRRIGATION DISTRICT 305,261 305,701 299,152 --- 733,258 737,226 746,500 -9,274YUMA PROJECT RESERVATION DIVISION 42,424 42,689 56,799 --- 81,293 81,869 107,960 -26,091 YUMA PROJECT RESERVATION DIVISION - INDIAN UNIT --- --- --- --- 42,354 42,630 52,360 -9,730 YUMA PROJECT RESERVATION DIVISION - BARD UNIT --- --- --- --- 38,939 39,239 55,600 -16,361YUMA ISLAND PUMPERS 3,840 3,855 3,855 --- 6,943 6,971 6,971 0FORT YUMA INDIAN RESERVATION - RANCH 5 640 643 643 --- 1,155 1,160 1,160 0IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT 2,532,414 2,545,185 2,608,600 -63,415 2,494,885 2,508,952 2,731,274 ---SALTON SEA SALINITY MANAGEMENT 102,006 105,000 105,000 0 107,149 99,543 99,543 ---COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 333,491 335,426 366,000 -30,574 343,017 345,151 383,729 ---OTHER LCWSP CONTRACTORS 694 697 697 --- 1,134 1,138 1,138 0CITY OF WINTERHAVEN 66 66 66 --- 100 100 100 0CHEMEHUEVI INDIAN RESERVATION 126 126 126 --- 11,295 11,340 11,340 0

TOTAL CALIFORNIA 3,998,648 4,018,089 4,471,193 4,485,491 4,662,849

CALIFORNIA ADJUSTED APPORTIONMENT CALCULATIONCalifornia Basic Apportionment 4,400,000System Conservation Water - Pilot System Conservation1 -193Creation of Extraordinary Conservation ICS (IID) -25,000Creation of Extraordinary Conservation ICS (MWD)2 -375,000Total State Adjusted Apportionment 3,999,807Excess to Total State Adjusted Apportionment 18,282

NOTES: Click on California Schedules and Approvals above for incoming diversion schedules and approvals.

CY 2017

1System Consevation Water to be conserved by the City of Needles pursuant to System Conservation Implementation Agreement (SCIA) No. 15-XX-30-W0596. In accordance with the SCIA, this water will remain in Lake Mead to benefit system storage. 2In accordance with MWD's Modified 2017 Plan for the Creation of Extraordinary Conservation (EC) ICS, MWD is approved to create up to 398,000 AF of EC ICS. However, this amount is limited to the amount that, when added to the amount of EC ICS created by IID, does not exceed 400,000 AF.

2,000,000

2,100,000

2,200,000

2,300,000

2,400,000

2,500,000

2,600,000

2,700,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

IID Forecast


300,000

310,000

320,000

330,000

340,000

350,000

360,000

370,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

CVWD Forecast

280,000

300,000

320,000

340,000

360,000

380,000

400,000

420,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

PVID Forecast

340,000

360,000

380,000

400,000

420,000

440,000

460,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

CA Priorities 1, 2 &3b Forecast

38,00040,00042,00044,00046,00048,00050,00052,00054,00056,00058,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

YPRD Forecast

400,000

450,000

500,000

550,000

600,000

650,000

700,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

MWD Forecast

1


NEVADA WATER USERSFORECAST OF END OF YEAR CONSUMPTIVE USEFORECAST BASED ON USE TO DATE AND APPROVED ANNUAL WATER ORDERSNevada Schedules and ApprovalsHistoric Use Records (Water Accounting Reports)


To Date Use Use Use To Date Diversion Diversion DiversionWATER USER CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017 CY2017ROBERT B. GRIFFITH WATER PROJECT (SNWS) 439,581 442,388 467,786 -25,398 439,581 442,388 467,786 -25,398LAKE MEAD NRA, NV - Diversions from Lake Mead 332 315 372 --- 332 315 372 -57LAKE MEAD NRA, NV - Diversions from Lake Mohave 150 138 177 --- 150 138 177 -39BASIC MANAGEMENT INC. 4,683 4,078 8,208 --- 4,683 4,078 8,208 -4,130CITY OF HENDERSON (BMI DELIVERY) 12,910 11,795 15,878 --- 12,910 11,795 15,878 -4,083NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 9 8 12 -4 506 460 551 ---PACIFIC COAST BUILDING PRODUCTS INC. 899 832 928 --- 899 832 928 -96BOULDER CANYON PROJECT 169 170 170 --- 299 300 300 0BIG BEND WATER DISTRICT 2,145 1,883 4,977 --- 4,343 3,782 10,000 -6,218FORT MOJAVE INDIAN TRIBE 2,750 2,763 3,886 --- 4,102 4,121 5,800 -1,679LAS VEGAS WASH RETURN FLOWS -220,747 -222,371 -202,394 ---

TOTAL NEVADA 242,881 241,999 300,000 -25,402 467,805 468,209 510,000

SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER SYSTEM (SNWS) 218,834 220,017 442,388ALL OTHERS 24,047 21,982 25,821NEVADA USES ABOVE HOOVER 237,986 237,353 460,306NEVADA USES BELOW HOOVER 4,895 4,646 7,903

Tributary Conservation & Imported Intentionally Created SurplusTotal Requested Tributary Conservation Intentionally Created Surplus 47,000Total Requested Imported Conservation Intentionally Created Surplus 9,0005% System Cut for Creation of Intentionally Created Surplus -2,800Total Intentionally Created Surplus Left in Lake Mead 53,200

NEVADA ADJUSTED APPORTIONMENT CALCULATIONNevada Basic Apportionment 300,000Excess to Total State Adjusted Apportionment -58,001

NOTES: Click on Nevada Schedules and Approvals above for incoming diversion schedules and approvals.

CY 2017


300,000

320,000

340,000

360,000

380,000

400,000

420,000

440,000

460,000

480,000

500,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

Robert B. Griffith Forecast

105,000

125,000

145,000

165,000

185,000

205,000

225,000

245,000


Fore

cast

Use

, ac-

ft

LV Wash Return Forecast

1

Measurement as Inches Water Content; Precipitation totals are cumulative for water year beginning Oct 1

EASTERN SIERRA CURRENT PRECIPITATION CONDITIONS

January 2, 2018

15%

2%

10%13%

8%

32%

35%

4%

22%

32%

19%

75%

0%

50%

100%

GemPass

MammthPass

Rock Crk Sawmill Big PineCrk

CottnwdLakes

5.1 in. 0.7 in. 1.4 in. 2.6 in. 1.5 in. 4.0 in.

Snow Pillows % of Apr 1 Normal% of Norm to Date

17%

10%

4% 3% 7%

1% 0%

56%

34%

12% 9%

21%

3% 1% 0%

50%

100%

CainRanch

LongValley

Bishop BigPine

Indep So.Haiwee

LosAngeles

1.75 in. 0.98 in. 0.22 in. 0.25 in. 0.37 in. 0.06 in. 0.03 in.

Rainfall % of Sep 30 Normal% of Norm to Date

0

10

20

30

40

50

October November December January February March April May June July

Weighted Average of Owens Valley Snow Courses

2017-2018Average2016-2017 (Wettest Year)2014-2015 (Driest Year)

Inch

es o

f wat

er

3.1" w/c 32% of normal

1

[DRAFT] AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING PROGRAMATIC FUNDING FOR COLORADO

RIVER BASIN WEATHER MODIFICATION This Agreement Establishing a Colorado River Basin Weather Modification Funding Mechanism (“Agreement”) is made and entered into on ___________________, 2018, by and among California’s Six Agency Committee, Central Arizona Water Conservation District, and Southern Nevada Water Authority (collectively “Funding Parties”), Colorado Water Conservation Board, Utah Division of Water Resources, Wyoming Water Development Office (collectively “Upper Basin Entities”) and the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission (“NMISC”). The Funding Parties, Upper Basin Entities, and the NMISC are collectively referred to as the “Parties” and each individually as “Party.”

RECITALS

Parties

1. The Six Agency Committee (“SAC”), which was created in 1950 to support the Colorado River Board of California (“CRB”), represents six Southern California public agencies that have interests in Colorado River water and power resources: Coachella Valley Water District, Imperial Irrigation District, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Palo Verde Irrigation District, San Diego County Water Authority and The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The Six Agency Committee administers funds contributed by the represented agencies to protect and advance the agencies’ rights and interests in the Colorado River System.

2. The Southern Nevada Water Authority (“SNWA”) is a Nevada joint powers agency and

political subdivision of the State of Nevada, created by Cooperative Agreement dated July 25, 1991, as amended November 17, 1994, and January 1, 1996. SNWA was formed to address Southern Nevada’s unique water needs on a regional basis. SNWA manages the region’s water resources, including water from the Colorado River, to provide for the Las Vegas Valley’s present and future water needs.

3. The Central Arizona Water Conservation District (“CAWCD”) is a multi-county water

conservation district established under Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) §§ 48-3701 et seq. CAWCD operates and maintains the Central Arizona Project. The CAWCD is the steward of Central Arizona’s Colorado River water entitlement.

4. The Colorado Water Conservation Board (“CWCB”) is a division of the State of Colorado,

Department of Natural Resources, created to aid in the protection and development of the state’s waters. Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes (“C.R.S.”) §§ 36-20-101 et seq. (2016), CWCB administers the state’s weather modification program and has regulatory authority over cloud seeding operators. Typically, such operators contract with local program sponsors, such as water districts and water utilities, for cloud seeding services in specific watersheds. The state, through CWCB, has established a weather modification program. C.R.S. §§ 36-20-102. CWCB receives appropriations for the weather modification program from the Colorado Legislature. The

2

appropriations are deposited in the Construction Fund. In addition, CWCB may accept funds from other entities. C.R.S § 37-60-121.

5. The Utah Division of Water Resources (“UDWRe”) is a division of the State of Utah,

Department of Natural Resources. UDWRe’s mission is to plan, conserve, develop, and protect Utah’s water resources. In 1973, the Utah Legislature passed the Utah Cloud Seeding Act which allowed for the licensing of operators and permitting of cloud seeding projects by UDWRe. Cloud seeding operators contract with local program sponsors, such as water districts and counties within the state, for cloud seeding activities in specific project areas. The projects are funded by local sponsors with a cost share from the State of Utah of up to fifty percent (50%) of the total cost. The State’s share is currently limited to three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000). In addition, UDWRe may accept funds from other entities.

6. The Wyoming Water Development Office (“WWDO”) is an agency of the State of

Wyoming. WWDO administers the Wyoming Water Development Program (Wyoming Statutes § 41-2-112), which was established in 1975 to promote the optimal development of the State’s human, industrial, mineral, agricultural, water, and recreational resources. This program provides, through the Wyoming Water Development Commission, procedures and policies for planning, selecting, financing, constructing, acquiring, and operating water projects, such as cloud seeding activities. Weather modification programs are partially funded through annual Legislative appropriations passed in the Omnibus Water Bills. In addition, WWDO may acquire funding from other entities.

7. The NMISC is an agency of the State of New Mexico. Pursuant to NMSA 1978, § 72-14-

3, the NMISC is authorized to investigate water supply; to develop, to conserve, and protect the water supply; and to do any and all other things necessary to protect, conserve, and develop the waters and stream systems of the State of New Mexico, interstate or otherwise. The NMISC also administers and regulates New Mexico’s weather control and cloud modification operations pursuant to the state’s Weather Control Act, NMSA 1978, § 75-3-1 to 75-3-15. The State of New Mexico does not have its own weather modification program. Instead, the NMISC currently provides funds to the CWCB for weather modification programs in Southwestern Colorado. Background

8. The Upper Basin Entities have a variety of existing operational weather modification programs within the Colorado River Basin. Historically, these weather modification programs were funded, operated, and regulated at the state and local level. Since 2007, the Funding Parties have funded portions of these programs. The NMISC first provided funds for a portion of these programs in 2007.

9. The Parties agree that properly designed and operated winter season orographic weather

modification programs may increase winter snowpack in the Colorado River Basin. Increased snowpack may augment the Colorado River Basin’s water supply by increasing precipitation and runoff.

3

10. All seven of the Colorado River Basin States ― Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming (the “Basin States”) ― and their water users benefit from increased water supply in the Colorado River Basin. Any increase in runoff is additional Colorado River System water that benefits the entire Colorado River Basin.

11. The Parties recognize opportunities for augmenting Colorado River System runoff through

a cooperative weather modification cost-share funding mechanism. From 2007 through 2017, the Funding Parties and Upper Basin Entities implemented a collaborative effort to enhance Colorado River System water supply conditions through annual amendments to three base agreements to provide supplemental funding for weather modification activities in the Upper Basin. During that period, the Funding Parties contributed funds to the Upper Basin Entities for cloud seeding of appropriate orographic storms in the respective states. The NMISC also provided supplemental funding through a separate agreement to operations in southwestern Colorado.

Guiding Principles for the Establishment of the Colorado River Basin Weather Modification Funding Mechanism

12. The Parties intend for this Agreement to allow a continuation of efforts to pursue weather modification activities in a more efficient and long-term programmatic approach. The terms of this Agreement are informed by the Parties’ past efforts and are intended to provide greater certainty and efficiency going forward.

13. As with previous collaborative efforts, the Parties understand that the Funding Parties’ financial contributions to the Upper Basin Entities are not intended to replace existing weather modification programs, or the cooperative funding provided by Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. Through this Agreement, rather, the Funding Parties seek to supplement, improve, expand, and extend the Upper Basin Programs, as defined herein.

14. This Agreement is intended to reflect a cost-sharing relationship of generally fifty/fifty

percent (50%/50%) between the Funding Parties and the NMISC, and funds contributed by Upper Basin Entities, including Local Contributions.

15. No minimum annual funding contribution and commitment will be required of the Funding Parties and the NMISC by any Upper Basin Entity.

16. Funding contributions provided by the Funding Parties shall only be matched to funds contributed by Upper Basin Entities, including Local Contributions, that are to be utilized for weather modification activities that contribute to increased water supply within the Colorado River Basin.

17. Funding contributions provided by the NMISC are to be utilized only for weather

modification activities that contribute to increased water supply within the Western and Eastern San Juan Basin.

18. Funds to be provided by the Funding Parties and the NMISC may be subject to annual approval by the respective Boards, committees or agencies.

4

19. Accordingly, through this Agreement, the Parties will establish a nine-year Colorado River

Basin Weather Modification Funding Mechanism (“Funding Mechanism”). This Agreement, undertaken with funding provided by the Funding Parties and the NMISC, will be directed by a Technical Committee (“Technical Committee”) as described below. The purpose of this Agreement is to efficiently supplement, improve, expand, and extend weather modification activities through the Upper Basin Entities by reducing the time and resources devoted to project review and approval, streamlining funding authorization efforts, providing flexibility in implementing weather modification operations, and facilitating the Upper Basin programs’ geographic and temporal expansion of weather modification programs through long-term funding.

Agreement

1. Definitions.1 a. Accomplishment Summary. A brief annual summary compiled by the Funding Party

Technical Committee representatives that summarizes the information presented in the Annual Reports.

b. Activities. Those weather modification practices, performances, transactions, project feasibility studies, operations, or other actions undertaken pursuant to this Agreement or any amendments thereto.

c. Activity Exhibit. The Activity Exhibit is a document detailing each Upper Basin Entity’s Activities and budget estimates for an upcoming Water Year. The finalized Activity Exhibit will outline the Upper Basin Entities’ Approved Activities, Funding Party Yearly Contributions, NMISC Annual Funding for an upcoming Water Year, and any additional funding provided by other entities.

d. Annual Reports. Reports submitted by the Upper Basin Entities that document the

Activities completed during the Water Year. e. Approved Activities. Activities identified in a Water Year’s finalized Activity Exhibit

that has been approved and executed by each Party based on the Notice of Recommendation.

f. Colorado River Basin States (“Basin States”). The states of Arizona, California,

Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. g. Colorado River System. This term has the meaning set forth in Article II(a) of the

Colorado River Compact of 1922.

1 Additional terms are defined throughout the Agreement.

5

h. Funds. Those monies contributed by the Funding Parties and the NMISC to the Upper Basin Entities to be disbursed for Activities and administration pursuant to this Agreement.

i. Funding Parties. Lower Basin entities (i.e., SAC, SNWA, and CAWCD) providing

Funds to the Upper Basin Entities. The NMISC is not considered a Funding Party because New Mexico is an Upper Basin State and is providing funding in lieu of implementing its own weather modification program.

j. Local Contributions. Funding contributions detailed in the Activity Exhibit that are

acquired or accepted by an Upper Basin Entity to be used for Activities that benefit the Colorado River Basin.

k. Notice of Recommendation. A recommendation from the Technical Committee to

approve and execute a final Activity Exhibit. l. Party or Parties. Any signatory to this Agreement or collectively all signatories to this

Agreement.

m. Upper Basin Entities. The Upper Colorado River Basin agencies (CWCB, UDWRe, and WWDO, responsible for the implementation and management of state specific weather modification programs within the Upper Colorado River Basin.

n. Upper Basin Programs. The weather modification programs operated and administered

by CWCB, UDWRe, or WWDO. o. Upper Colorado River Basin. This term has the meaning set forth in Article II(f) of the

Colorado River Compact of 1922. p. Water Year. The twelve (12) month period for which Funds are provided, from October

1 of any year through September 30 of the next year.

2. Term of Agreement. a. This Agreement shall have a duration of up to nine (9) years (“Term”).

b. The Term shall commence on October 1, 2017 (“Commencement Date”), and continue

for up to nine (9) years, through September 30, 2026 (“Termination Date”). c. The Agreement may be terminated prior to the Termination Date and during the Term

of the Agreement according to the conditions set forth in Section 8.

3. Funding Contributions.

6

a. The Funding Parties agree to contribute up to five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) each, and up to one million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000) collectively, in funding for Approved Activities in a single Water Year (“Yearly Contribution”).

b. The NMISC agrees to contribute up to twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) in annual funding for Approved Activities in a single Water Year (“Annual Funding”). The NMISC and any funds contributed by the NMISC are considered separate and distinct from the Funding Parties and the Yearly Contribution because New Mexico is an Upper Basin State that is providing funding to other Upper Basin States in lieu of implementing its own weather modification program.

c. The Yearly Contribution, Total Contribution, and Annual Funding amounts are subject

to the availability of funds and the terms and conditions otherwise set forth in this Agreement.

4. Technical Committee. The Parties authorize the creation of a Technical Committee to

direct and administer the provisions of this Agreement. The Technical Committee is responsible for the coordination of Activities and the allocation of Funds established as part of the Funding Mechanism, and will serve as a forum for the Parties to work collaboratively in fulfilling those responsibilities.

a. Composition. The Technical Committee shall be comprised of one representative from

each of the Parties. Unless a party objects, representatives from third-party organizations (e.g. consultants and researchers) may be asked to participate on the Technical Committee periodically. Parties’ decision-making authority will not be granted to any third-party representative regarding the allocation of Funds or coordination of Activities.

b. Chairperson. A Chairperson shall coordinate and preside over the Technical

Committee’s affairs including, but not limited to, organizing and hosting conference calls and meetings, disseminating information, and/or other Committee business. The Chairperson shall provide a meeting summary and list of action items after each meeting to all Technical Committee representatives. The Chairperson position shall be fulfilled by a Funding Party Technical Committee representative. Upon execution of this Agreement, a Funding Party Technical Committee representative from SNWA shall be appointed the position of Chairperson. The length of the Chairperson’s term of service and the selection of a subsequent Chairperson is at the discretion of the Technical Committee.

c. Meetings. An annual Committee Meeting (“Committee Meeting”) shall occur prior to June 30 of each Water Year. The objective of the Committee Meeting is to coordinate and evaluate the Upper Basin Entities’ Activity Exhibits; determine the Funding

7

Parties’ Yearly Contribution and NMISC’s Annual Funding for the upcoming Water Year; and discuss Activities completed during the current Water Year.

i. All Technical Committee representatives are expected to participate in each

annual Committee Meeting by teleconference or attend in person, as is reasonable and appropriate.

ii. Activity Exhibits. The Upper Basin Entities’ proposed Activity Exhibits are due

to the Technical Committee for review by May 15.

1. The Funding Party and NMISC Technical Committee representatives will review each Activity Exhibit in advance of the Committee Meeting, and provide preliminary approval of the proposed Activity Exhibits or recommend modification thereto to each Upper Basin Entity as appropriate, during the Committee Meeting.

2. Each Upper Basin Entity shall inform the Chairperson of their

respective agency’s concurrence with, or proposed modifications to, the Activity Exhibit, Yearly Contribution, and Annual Funding amounts, no later than July 31 each Water Year.

d. Approval. The Chairperson will provide a Notice of Recommendation and a final

Activities Exhibit to the Parties no later than August 31 of each Water Year.

i. The final Activity Exhibit will serve as a Technical Committee recommended Addendum to the Agreement, and as such be submitted to each Party for execution.

ii. The final Activity Exhibit will identify the Yearly Contribution and Annual Funding each Funding Party and the NMISC will respectively contribute to each Upper Basin Entity for the implementation and management of the Activities described therein.

e. Focus. The Parties will direct their efforts primarily at the implementation of Activities

in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, utilizing a long-term, programmatic funding approach. The scientific study and research of weather modification and its effectiveness are not a primary purpose of this Agreement.

f. Considerations. The Technical Committee shall consider the following Activities in relation to the allocation of Funds for any Water Year.

i. WWDO Activities: Supplementation of weather modification operations in the

Colorado River Basin portion of Wyoming.

ii. CWCB Activities: Extension and/or expansion of weather modification operations in the Colorado River Basin portions of Colorado.

8

iii. UDWRe Activities: Extension and/or expansion of weather modification

operations in the Colorado River Basin portions of Utah.

iv. The Funding Parties may reduce the funding of Activities when Lake Powell and Lake Mead are projected to collectively exceed eighty percent (80%) of live storage capacity in the upcoming Water Year. Notice of the decision of whether to fund Activities based on the results of the United States (“U.S.”) Bureau of Reclamation’s August Twenty Four (24) Month Study Report projections of collective inflow and storage at Lake Powell and Lake Mead shall be provided to the Upper Basin Entities no later than August 31 of each Water Year, and is not subject to change for the Water Year following that determination.

v. The funding and operations of the Upper Basin Programs are anticipated to be

expanded gradually throughout the Term of this Agreement. The Funding Parties will only provide funding to the extent that the Upper Basin Entities are providing funds in an amount equal to or greater than that funded in the previous Water Year. Approval of Funding Parties’ Yearly Contributions in excess of fifty percent (50%) of the total cost for Activities will be evaluated by the Technical Committee on an as-needed basis.

vi. The Funding Parties’ primary goal is to maximize weather modification

operations. However, funding for scientific research related to the effectiveness or quantification of weather modification may be considered at the discretion of the Technical Committee.

g. Purchased Equipment. The appropriate Upper Basin Entity, upon receipt of the

equipment or instrumentation, shall be deemed the owner of such equipment or instrumentation and will be responsible for costs associated with storage, shipping, maintenance and disposal of such equipment or instrumentation.

h. Disbursement of Funds. Yearly Contributions and Annual Funding will be provided to Upper Basin Entities by the Funding Parties and the NMISC within forty-five (45) days from the execution of the final Activity Exhibit, or within forty-five (days) of invoicing, at the discretion of each Upper Basin Entity.

i. Invoices. The Technical Committee is responsible for establishing an invoicing

procedure consistent with Section 4.h of this Agreement, and considering the accounting requirements of the Upper Basin Entities, to be followed by the Upper Basin Entities in submitting invoices to the Funding Parties and the NMISC, as appropriate. This procedure will be documented in written format, and may be modified or amended at the discretion of the Technical Committee.

9

j. Approved Activity Funding. Yearly Contributions and Annual Funding may only be

used to fund Approved Activities specifically described in the final Activity Exhibit for that Water Year.

k. Unused Funds. Yearly Contributions and Annual Funding provided to the Upper Basin Entities that are unused and uncommitted by the end of the Water Year may be credited towards future Approved Activities or reimbursed to the Funding Parties and the NMISC, at the discretion of the respective Funding Party and the NMISC. At no time will the sum of any current and subsequent Yearly Contribution provided by any single Funding Party exceed five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) in a given Water Year.

5. Reporting

a. Annual Reports. Each Upper Basin Entity will submit four (4) hard-copy Annual

Reports and one (1) electronic version to the Chairperson no later than September 30 of each Water Year. At a minimum, each Annual Report should include the following information:

i. Maps showing the locations of any weather modification equipment (for

example: generators, icing rate meters, radiometers and aircraft flight paths) funded through this Agreement.

ii. Maps showing the target areas of the Activities funded through this Agreement.

iii. A list of any equipment purchased using funds from this Agreement.

iv. A monthly timescale accounting of the number of seeding events, amount of silver iodide or seeding agent used, and the number of generator hours or flight hours where applicable.

v. As available, an expense report comparing the budgeted versus actual costs for

the Water Year.

b. Accomplishment Summary. The Funding Party Technical Committee representatives will complete an annual Accomplishment Summary synthesizing the information contained in the Annual Reports referenced above.

c. If any Upper Basin Entity fails to provide their Annual Report under Section 5.a, the Funding Parties and the NMISC are released from any obligation to continue funding Activities to that Upper Basin Entity until the past due reports have been provided.

6. Timeline.

10

a. April/May

i. The Chairperson of the Technical Committee schedules the annual Committee Meeting to be held prior to June 30 of each Water Year.

ii. The Upper Basin Entities’ proposed Activity Exhibits will be submitted to the Chairperson for review by the Technical Committee Funding Party representatives by May 15 of each Water Year.

b. June i. The Technical Committee shall meet annually prior to June 30 of each Water

Year to coordinate and evaluate the Upper Basin Programs’ Activity Exhibits, the Funding Parties’ Yearly Contribution, and the NMISC’s Annual Funding for the upcoming Water Year.

ii. The proposed Activity Exhibits shall contain maps of proposed generator locations and weather modification equipment. Generators and equipment that are proposed for operations using funds provided by the Funding Parties and the NMISC shall be clearly identified. The Funding Parties and the NMISC shall have an opportunity to review and approve existing or proposed locations for generators and equipment prior to the start of annual cloud seeding operations.

iii. The Funding Party and the NMISC Technical Committee representatives will review and provide preliminary approval of all Upper Basin Entity Activity Exhibits or recommend any modifications thereto to the respective Upper Basin Entity, as appropriate, during the Committee Meeting.

c. July i. Upper Basin Entities shall inform the Chairperson of their respective agency’s

concurrence with, or proposed modifications to, their Activity Exhibit, Yearly Contribution, and Annual Funding amounts no later than July 31 of each Water Year.

ii. Upper Basin Entity draft Annual Reports from the previous operational season

(current Water Year) are due to the Chairperson no later than July 31 of each Water Year.

d. August

i. The Funding Parties will provide notice to the Upper Basin Entities and the NMISC regarding the decision of whether or not to fund future Activities based on the results of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s Twenty Four (24) Month

11

Study Report, Operation Plan for Colorado River System Reservoirs, no later than August 31 of each Water Year.

ii. Funding Party Technical Committee representatives will complete an Accomplishment Summary for the previous Water Year no later than August 31 of each Water Year.

iii. The Chairperson will provide Notice of Recommendation and the final

Activities Exhibit to the Parties no later than August 31 of each Water Year. The final Activity Exhibit will serve as a Technical Committee recommended Addendum to the Agreement, and as such be submitted for execution by each Party.

e. September

i. Each Party’s Technical Committee representative will submit the recommended Addendum for entity-specific legal, and managerial review and execution.

ii. Upper Basin Entity final Annual Reports are due to the Chairperson no later

than September 30 of each Water Year.

f. October i. Operational weather modification contracts are negotiated and executed as

needed by the appropriate Consultant(s) and Upper Basin Entity for the current Water Year.

g. November

i. Water Year Activities start.

ii. Funding Party Yearly Contributions and NMISC Annual Funding are disbursed to Upper Basin Entities as appropriate.

h. December/January i. Funds provided to the Upper Basin Entities that are unused and uncommitted

by the end of the previous Water Year may be credited towards future Approved Activities or reimbursed to the Funding Parties and the NMISC, at the discretion of the Funding Parties and the NMISC.

i. March/April

i. Water Year Activities end.

Any dates are subject to review and amendment by the Technical Committee during the Term.

12

7. Insurance. The Upper Basin Entities shall ensure that, in contracting with third-party weather modification vendors, the third-party contractors procure general liability insurance coverage for at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) and maintain such policy for the duration of the Activities that are funded in part through this Agreement. Such insurance policies shall name the Funding Parties and the NMISC, as appropriate, as additional insureds. If the third-party contractor is a governmental entity, then it may demonstrate that it is self-insured for up to at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) in lieu of the general liability insurance requirements in this paragraph.

8. Termination. A Party may terminate its rights and obligations under this Agreement and

participation in the Funding Mechanism by providing written notice to each of the other Parties.

a. If a Funding Party, and/or the NMISC, provides notice of termination, that Funding

Party’s and/or the NMISC’s participation in the Agreement shall terminate at the conclusion of the Water Year in which the notice is given. A terminating party shall remain responsible for funding Approved Activities for the Water Year in which notice of termination is given.

b. If CWCB, UDWRe, or WWDO provide notice of termination, the respective Party shall withdraw from participating in the Agreement upon its completion of all Approved Activities that the Party was responsible for completing in that Water Year. If CWCB, UDWRe, or WWDO is unable to complete all Approved Activities that the Party was responsible for in that Water Year, the respective Party will inform the other Parties of this in the notice of termination. Any unused funds shall be delivered by hand, electronic transfer, or certified mail to the respective Funding Parties and the NMISC.

c. A Party’s withdrawal from this Agreement will not terminate the Agreement among

the remaining Parties. The Funding Parties’ Yearly Contribution, the NMISC’s Annual Funding, and Upper Basin Entities’ Activities will be re-negotiated between the remaining Parties and agreed upon in writing. If a revised Yearly Contribution, Annual Funding, and Activity arrangement cannot be reached, the Agreement shall terminate when all the remaining Parties’ responsibilities for that current Water Year are complete.

d. No penalty shall accrue to any Party that provides notice of termination and no Party

shall be obligated to implement Activities or contribute Funds for Activities not already authorized.

9. Existing Law.

a. Reaffirmation of Existing Law. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to, nor shall this

Agreement be construed to, diminish or modify the right of any Party under existing

13

federal and/or state law, including, without limitation, the 1922 Colorado River Compact, the 1948 Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2006 Consolidated Decree in Arizona v. California (547 U.S. 150). The Parties hereby affirm the entitlement and right of each State under such existing law to use and develop Colorado River System water.

b. Consistency with Existing Law. This Agreement is consistent with and shall be interpreted to be consistent with, existing federal and/or state law, particularly Article III(a)-(e) inclusive of the 1922 Colorado River Compact, Sections 601 and 602(a) of the Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968 (43 United States Code §§ 1551 and 1552(a)), and all applicable rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.

10. Governing Law. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to conflict with the laws of the state in which each Party resides. Should there be a conflict between the Parties concerning rights and obligations under this Agreement, each state’s respective state law shall apply. If a court of competent jurisdiction determines there is a conflict between state law and federal law under this Agreement, federal law shall prevail.

11. Authority. Each person executing this Agreement has the full power and authority to bind

the respective Party to the terms of this Agreement.

12. Sovereign Immunity and Limitations. By executing this Agreement the Parties expressly reserve sovereign immunity and specifically retain all immunities available to them as sovereigns, governmental entities, or political subdivisions under the law of their respective states. The Parties further acknowledge that there are constitutional and statutory limitations on the authority of the Parties and their agencies or instrumentalities to enter into certain terms and conditions, including, but not limited to, the following: liability for damages; choice of law; conflicts of law; governing law; venue and forum-selection clauses; defense or control of litigation or settlement; liability for acts or omissions of third parties; payment of attorney’s fees or costs; additional insured provisions; dispute resolution, including, but not limited to, arbitration; indemnification of another party; and confidentiality. Any such provisions in the Agreement, or in any attachments or documents incorporated into this agreement by reference, will be binding on the Parties only to the extent authorized by the laws and Constitutions of their respective states. Designations of venue, choice of law, governing law, enforcement actions, and similar provisions shall not be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity. The Parties agree that any ambiguity in this Agreement shall not be strictly construed, either against or for any Party, except that any ambiguity as to sovereign immunity shall be construed in favor of sovereign immunity.

13. Availability of Funds and Legislative Authorization. Each payment obligation of the Parties is conditioned upon authorization and the availability of funds which are appropriated or allocated for the payment of this obligation and which may be limited for

14

any reason including, but not limited to, congressional, legislative, gubernatorial, or administrative action. If authorization and/or funds are not allocated and available for continued performance of the Agreement, the Agreement may be terminated by the Parties at the end of the period for which the funds are available. No penalty shall accrue to the Parties in the event this provision is exercised, and the Parties shall not be obligated or liable for any future payments due or for any damages as a result of termination under this Section.

14. Severability. Should any portion of this Agreement be judicially determined to be illegal or unenforceable, the remainder of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect, and the Parties may renegotiate the terms affected by the severance.

15. Third-Party Beneficiary Rights. The Parties do not intend to create in any other

individual or entity the status of third-party beneficiary. This Agreement shall not be construed to create such status. The rights, duties, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall operate only among the Parties to this Agreement, and shall inure solely to the benefit of the Parties to this Agreement. The provisions of this Agreement are intended only to assist the Parties in determining and performing their obligations under this Agreement.

16. Waiver. The waiver of any breach of any term or condition in this Agreement shall not

be deemed a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach. Failure to object to a breach shall not constitute a waiver.

17. Indemnification. Each Party to this Agreement shall assume the risk of any liability

arising from its own conduct. The Parties do not agree to insure, defend, or indemnify each other.

18. Miscellaneous.

a. Appropriation Contingency. Nothing in this Agreement may be construed to obligate

the Funding Parties or the NMISC to any current or future expenditure of resources in advance of the availability of appropriations.

b. Modification/Amendments. The Parties may mutually agree in writing to modify or amend the terms of this Agreement. Modifications and/or amendments to this Agreement will be valid only if they are in a written document signed by all the Parties hereto.

c. Notices. All notices required to be given hereunder shall be in writing and hand delivered, or sent by certified U.S. mail, to such Party’s representative or designee at the addresses set forth below. E-mail notices will be accepted, but not as the singular form of notice. Any Party from time to time may by written notice substitute addresses

15

or persons to whom such notices shall be sent. Unless otherwise provided herein, all notices shall be effective upon receipt.

Dr. Mohammed Mahmoud CAWCD P.O. Box 43020 Phoenix, Arizona 85080-3020 [email protected] Mr. Christopher Harris Six Agency Committee c/o 770 Fairmont Avenue, Suite 100 Glendale, California 91203-1068 [email protected] Ms. Colby Pellegrino SNWA P.O. Box 99956 Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-9956 [email protected] Mr. Joe Busto CWCB 1313 Sherman Street, Room 721 Denver, Colorado 80203 [email protected] Ms. Candice Hasenyager UDWRe 1594 West North Temple Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 [email protected] Ms. Julie Gondzar WWDO 6920 Yellowtail Road Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002 [email protected] Ms. Kristin Green NMISC Bataan Memorial Building, Room 101 P.O. Box 25102

16

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504 [email protected]

d. Entirety of Agreement. This Agreement, comprised of 19 pages, and any associated attachments constitute the entire understanding of the Parties hereto.

e. Assignment. The Upper Basin Entities and the NMISC shall not assign or transfer their interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Funding Parties and/or the NMISC, as appropriate.

17

SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER AUTHORITY ________________________________________ ________________ John J. Entsminger Date General Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ________________ [ ] Date Director of Legal Services SIX AGENCY COMMITTEE ________________________________________ ________________ By Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ________________ By Date CENTRAL ARIZONA WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT ________________________________________ ________________ Theodore C. Cooke Date General Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ________________ By Date

18

WYOMING WATER DEVELOPMENT OFFICE ________________________________________ ________________ Harry C. LaBonde, Jr. Date Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ________________ Tyler M. Renner Date Assistant Attorney General State of Wyoming UTAH DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES ________________________________________ ________________ By Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ________________ By Date COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD ________________________________________ ________________ By Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ________________ By Date

19

NEW MEXICO INTERSTATE STREAM COMMISSION ________________________________________ ________________ By Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________________ ________________ By Date

december 28, 2017 notice of regular meeting of · pdf file10.01.2018 · december...

Documents