(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Implementation of the California water plan : appendixes A through F"

LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
DAVIS 




STATE OF CALIFORNIA 
The Resources Agency 

partment of Water Resources 



1969 



BULLETIN No. 160-66 



IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN 



Appendixes A Through F 



AUGUST 1967 



UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
DAVIS 

NOV IV 1967 

GOV'T. DOCS. - LIBRARY 



RONALD REAGAN 

Governor 

State of California 



LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
DAVIS 



WILLIAM R. GIANELLI 

Director 
Department of Water Resources 



STATE OF CALIFORNIA 
The Resources Agency 

Department of Water Resources 



BULLETIN No. 160-66 



IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN 



Appendixes A Through F 





AUGUST 1967 




RONALD REAGAN 




WILLIAM R. GIANELLI 


Governor 




Direcfor 


State of California 




Department of Water Resources 



This volume consists of the following: 



APPENDIX A - WATER REQUIREMENTS 

APPENDIX B - WATER SUPPLY AND OPERATION STUDIES 

APPENDIX C - LEGISLATION AND COURT DECISIONS 

APPENDIX D - ROLE OF ELECTRIC POWER 

APPENDIX E - THE COLORADO RIVER 

APPENDIX F - WATER PROJECT STATISTICAL DATA 



ii 



FOREWORD 



This volume contains six appendixes, prepared 
under the Coordinated Statewide Planning Program, in 
support and extension of the information presented in 
Bulletin No. 160-66, "implementation of The California 
Water Plan", published March 1966. They are described 
briefly in the following paragraphs. 

Appendix A, "Water Requirements", presents 
information on basic data, study criteria, and methods 
used in estimating future water requirements; discusses 
the relationships among study phases; indicates limitations 
of the information now available; and describes current 
analytical studies directed toward improving those estimates 
for inclusion in subsequent editions of the Bulletin No. 160 
series. 

Appendix B, "Water Supply and Operation Studies", 
discusses the development of basic water supply forecasts 
and the coordinated operation studies for the State Water 
Project-Central Valley Project System necessary to estimate 
the present and future dependable water and hydroelectric 
power yields of the system. 

Appendix C, "Legislation and Court Decisions", 
presents short descriptions of the more significant federal 
and state water legislation and court decisions during the 
period 1956 through 1966. 



Appendix D, "Role of Electric Power", presents 
and discusses forecasts of the California power load, 
technological developments in power production, the market 
for and value of hydroelectric power, sources and costs of 
power for water project pumping, the future role of power, 
and California's hydroelectric power resources. 

Appendix E, "The Colorado River", provides a 
discussion of the events leading to the United States 
Supreme Court decision in Arizona v. California , the 
impact of that decision on the West, basic water supply 
deficiencies in the Colorado River System, and a recognition 
of the need for future augmentation of supplies from sources 
outside of the Colorado River Basin. 

Appendix F, "Water Project Statistical Data", 
presents tabulations of certain physical and cost information 
on the present major water developments throughout the State. 

Each of these appendixes is self-contained with a 
minimum of cross referencing. The information provided is 
intended to be of statewide significance. 

The next edition of the Bulletin No. 160 series 
is scheduled for publication in December 1968. 



William R. Gianelli, Director 
Department of Water Resources 
The Resources Agency 
State of California 



STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

THE RESOURCES AGENCY 

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 



RONALD REAGAN, Governor 
WILLIAM R. GIANELLI, Director of Water Resources 
JOHN R. TEERINK, Deputy Director 



Bulletin No. 160-66, "implementation 

of The California Water Plan', was prepared 

under the direction of 

John M. Haley Chief, Statewide Planning Office 

Wayne MacRostie Chief, Planning Investigation Branch 

Appendix A, "Water Requirements ", 

Appendix B, 'Water Supply and Operation Studies", and 

Appendix F, "Water Project Statistical Data", 

were prepared within the Planning Investigation Branch 

by 

Donald K. Cole Senior Economist 

Maurice D. Roos Senior Engineer 

Jacob W. Holderman Associate Engineer 

Assisted by 

Glenn B. Sawyer Senior Land and Water Use Analyst 

James Randall Engineering Associate 

Louis R. Mitchell Senior Engineer 



Appendix C, Legislation and Court Decisions , 
Appendix D, "Role of Electric Power", and 
Appendix E, "The Colorado River", 
were prepared within the Office of the 
Chief Counsel, Power Office, and 
Staff and Services Management, respectively 
by 

James M. Carl Senior Attorney 

Fred W. Groat Supervising Electric Utilities Engineer 

W. Don Maughan Principal Engineer 



CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION 



IRA J. CHRISMAN, Chairman, Visalia 
WILLIAM H. JENNINGS, Vice Chairman, La Mesa 



JOHN P. BUNKER, Gustine CLAIR A. HILL, Redding 

EDWIN KOSTER, Grass Valley WILLIAM P. MOSES, San Pablo 
SAMUEL B. NELSON, Los Angeles NORRIS POULSON, La Jo 11a 
MARION R. WALKER, Ventura 



WILLIAM M. CARAH 
Executive Secretary 



WILLIAM L. BERRY, SR, 
Engineer 



APPENDIX A 
WATER REQUIREMENTS 



A-i 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

FOREWORD A-vii 

DESCRIPTION AND MEANING OF WATER REQUIREMENTS 

IN BULLETIN NO. 160-66 A-l 

DERIVATION OF AGRICULTURAL WATER REQUIREMENTS. . . . A-5 

Steps in the Analysis A-5 

Land Use Surveys A-6 

History A-8 

Field Survey Procedures A-9 

Preparation of Maps A- 10 

Area Measurement by "Cutting and 

Weighing" A-10 

Electronic Machine Computation and 

Tabulation Procedures A-ll 

Land Classification Surveys A-12 

Field Survey Procedures A-13 

Data Processing A-l4 

Urban Expansion on Agricultural Lands A-15 

Crop Market Outlook Study A-16 

Determination of Demand Levels A-17 

Conclusions A-20 

Fruits, Nuts, and Grapes A-20 

Vegetables. A-21 

Field Crops A-22 

Acreage Requirements A-22 



A-iii 



Page 

Unit Applied and Consumptive Agricultural 

Water Requirements A-24 

Unit Applied Water Requirements A-24 

Unit Consumptive Use of Applied Water .... A-25 

Specific Studies and Considerations of 
Agricultural Water Requirements by 

Hydrologic Study Areas A-26 

North Coastal A-27 

San Francisco Bay A-28 

Central Coastal A-29 

South Coastal A-29 

Sacramento Basin A-30 

Delta-Central Sierra A-30 

San Joaquin and Tulare Basin A-31 

North Lahontan A-31 

South Lahontan and Colorado Desert A-31 

DERIVATION OF MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

WATER REQUIREMENTS A-33 

Population Projections A-33 

Projections for Bulletin No. 2 A-34 

Projections for Bulletin No. 78 A-34 

Recent Population Projections A-37 

Population Projections for Hydrologic 

Study Areas A-39 

Unit Municipal and Industrial Water Use A-4l 

Urban Water Use in Five San Joaquin 

Valley Cities A-4l 

Industrial Water Use Studies A-43 



A-iv 



Page 

NET WATER REQUIREMENTS A-45 

LIMITATIONS OF INFORMATION CONTAINED IN 

BULLETIN NO. 160-66 AND WORK IN PROGRESS A-47 

Scope of Water Demand Studies Under Present 

Program A-47 

Necessity to Review Crop Market Outlook Study . . . A-48 

Reexamination of Population Estimates A-49 

Water Use Considerations A-51 

Status of Studies in Hydrologic Study Areas .... A-52 



FIGURES 

No. 

A-l Hydrologic Study Areas of California 

A-2 Land Use Legend 

A-3 Year of Most Recent Land Use Survey 

A-4 United States Geological Survey Quadrangle 
Depicting Land Use Survey Data 

A-5 Machine Computation Print Out Sheet Reporting 
Acres of Land Use by Various Categories 

A-6 Land Classification Legend 

A-7 Status of Land Classification Data 

A-8 United States Geological Survey Quadrangle 
Depicting Land Classification Survey Data 



A-v 



FIGURES (Continued) 



No. 



A-9 Machine Computation Print Out Sheet Report- 
ing Acres of Land by Various Classes 

A-10 Estimated Index of Per Capita U. S. Consump- 
tion by Major Food Classes 



TABLES 

No. 

A-l Future Yield Levels by Crops in Year 2020 

A-2 Total Irrigated Crop Acreages by Major Crop Cate- 
gories in California, i960 and 2020 

A- 3 i960 Populations of California Counties and 
Hydrologic Study Areas 

A-4 1990 Populations of California Counties and 
Hydrologic Study Areas 

A-5 2020 Populations of California Counties and 
Hydrologic Study Areas 



A-vi 



FOREWORD 

The primary purpose of this appendix is to present 
some of the basic considerations and information used in making 
the estimates of future water requirements shown in Department 
of Water Resources' Bulletin No. 160-66, "implementation of 
The California Water Plan", March 1966. 

The material in this appendix includes criteria, 
techniques, and methods used for estimating both municipal- 
industrial, and agricultural water requirements on a statewide 
basis and for the 11 hydrologic study areas reported on in 
Bulletin No. 160-66 (Figure A-l). Brief descriptions are 
presented of the relationships among study phases such as 
population projections, crop market outlook forecasts, land 
use and classification surveys, and other considerations leading 
to the estimates of net water requirements. 

The appendix will indicate the limitations of this 
information and briefly describe work in progress aimed at 
improving it for subsequent editions of this Bulletin series. 



A- vii 



DESCRIPTION AND MEANING OF 
WATER REQUIREMENTS IN BULLETIN NO. 160-66 

Very simply, agricultural water requirements are those 
quantities of water necessary for crop production. Because the 
aim of the Department's effort is to determine the need for water 
development, the main concern is with that portion of agricultural 
water requirements dependent on irrigation (applied water) rather 
than natural precipitation. Unless otherwise indicated, sub- 
sequent references to water requirements in this report connote 
applied water requirements. 

The basic approach for determining agricultural water 
requirements is to apply estimates of unit water use values 
(acre-feet of water per acre of crop) to crop acreage estimates. 
Similarly, per capita unit use values are applied to population 
forecasts in arriving at municipal-industrial water requirements. 

Before some of the considerations and procedures used 
in determining future water requirements are discussed in detail, 
several aspects of the information should be understood and 
clarified. These relate to water requirements as contrasted 
with economic demands; differentiation between applied and net 
water requirements; and areal interpretation of surplus or de- 
ficiency estimates for specific hydrologic study areas. 

The use of the term water requirements has, at times, 
been substituted too loosely and interchangeably with other 
terms, particularly economic demand. The latter is an ex- 
pression of market demand or the quantity of water that can 



A-l 



be sold at a given price under given market conditions. In 
a very strict sense, requirements have been associated with 
physical need. It takes, for example, so much water to 
grow a particular crop. As such, requirements establish an 
upper limit or maximum quantity of water necessary to support 
a given level of development. While this proves useful in 
pointing up apparent conflicts between regional supplies of 
water and potential use, it does not provide an indication 
of the amount of water that more realistically may be sold 
in light of anticipated water costs and ability to pay. 

Generally, the requirement figures referred to in 
Bulletin No. 160-66 fit neither the classical definition of 
economic demand nor the strict interpretation of water require- 
ments. The Department's estimates include both physical 
factors and some broad economic considerations. Among these 
are: knowledge of the extent and nature of irrigable lands 
and present land uses; estimates of future population growth; 
market outlook studies for California crop production; future 
land use patterns; and unit values of applied water associated 
with various types of anticipated development „ 

With the exception of the service areas of the 
State Water Project, however, these estimates do not reflect 
the full consideration of the economic constraints involved. 
More specifically, a cost-price relationship between probable 
water costs and payment capacity or ability to pay for water 
is not reflected in the estimated requirement levels, except 
as noted. There are many areas where water costs are now and 



A-2 



will likely remain comparatively low. In such instances the 
estimates, as given, will probably stand up under further 
analysis. In most cases, however, this and other judgments 
leading to a refinement of the figures in Bulletin No. 160-66 
must be substantiated and documented. The latter is a 
necessary step if the Department is to reach a level of 
comparability in its forecasts of future water demands 
throughout the State. 

Both applied water requirements and net water re- 
quirements are referred to in this appendix. The former 
represent the actual amounts needed at farm headgates and 
at urban distribution system intakes. These need modification, 
however, to allow for the possibility of reuse. This is 
particularly significant because the actual quantities of 
water necessary for import into an area, or available for 
export, are determined on the basis of net water requirements. 
The net water requirement consists of the quantity of water 
consumptively used plus irrecoverable losses. Consumptive 
use includes disposal through transpiration by plants and 
any evaporative losses. Outflow to the ocean and percolation 
of water to a ground water basin, where depth to water or 
quality considerations make reuse impracticable, are examples 
of irrecoverable losses. 

Another qualification concerns the interpretation 
of data for the separate hydrologic study areas. The 11 
hydrologic study areas for this report wore selected as large 
geographic units within which the watersheds possess similar 



A-3 



characteristics of streamflow, local water development, 
economic development, and water import requirements or water 
export potential. The selected study areas generally meet 
these requirements. Occasionally they do not. General 
statements made herein about a hydrologic study area may not 
apply to a specific subunit in that area. For example, the 
North Coastal Hydrologic Study Area possesses an extremely 
large surplus in developable water supplies, but the Round 
Valley-Covelo vicinity, within that study area, has an esti- 
mated future water deficiency. Variations in growth patterns 
and the uneven distribution of local water supplies account 
for this apparent anomaly. In future reports of the Bulletin 
No. 160 series it is planned to present information by major 
subdivisions or by specific water service areas of the 
hydrologic study area where necessary to diminish the possi- 
bilities of such seemingly inconsistent results. 



A-4 



DERIVATION OF AGRICULTURAL WATER REQUIREMENTS 

This section of the appendix sets forth the basic 
inputs that have gone into the estimates of future water re- 
quirements appearing in Bulletin No. 160-66. Some of the 
major considerations and assumptions behind the estimates are 
discussed including: basic land use and class data; crop 
market outlook study; urban expansion; unit use figures; and 
areal allocations of crop acreages. Following this, specific 
studies and considerations that apply to the individual hydro- 
logic study areas are discussed. 

Steps in the Analysis 
The most meaningful measure of the future need for 
water is obtained by determining estimates of economic or 
effective demand. In other words, the amount of water that 
consumers will be willing and able to buy at a given cost. 
Estimates of economic demand are determined as follows: 

1. Information is collected on present land use and 
suitability for future development. 

2. Economic development parameters, such as population 
growth and future crop market conditions, are 
evaluated. 

3. Estimates are made of the nature and magnitude of 
future agricultural land use development. 

4. Water requirements are determined by applying unit 
water use values to future crop acreage. 



A-5 



5. Based on these requirements, estimates of possible 
sources of water and probable costs are developed. 

6. The ability to pay for water is estimated, based upon 
the determination of payment capacities for specific 
agricultural crops. 

7. Water costs are compared with estimates of the ability 
to pay for water, and projected land development and 
associated water requirements are adjusted accordingly. 

As discussed previously, not all of these steps are 
reflected in the figures shown in Bulletin No. 160-66. In 
some cases, the analysis does not go beyond step four which 
represents the determination of water requirements only. One 
of the objectives of the Coordinated Statewide Planning Program, 
however, is to obtain comparability throughout the State within 
the scope of all the listed items. 

A more detailed discussion of some of the specific 
inputs that went into the estimates for Bulletin No. 160-66 
and some of the considerations influencing the allocation of 
those projections among the hydrologic study areas follows. 

Land Use Surveys 
The Department and its predecessor agencies have long 
engaged in the collection of land use information as the best 
means of pinpointing the location and estimating the quantities 
of water used. Accurate land use survey data, when segregated 
into categories to which valid estimates of water use can be 
applied, constitutes the basic foundation upon which practically 
all water development planning studies are based. 

A-6 



In the Department's standard land use survey legend, 
over 60 individual crop types, 16 native vegetation classes, 
5 major urban groupings, and 4 recreational water-using 
categories are recognized as having some unique basis for 
segregation (see Figure A-2). Actually, in many instances, 
the need for these detailed segregations are for economic and 
demographic as well as water use evaluations. The agricultural 
sector is segregated in detail in order to detect where acreage 
changes are occurring as well as trends in the plantings of 
specific crops. 

Rapid changes in the pattern of land use are occurring 
throughout most of the State. The San Francisco Bay Area and 
Southern California counties are experiencing accelerated urban 
expansion on agricultural lands while the Sacramento- San 
Joaquin Valley areas are experiencing large increases in 
irrigated agriculture. Since the season of use, quantities of 
total applied water needed and the consumptive water loss 
associated with these land uses are usually different, reliable 
methods to monitor change are essential. 

Conventional recurring land use surveys involving 
100 percent field canvass are by far the most effective, 
although a costly, means of detecting change. New, highly 
sophisticated, aerial photogrammetric interpretation techniques 
involving little field canvass show promise as a method to 
lower cost and time requirements without sacrificing needed 
accuracy. In the future, the land use data collection program 
of the Department will make greater use of the latter technique. 



A-7 



History 

It was not until the late 19^0' s that any attempt was 
made to obtain accurate measurements of land and water use on 
a statewide basis. During 19^7* the Legislature directed the 
State Water Resources Board to make an investigation of the 
water resources and present and future ultimate water require- 
ments of each of the river basins of the State. These studies 
were deemed essential to formulation of a comprehensive overall 
state water development plan. Under this broad directive, 
the then Division of Water Resources collected data from the 
most reliable sources available and compiled maps that depicted 
irrigated agriculture and urban development. The data that 
went into the resulting report, State Water Resources Board, 
Bulletin No. 2, "Water Utilization and Requirements of California", 
June 1955, came from numerous federal agencies, irrigation 
districts, county agricultural office files, and the like. For 
some areas of the State the data gathered for Bulletin No. 2 is 
still the best information of record. 

Following Bulletin No. 2, the next major land use 
data collection effort of significance was accomplished during 
the period 1954-56 for preparation of Department of Water 
Resources 1 Bulletin No. 58, "Northeastern Counties Investi- 
gation", June i960. The latter covered 15 counties of 
California that lie generally north of the City of Sacramento 
and east of the Coast Range. The study was done in consid- 
erably more detail than that for Bulletin No. 2. 



A-* 



In 1956, legislation was enacted (Water Code Section 232) 
which directed the Department to determine the present and 
future water needs of the respective watersheds of the State, 
the quantities of water originating therein, and the amount, 
if any, available for export. In response to this legislation, 
the Department initiated a series of very detailed land and 
water use studies that had as their goal the collection and 
presentation of land use, land classification, water use 
data, and apparent water rights for many of the river basins 
of the State. The data from these studies has been presented 
in numerous land and water use (Bulletin No. 9^ series) 
reports since 1956. In addition, recurring land use surveys 
have been conducted for many years in Southern California and 
the results presented in the Bulletin 24, 70, 71, 101, 102, 103, 
121, and 122 series of reports. Land use surveys of limited 
extent have also been conducted for specific investigations in 
many parts of the State. The current status of land use 
surveys in California is shown in Figure A- 3. 

Field Survey Procedures 

The land use surveys accomplished by the Department 
since 1956 have been field canvass surveys accomplished during 
the height of the agricultural growing season, usually June, 
July, or August. The major types of land uses mapped have been 
both irrigated and dry-farmed agricultural land, urban areas, 
recreational lands, and in some special instances various 



A-9 



types of native vegetation. The Department uses 1:20,000 
scale aerial photographs as working field maps upon which 
land use types are delineated and identified by use of special 
symbols. 

Preparation of Maps 

Maps are prepared from the aerial photographs to 
facilitate the analysis of data, for presentation in reports, 
and for aiding the acreage determination. However, there is so 
much variation in the scale of aerial photographs that measuring 
area directly from them is subject to considerable error. 

The delineations on the photographs are transferred 
to copies of 1:24,000 United States Geological Survey quadrangle 
maps. The transfer is accomplished through the use of an 
opaque projector, which allows proper adjustment of scale and 
accurate alignment of the delineations. After delineations 
are coded, transparent reproducible copies are made so that 
inexpensive diazo prints can be produced on demand. An 
example is shown in Figure A-4. 

Area Measurement by "Cutting and Weighing" 

One of the most rapid and accurate methods for 
measuring area on a map surface, particularly when many maps 
with numerous delineations are involved, is by the cutting 
and weighing process. Diazo copies of the land use maps are 
made, the weight of the total quadrangle is determined, each 
individual parcel is cut out and weighed, and then, because 



A-10 



the total area of the quadrangle is known, the acreage of each 
parcel can be determined through simple proportioning. The 
vellum paper used in the diazo printing process exhibits 
nearly constant weight per unit area. An analytical balance, 
calibrated to one- ten thousandth of a gram, is used for 
weighing. 

Electronic Machine Computation and Tabulation Procedures 

Prior to 1958, the computation and tabulation of land 
use information was accomplished using tedious hand methods. 
Since that time, the utilization of electronic data processing 
techniques has resulted in increased speed, greater accuracy, 
and lower unit cost. The location, identification, area and 
weight of the quadrangle, the weight of the delineated parcels, 
and the appropriate parcel identification coding are key 
punched onto computer cards. After the computer has made the 
computations, a standard machine tabulation print out is 
produced. 

There are many checks built into the program to keep 
errors to a minimum. One check is that the total weight of 
the sum of the pieces must be within +2 percent of the total 
weight of the quadrangle. In actual practice, these checks 
usually show variations of less than 1 percent. 

Figure A-5 is a sample of a land use print out sheet. 



A-ll 



Land Classification Surveys 

While land use surveys pinpoint the type and location 
of land and water use, land classification surveys identify types 
of land being developed and the capability of remaining undeveloped 
lands for further development. Such identification is especially 
important for projecting agricultural acreage and is becoming 
increasingly significant in urban and recreation planning. 

Over the years, the Department has developed a land 
classification system that is almost completely independent of 
economic judgments or other subjective evaluations. The present 
system employs the evaluation of the physical and chemical aspects 
of soil and land in making a classification. To the extent that 
the classification system has been consistently applied, the data 
collected by the Department will probably be valid for many years 
into the future. 

Since 1956, the departmental land classification criteria 
have not changed materially, and classification work done since that 
date is essentially comparable. For an example of the land classi- 
fication legend currently used by the Department, see Figure A-6. 
To the present time (1967), practically all of the North Coastal 
and Central Valley areas have been classified to these standards 
(Figure A-7). Although much of the land in the northeastern, 
central coastal, and southeastern portions of the State has not 
been mapped to these standards, completion of scheduled mapping 



A-12 



in the Central Coastal area will fulfill current statewide 
planning needs. 

Field Survey Procedures 

As in the land use surveys, departmental land 
classification surveys are conducted in the field using 
1:20,000 scale stereoscopic aerial photographs. The field 
surveys included a determination of the character of the soils 
as established by examination of materials from auger holes, 
road cuts and ditch banks, together with an evaluation of the 
types of native vegetation or the crops being produced. The 
presence of rock, high water table, alkalinity and other soil 
conditions such as dense clay or hardpan subsoil layers, fine 
clay or coarse soil texture, are all recorded by the field 
surveyor. In many areas, soil samples are taken and analyzed 
in the laboratory to ascertain the degree of alkali (sodic) 
condition or the presence of boron.. 

Since slope and microrelief conditions generally 
restrict the types of crops that may be grown and regulate the 
mode and efficiency of irrigation, the departmental legend is 
divided into three broad slope group categories: smooth 
valley lands, gently rolling lands, and gently to steeply 
sloping lands. A clinometer is used to measure slopes, and 
then slope groups are segregated by use of stereoscopic aerial 
photographs. Although 30 percent is considered about the upper 



A-13 



limit of slope for irrigation, this restriction is not appli- 
cable in certain areas of the State, particularly along the 
Southern California coast where avocados and citrus fruits 
are grown. 

After adequate familiarization with an area, obtained 
by measuring slopes, augering test holes and evaluating other 
soil characteristics, delineations are drawn on an aerial 
photograph in such a way as to define areas with similar 
characteristics. Each of these delineations is identified 
by the use of one or a series of symbols descriptive of the 
classifier's observations. Where available, the land classifier 
always utilizes United States Department of Agriculture and 
University of California soil surveys and Bureau of Reclamation 
land classification information to supplement his knowledge of 
an area. An example of a completed land class quadrangle is 
presented in Figure A-8. 

Data Processing 

Like the tabulation of land use information, all land 
classification field data is transferred to a United States 
Geological Survey quadrangle sheet. The quadrangles are copied, 
the parcels are cut out and weighed, and then the acreages are 
calculated and tabulated through electronic data processing 
techniques. The final product is a print out showing acreages 
of land in various land class categories systematically arranged 



A-14 



by any boundary subdivision desired such as an irrigation district 
or potential water service area. An example of the detail ob- 
tainable through the use of this procedure is shown in Figure A-9. 

Urban Expansion on Agricultural Lands 
In the course of making estimates of total irrigated 
acreage in the several hydrologic study areas of the State, it 
was necessary to estimate the extent of urban expansion to be 
anticipated on land that is now, or in the future would be, 
otherwise occupied by irrigated agriculture. This was necessary 
to determine possible limitations on lands available for irrigation. 

Present population density patterns were, in general, 
used as the basic guides for setting future densities. High 
densities were assumed in the Los Angeles and San Francisco 
metropolitan areas, where topographic limitations are already 
producing typically congested patterns. In the valley and desert 
areas, however, the ample availability of land for expansion was 
assumed to allow considerably lower densities. 

Since the forecasts were made for two key years in the 
future, 1990 and 2020, the densities were applied in a pattern 
of stages. Thus, in the period between i960 and 1990* areas 
presently occupied at less than full density were assumed to be 
brought up to the assumed standards, with rings of new develop- 
ment projected at lesser density to accommodate the residual 
population increase. In the succeeding period, to 2020, these 
rings were in turn brought to the standard densities, before 
again adding further acreage. With the exception of the Central 



A-15 



Valley area, these densities were applied on a county unit basis. 
In the hydrologic study areas of the Central Valley, densities 
were determined for each of the geographic subunits adopted for 
the Joint Delta Depletion Study of the Department of Water 
Resources and the Bureau of Reclamation, described in Appendix B. 

In most cases, numbers of rural residents were subtracted 
from total population forecasts before establishing urban popula- 
tions, densities, and areas. In the San Joaquin Basin and Tulare 
Basin Hydrologic Study Areas, however, densities were adjusted 
downward to account for the rural population. These adjusted 
densities were then applied to the entire population of each 
study unit. 

Crop Market Outlook Study 

Originally the crop market outlook study was initiated 
to provide long-term projections of market demands for 
California crops to be used specifically by the Department's 
Southern District in its evaluation of water demands associated 
with the State Water Project. It was also anticipated that the 
study would serve as a general guide in developing future crop 
patterns for various areas throughout the State. 

The Department has continued to use the crop market 
outlook study as a tool in the agricultural crop projection 
phase of its planning studies. In order to avoid the pitfall 
of projecting unduly large acreages of certain crops and 
underestimating others, an overall crop outlook serves to 
relate supply to demand, at least on a statewide basis. 



A-16 



Once an overall crop market outlook has been estimated 
for the State, crop acreages are allocated to regions based 
upon local agricultural trends and variations in physical 
factors of climate and soils. The resulting agricultural esti- 
mates serve as guidelines for more definitive studies within an 
area. It can be expected that such closer looks will result in 
some changes in the regional allocations of crop acreage and 
a refined crop market outlook study. 

The initial outlook study was completed in 1959. In 
1964, a quick review was undertaken and some adjustments made 
in the original forecasts as suggested by crop production trends 
in the intervening years between 1959 and 1964. Some of the 
major considerations and methodology that lie behind the original 
study are discussed briefly in the following paragraphs. 

Determination of Demand Levels 

In general, the study is limited to a historical review 
of production and consumption patterns; an analysis of the impact 
of population and income on consumption; and assumptions con- 
cerning California's share of the national market for each crop. 
Crops considered in the study included the following: 



A-17 



Fruits, Nuts and Vines Vegetables Field Crops 

Almonds Artichokes Alfalfa Hay- 
Apples Asparagus Cotton 
Apricots Broccoli Dry Beans 
Avocados Celery Field Corn 
Figs, dried Green Limas Hops 
Grapes Lettuce Potatoes 
Lemons Melons Rice 
Olives Onions Sugar Beets 
Oranges Sweet Corn 
Peaches Tomatoes 
Pears 
Plums 

Prunes, dried 
Walnuts 

Two sets of projections were made. The first being 
for comparative reasons and to serve as a general guide. It 
was assumed for this projection that per capita consumption and 
California's share of the expected market demand would remain 
unchanged from the levels of 1950-56. Thus, aggregate demand 
would increase at the same rate as population. All crops except 
sweet corn, field corn, and alfalfa were related to United 
States population. These three crops were related to California 
population because of the localized aspects of the market for 
these crops. 

The second set of projections involved an appraisal 
of per capita consumption for the various decades to the year 
2020. These projected rates of consumption were based on rates 
of consumption for families with incomes above $8,000, together 
with some consideration of the long-term historical trend of 
consumption for all families in the United States. After 
determining the estimated future per capita consumption rates 
during the period of analysis, the projected population of the 



A-18 



market area was applied to determine the aggregate domestic 
market demand likely to prevail. To this domestic market demand, 
import and export considerations were added whenever it was 
believed that these items were of significance to the total 
market demand. 

After determining total market demand for United States 
production, estimates were made of the percent of the total 
market demand that the State of California might be expected 
to acquire if the forces of economics were allowed to freely 
determine areas of production. It should be kept in mind that 
land limitations did not influence these projections. The pro- 
jections are intended to indicate the approximate economic limits 
beyond which producers would be faced with substantially reduced 
prices on a national scale, and the point beyond which California 
producers would likely find it difficult to produce on a com- 
petitive basis. It is recognized that changes in the comparative 
advantage of the new areas of production within California as 
compared to those outside of California are an important factor; 
however, these advantages could occur in either direction- 
increasing or decreasing California's comparative advantage. 

Historical trends were developed to show the percentage 
of a given crop that has been produced in California. For most 
of the crops, these trends covered a period of 3° years or more. 
In developing projections, cognizance was taken of those crops 
in which California demonstrated a definite economic advantage 
by assuming a continuing increase in the percentage of the total 



A- 19 



market which California farmers may be expected to acquire. 
However, it is expected that this comparative economic 
advantage for many California crops will tend to disappear 
over the long period of analysis. Thus the rate of growth 
in California's share of total market demand is expected to 
decrease, particularly as the year 2020 is approached. 

Because of the divergent changes that are predicted to 
take place in the various rates of per capita consumption over 
the period of analysis, a final check was made to see that 
total consumption per person did not exceed a reasonable amount. 
It was found that the per capita consumption of all foods was 
approximately the same as per capita consumption during the 
past 50 years. Essentially, changes will occur in the dietary 
mix, rather than poundage of food consumed. Figure A-10 
illustrates, on an index basis, the projected trends for all 
food classes. 

Conclusions 

Some of the conclusions reached in the study with 
respect to major crop groupings are as follows: 

Fruits, Nuts, and Grapes . Historical data developed 
in the outlook study indicate a considerable rise in the per 
capita consumption of nuts and citrus fruits with continued 
future increases due primarily to increased disposable real 
income. Deciduous fruits display a variation of per capita 
consumption patterns, although the overall trend is toward 
higher consumption. By year 2020, for instance, per capita 



A-20 



consumption is expected to average 20 to 30 percent higher than 
the 1950 to 1956 period. Additional technological improvements 
in both processing and handling will tend to encourage the con- 
sumption of fruits, both citrus and deciduous. 

Increased per capita consumption of wine will lead to 
increased demand for grapes, not only for wine varieties, but 
also for table and raisin varieties, all of which contribute 
sizable amounts of their total production to the wine industry. 
The general tendency of high income groups to consume more fresh 
fruits will lend additional strength to the future demand for 
grapes as average disposable income increases in the future . 

California's present dominant position as a supplier 
of most fruit, nut and vine crops is expected to continue. 
This, together with indications of a strong total demand for 
these products should assure an expanding market for California 
producers. 

Vegetables . The general upward trend in consumption 
of vegetables is expected to continue. This trend is the result 
of three major influences—population growth, increased real 
disposable income, and higher levels of technology in food 
processing. 

Consumption of all forms of processed vegetables will 
tend to increase because of greater urbanization and the 
resultant decrease in home vegetable gardens. In canned 
vegetables, however, the upward influence will be modified by 
a greater emphasis on frozen varieties. 



A-21 



The latter will have higher rates of consumption mainly 
because of higher disposable incomes. Refined technology will 
encourage the upward trend by increasing availability and 
lowering unit costs. Increased consumption of processed 
vegetables will also tend to reduce the consumption of fresh 
vegetables, except in noncompeting varieties such as lettuce 
and celery. 

Field Crops . In contrast with vegetables, nuts and 
fruits, field crops, as a group, are expected to show a decline 
in terms of per capita consumption. However, this decline will 
not be true for all field crops because of the wide variety of 
types and historical consumption patterns in this group. 

Dry beans, peas, and sugar beets are expected to 
become less important in the future while feed crops, influenced 
by the increased demand for livestock, and poultry products, will 
probably continue to climb. Notable among the latter will be 
hybrid corn and the more concentrated feeds. 

Field crops are generally low dollar-yield crops, 
and as such will be in a relatively poor position to compete 
for the available land and water. An important exception to 
this is cotton which, ignoring acreage quotas, can compete 
quite strongly for land in the central valleys. 

Acreage Requirements 

Once consumption levels had been determined, conversion 
was made to acreage requirements. The latter was done by 
applying productivity per acre to the consumption estimates. 



A-22 



Historical data were used to project productivity levels out to 
year 2020. As a result of these computations and based upon the 
original crop market outlook study, it was estimated that approx- 
imately 13 million acres would be irrigated in California by 
year 2020. 

As indicated earlier, however, the original projections 
have been reviewed and modified. Another estimate was made of 
California's share of the national market for certain crops 
and changes in yields. The result was a revised projection of 
11.1 million acres of irrigated land by year 2020. Work done 
by the University of California served as a basis for the 
revision. In the course of its studies, the University has 
projected crop yields to 1975. The projections reflect anti- 
cipated advances in technology and a price-cost relationship 
like that of 195^-57. For departmental purposes, the University's 
projections were extrapolated to 2020. The resulting yiald levels 
by crop are shown in Table A-l. Total irrigated crop acreages 
for the State are shown in Table A-2. 

As a subsequent phase of the Crop Market Outlook Study, 
statewide acreages were allocated to various regions within 
California. This was done to serve as a general guide to 
determine more localized growth rates and any corresponding 
need to develop additional water supplies. 

As a first step, the regional forecasts were made by 
extrapolating the shifts in crop acreages among different pro- 
ducing areas of the State during the past 30 years. These 



A-23 



initial allocations were further adjusted on the basis of 
specific considerations for each area. These included: the 
rapidity of urban expansion on agricultural land, the comparative 
advantages of land and water supply; and, in many instances, the 
results of detailed studies done at one time or another in 
various major agricultural areas of the State. 

Unit Applied and Consumptive Agricultural Water Requirements 
In planning for water project development, it is 
necessary to know water needs expressed in two different ways. 
One is an expression of quantity of water that must be made 
available at the actual place of use, the applied water require- 
ment, and the other is the quantity that must be delivered to 
the service area as a whole. As a general rule, this latter 
amount, the net water requirements, will be less than the 
former due to the possibilities of reuse of excess applied 
water within the boundaries of the service area. 

The net water requirement includes transpiration, 
evaporation, and all other irrecoverable losses associated 
with irrigation. 

Unit Applied Water Requirements 

The unit applied water requirement of an acre of crop 
land is comprised of consumptive use of applied water and the 
surface runoff and deep percolation that normally occur during 
irrigation. The percent of the total applied water that is 
consumptively used is called the irrigation efficiency. The 



A-24 



usual approach to determining unit applied water requirement 
is to apply an estimate of the irrigation efficiency to the 
unit consumptive use of applied water. In addition, the Depart- 
ment has made many measurements of applied water in conjunction 
with numerous investigations and water rights adjudications. 
Other data have been collected from the files of County 
Agricultural Extension Service offices. These data show 
tnat, as might be expected, unit applied water is lower than 
normal for a given crop where water costs are high and 
higher where water costs are low and there is an abundant 
supply. 

Unit Consumptive Use of Applied Water 

Prior to 1954, the Department depended largely on the 
Blaney-Criddle method for estimating the total consumptive use of 
water. This method required evaluation of historic mean monthly 
temperatures and the monthly percent of annual daylight hours. 
To obtain the consumptive use of applied water, these values 
were further modified to account for the consumptive use of 
natural precipitation. The water requirement determinations 
developed for Bulletin No. 2, "Water Utilization and Require- 
ments of California", were based largely on this approach. 

The succeeding Department program, initiated in 
July 1954, has the goal of obtaining accurate long-term monthly 
ana seasonal values of water requirements and evapotranspiration 
for the principal crops grown within the State. The work of 
the Department and the continuing research being conducted by 
colleges and universities, particularly the University of 



A-25 



California at Davis, has greatly broadened knowledge of the 
parameters that affect the consumptive use of water by crops. 
The values of consumptive use of applied water for individual 
crops used in determining the water requirements presented in 
Department of Water Resources' Bulletin No. l60- 66, "implemen- 
tation of The California Water Plan", are the results of 
these years of study. In general, the indicated studies since 
1954 suggest that Bulletin No. 2 values of consumptive use are 
significantly low for hot interior valleys and high for moist 
coastal areas. The resulting adjustments were included in the 
work done for Bulletin No. 160-66. 

In 1967, the Department will publish Bulletin 
No. 113-2, "Vegetative Water Use Studies in California", which 
will present new findings and discuss new techniques for 
measuring the consumptive use of applied water. 

Specific Studies and Considerations of Agricultural 
Water Requirements by Hydrologic Study Areas 

The foregoing sections discuss the standard pro- 
cedures and some of the considerations used by the Department 
for estimating agricultural water use. The actual details of 
procedures, depth of study of any particular data input, and 
overall scale of appraisal used in past studies varied in accor- 
dance with the objective and scope of the study. The older 
Department studies are more general in many respects. In early 
years, studies of future land use were confined to conditions 
of "ultimate" development, for the purpose of assessing 
maximum physical water needs within specific areas. Project 



A-26 



planning work in more recent years has made it necessary to 
estimate "staged" or decadal land and water use development 
expected over the next several decades. Several bulletins have 
been written with this objective in mind, including Department of 
Water Resources' Bulletin No. 142-1, "Water Resources and Future 
Water Requirements, North Coastal Hydrographic Area, Volume 1: 
Southern Portion", Preliminary Edition, April, 1965. 

Studies under the Coordinated Statewide Planning Program 
as well as specific project investigations provided most of the 
agricultural water requirements information presented in 
Bulletin No. 160-66. For some portions of some hydrologic 
study areas, however, staged land and water use projections 
have not been made. Therefore, to complete a picture of con- 
ditions in the State as a whole, it was necessary to make rough 
estimates for these areas. These reconnaissance-level estimates 
resulted from very limited considerations, usually because basic 
input data were not available. 

The published bulletins and specific studies which 
provided staged agricultural water requirement estimates and 
the portion of the study areas for which reconnaissance estimates 
had to be made are given in the following pages. 

North Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 

The present and future agricultural water requirements 
of the southern half of this area have been studied in detail, 
resulting in relatively reliable estimates of future water 
demands as defined on page A-5. These studies are reported in 
Bulletin No. 142-1. The area covered included the Trinity 



A-27 



River, Mad River-Redwood Creek, Eel River, and Mendocino 
Coast Hydrographic Units. The Russian River Hydrographic 
Unit, which is a portion of the San Francisco Bay Hydrologic 
Study Area, completed the study area. 

Similar studies had not been made for the remaining 
area, namely, the Smith River, Klamath River, Lost River-Butte 
Valley and the Shasta-Scott Valley Hydrographic Units. For 
these units, therefore, it was necessary to make reconnaissance- 
level estimates. Although they represent a minimum effort, a 
greater confidence has been placed on the estimates for these 
remaining areas than might otherwise be the case. The reasons 
for this can be attributed to information available at the time, 
including the results of recently completed land use and land 
classification surveys, allocations from the crop market outlook 
study, and the land and water use studies presented in Depart- 
ment of Water Resources' Bulletin No. 58, "Northeastern Counties 
Investigation", June i960. 

San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Area 

The Russian River Hydrographic Unit portion of this 
area was studied in detail and the resulting estimates of 
present and future agricultural water requirements were re- 
ported in Bulletin No. 142-1. 

No work of a comparable nature has been done for the 
remaining portion of this area„ Land classification and land 
use surveys have not been made since the late 194-0' s, except 
in the North Bay area. It was necessary, therefore, to make 
reconnaissance level estimates for Bulletin No. 160-66. 



A-28 



In the South Bay area, and to a significant extent in 
the North Bay area, urban development will dictate the limits 
of agricultural activity. Consequently, population and density 
estimates had great significance in the process of determining 
future agricultural water use. 

Central Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 

Future agricultural water use in the San Luis Obispo 
and Santa Barbara Counties 1 portion of this area was based 
upon Department of Water Resources' Bulletin No. 78, "investi- 
gation of Alternative Aqueduct Systems to Serve Southern 
California", Appendix D, "Economic Demand for Imported Water", 
March i960. 

For the remaining area, no land use or land classifi- 
cation surveys have been made with the exception of a few small 
areas. As a consequence, reconnaissance-level estimates had to 
be made based upon Bulletin No. 2, preliminary allocations of 
the crop market outlook study to this area, analysis of unit 
water requirements conducted in other areas, and United States 
Bureau of Reclamation studies of the San Felipe Division for 
San Benito and Southern Santa Clara Counties. Allowances were 
made for the possible effect expansion of the Bay Area metro- 
politan development would have on the availability of agricultural 
land. 

South Coastal Hydrologic Study Area 

Estimates of future agricultural land development ana 
water use were taken from Bulletin No. 78, Appendix D. The 



A-29 



present level of land and water use was obtained from recently- 
completed land and water use surveys. 

Sacramento Basin Hydrologic Study Area 

Concurrent with the preparation of Bulletin No. 160-66, 
a joint Central Valley Depletion Study involving the Department 
of Water Resources and the Bureau of Reclamation was being 
conducted in areas tributary to the Sacramento- San Joaquin 
Delta to determine the future reduction in streamflows that 
might occur due to additional water-using development. 

The depletion study work, described more fully in 
Appendix B, provided a basis for the water requirements re- 
ported in Bulletin No. 160-66 and continues to provide 
information for work currently being conducted under the 
Coordinated Statewide Planning Program. 

Results of recent land use and classification surveys 
were available for all the area except the Pit River drainage 
basin where it was necessary to use 1955-56 information re- 
ported in Bulletin No. 58* 

Delta-Central Sierra Hydrologic Study Area 

The estimates of irrigated land and the basis for 
the unit applied water requirements were obtained from the 
Depletion Study noted above. Much of the information for the 
latter was developed by the Department's long-term hydrologic 
studies of the Sacramento- San Joaquin River Delta. 



A-30 



San Joaquin and Tulare Basin Hydrologic Study Areas 

Projections of irrigated crop land and applied water 
requirements were developed during the course of the depletion 
studies. To a large extent, the basic work on crop projections 
used in these studies had been accomplished at an earlier date 
as part of the Coordinated Statewide Planning Program activities, 
Estimates of consumptive use of applied water and irrigation 
efficiencies were based on the latest information available 
from the Department's long-term Vegetative Unit Water Use 
Studies being conducted in the San Joaquin Valley. 

North Lahontan Hydrologic Study Area 

No studies had previously b3en made of staged water 
requirements for this area. Therefore, it was necessary to 
make reconnaissance-0.evel estimates based on information pre- 
sented in Bulletin No. 2, Bulletin No. 58, and the broad 
guideline provided by the Crop Market Outlook Study. 

South Lahontan and Colorado Desert Hydrologic Study Areas 

Estimates of future agricultural water requirements 
for these two areas were based upon Bulletin No. 78, Appendix D. 



A-31 



DERIVATION OF MUNICIPAL AND 
INDUSTRIAL WATER REQUIREMENTS 

Municipal and industrial water requirements are, 
essentially, the product of two factors: population and unit 
water use. Before each of these items are discussed in detail, 
it should be noted that the discussion pertaining to population 
estimates has been purposely placed in this section of the 
Appendix to facilitate the presentation of the derivation of 
municipal and industrial water requirements. It is recognized, 
however, that these projections have a much broader significance 
and applicability. They serve as the basic parameter for es- 
tablishing levels of future economic growth, the availability 
of land, the character of future regional growth patterns, as 
well as demands for agricultural products, power production, 
and recreational facilities. 

Population Projections 

Essentially, the Department and its predecessor, 
the Division of Water Resources, have made three statewide 
sets of population projections since the beginning of the 
Statewide Water Resources Investigation in 19^7: (1) Pro- 
jections of "ultimate" populations for Bulletin No. 2, 
(2) projections of statewide, regional, and county popula- 
tions, by decade to 2020, for Bulletin No. 78, Appendix D, 
and (3) the present set of projections. 



A-33 



Projections for Bulletin No. 2 

The first set of projections, part of the studies basic 
to Bulletin No. 2, was related to a physical inventory of lands 
available for various types of future development. Within this 
framework, the habitable areas within the basins immediately 
surrounding the Los Angeles, San Francisco Bay, and San Diego 
metropolitan areas would be completely occupied by urban develop- 
ment under "ultimate" conditions. Populations for these areas 
were derived by application of urban population densities. Pop- 
ulation increases in the rest of the State were made essentially 
proportional to the increases in irrigated acreage as determined 
from land classification surveys. The grand total of population 
obtained for California as a result of these studies was approx- 
imately 42 million. As will be seen later, this total is 
considerably less than the median 2020 estimate for the State 
used for the later Southern California Aqueduct routing studies. 
The reason for this difference can be explained by two 
factors: an underestimate of urban population densities in 
the future metropolitan areas; and a lack of consideration 
for development factors other than agriculture in the rest of 
the State. 

Projections for Bulletin No. ?8 

The second of the major sets of population projections 
made by the Department was that referred to above as related to 
the aqueduct routing studies. This set, made in 1958, consisted 
of high, median and low estimates for the United States, for the 



A-34 



State of California, and for ten multiple-county regions of 
California, as well as county and subunit projections within 
the nine-county Southern California region. The county and 
subunit populations were consistent with the median projections 
for Southern California. 

Forecasts for the United States, California, and 
Southern California were based on estimates of components of 
change — that is, births, deaths, and migration. Age differentials 
in all of these components are quite significant, requiring the 
separate computation of values for each of the several age 
groups in the population. Death rate changes, as well as ratios 
among such rates in different parts of the country, have been 
quite stable; thus, it was quite straightforward to make a 
single set of projections of these rates. 

Birth rates are considerably more variable than death 
rates. For that reason, three different sets of age-specific 
birth rate projections were made in each area, corresponding to 
different assumptions as to the relationship between future and 
past fertility levels, as reflected by the gross reproduction 
rate. The basic projections of this rate were for the United 
States, with ratios established to obtain the corresponding 
rates for California and Southern California. 

Migration is the most highly variable of the com- 
ponents of population change, particularly for areas less than 
national in scope. Projections of declining levels of migration 
to California and to Southern California were based on the 
assumption, that to a continually greater extent, natural 



A-35 



increase within each of these areas would provide the labor 
demands of a growing economy. Specific estimates of economic 
activity were made for 1970 and I98O only. Labor requirements 
were established on the basis of these estimates. 

Projections for each of the regions of the State 
other than Southern California, under high, median, and low 
assumptions, were made by assigning appropriate proportions 
of the total state populations for 2020 under these assumptions, 
and obtaining figures for the intervening decades by considering 
rational differentials among rates of growth to be anticipated 
in the various regions during different portions of the pro- 
jection period. The factors evaluated in both phases of this 
projection were quite complex and gave rise to assignments that 
involved a considerable amount of judgment. 

For purposes of estimating demands for water from 
the California Aqueduct System, the median populations for 
California and its regions were chosen. In the case of Cal- 
ifornia, the 2020 population for this series is 55,800,000. 

Population projections for the counties which make 
up the nine-county Southern California region, for the portions 
of each of those counties in the anticipated aqueduct service 
area, and for subunits within that service area, were made on 
a basis similar to that for the regions of the State. In the 
case of the urban complex centered in Los Angeles, the subunit 
projections were made by considering the expansion of that 
complex within the framework of a theory of urban growth 



A- 36 



developed by Hans Blumenfeld. This theory describes the ex- 
pansion of such a complex within the framework of a set of 
concentric zones surrounding the central nucleus of the complex. 
Subunit populations within the complex were obtained by geo- 
graphical subdivision of the populations indicated at each 
decade for the several zones. 

Subsequent to the completion of the aqueduct route 
studies, population projections were made in 1959 and i960 for 
the counties making up the regions other than Southern California. 
These were explicitly made as subdivisions of the several 
regional projections. For each region, assignments of 2020 
populations to counties were based on assessments of comparative 
economic opportunities in terms of assumed levels of employment 
of the various counties. County populations for intervening 
decades were obtained by interpolating percentages of regional 
totals. The shapes of the interpolation curves were defined by 
judgments concerning differential rates of change for the 
various counties. 

Recent Population Projections 

Early in 1965> a revised statewide population estimate 
was made that represented a departure from the median pro- 
jection prepared for Bulletin No. 78. The revision was 
necessitated by two basic factors: new information and 
changing rates of natural increase. In the first category 
was the publication of i960 census data not available at the 
time the projections were made for Bulletin No. 78; the 



A-37 



issuance of new population projections by the Department of 
Finance to year 198O; and more intensive local studies by the 
Department. The changing rates of natural increase were based 
upon reports of the U. S. Bureau of the Census, Current 
Population Reports , Population Estimates , Series P-25, No. 286, 
and Projections of the Population of the United States, by 
Age and Sex: 1964 to 1985, with Extensions to 2010 , published 
in July 1964. The manner in which the revised statewide pop- 
ulation projection was derived is discussed in the following 
paragraphs. 

Differentials in rates of natural increase between 
California and the United States, as used in the studies for 
Bulletin No. 78, were applied to more recent projections of 
national rates of natural increase, derived in this Department 
from the above-mentioned Census Bureau birth and death rates. 
The Census Bureau birth rates, chosen in consultation with 
population specialists of the Department of Finance, were those 
identified in Series C in the indicated census report. 

The Series C rates represent a significant reduction 
from those basic to the Bulletin No. 78 median projections, 
particularly in the early portion of the projection period. 
They reflect an actual and unanticipated decrease in birth 
rates in the six years following the Bulletin No. 78 studies. 
After 1995* however, estimated birth rates are higher under 
Series C than those for the median projection in Bulletin No. 78, 
The reason for this is that in the latter, birth rates were 
depicted as decreasing to year 2010, whereas in Series C, birth 



A- 38 



rates remain essentially unchanged after year 1970. The Census 
Bureau assumption took account of almost 10 years of death 
records indicating a practically constant mortality rate after 
1955. This assumption was based, as well, on studies of causes 
of deaths which gave little hope for significant future develop- 
ments in combating the degenerative diseases. These diseases 
account for a large and growing proportion of deaths, and are 
responsible for the maintenance of overall mortality rates at 
current levels. 

Volumes of net migration to California, in the absence 
of more adequate indicators of determining factors, were assumed, 
for the current study, to be the same as given in Bulletin No. 78, 

The result of the statewide population study, as out- 
lined above, showed a 2020 population for California of about 
54,000,000. 

Population Projections for Hydrologic Study Areas 

In addition to the state total, future estimates of 
population have been made for counties and hydrologic study 
areas. Figures for i960, 1990, and 2020 are shown in 
Tables A-3, A-4, and A-5. In Table A-3 the populations for 
i960 consist of county totals, to the nearest hundred persons, 
as given by the United States Bureau of the Census for that 
year . Assignments of partial county populations to appropriate 
hydrologic study areas were made on the basis of the location 
of census county divisions; in some cases reference was made 
to even finer subdivisions of the published data. 



A- 39 



Like the agricultural crop projections, much of the 
information necessary for making projections for subdivisions 
of the State had been or was developed in connection with 
specific, local studies. For the most part, these were done 
by programs or investigations of the Department of Water 
Resources. In the North Coastal Hydrologic Study Area, for 
example, the Department's Bulletin No. 142-1 served as a 
basis for the projections, although supplemented by work done 
by U. S. Army Corps of Engineers in San Francisco. 

Similarly, the joint Central Valley Depletion Study 
provided population data to segments of the North Coastal and 
San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Areas, as well as major 
portions of the North Lahontan, Sacramento Basin, Delta-Central 
Sierra , San Joaquin Basin, and Tulare Basin Hydrologic Study 
Areas. 

Population projections for those counties and portions 
of counties within the South Coastal Hydrologic Study Area were 
originally based upon Bulletin No. 78. Revisions were made for 
Bulletin No. 160-66, however, to reflect actual changes that 
had occurred between the publication dates of the two bulletins. 
Statistics from the Department of Finance, including their pro- 
jections to year 1980, served as a basis for the revisions. 
A similar procedure was followed in arriving at the estimates 
for the Colorado Desert and South Lahontan Hydrologic Study 
Areas. 



A-40 



Various studies contributed to the population fore- 
casts in the Central Coastal Hydrologic Study Area including 
work done in connection with the South Bay Aqueduct; the 
Coastal San Mateo Investigation (Bulletin No. 138); the U. S. 
Army Corps of Engineers' Soquel Creek survey report; and work 
done specifically for the Coordinated Statewide Planning Program. 

Unit Municipal and Industrial Water Use 
The method for determining unit municipal and 
industrial water requirements has been to relate total water 
delivery as determined from records of water service agencies 
to population within the service area, arriving at a unit 
requirement expressed in terms of quantity of water per capita. 
This present gross per capita water requirement is then in- 
creased or decreased to reflect anticipated changes in the 
makeup of the urban complex. Special studies, such as one 
conducted in the San Joaquin Valley and which is described 
below, have given indications of changes in unit use that 
might be expected, as well as some of the problems inherent 
in the gross per capita water requirement approach to estimating 
future water needs. 

Urban Water Use in Five San Joaquin Valley Cities 

In March i960, the Department published an office 
report showing the per capita water use for five San Joaquin 
Valley cities. The study was intended to develop per capita 
water use for the total developed urban area and to identify 
those factors that have an influence on water use. Some of the 
conclusions reached were: 

A-4l 



1. The use of meters tends to decrease per capita use. 

2. As the irrigated acreage in the valley increases and 
the humidity rises, the per capita water use require- 
ment tends to be lowered. 

3. Municipal water service systems are frequently under- 
sized and fail to meet peak delivery demands. Per 
capita water requirements would generally be higher 
if the systems were redesigned to meet these peak 
demands . 

4. In the study area, unmeasured water used from private 
sources was estimated to be as much as 30 percent of 
recorded use. 

5. Conservation programs to stop "gutter-flooding" 
materially lower per capita use. 

6. All other factors remaining constant, the monthly 
pattern of per capita water use has a strong corre- 
lation to average monthly temperature. 

This study demonstrated that the evaluation of per 
capita water requirements has many pitfalls. Data are fre- 
quently lacking or inadequate. Census data, even in census 
years, is hard to evaluate as enumeration districts and 
municipal water service area boundaries do not typically 
coincide. It is frequently impossible to isolate all the 
water being used; thus surveys of this nature tend to develop 
low estimates. 



A-42 



Industrial Water Use Studies 

In order to improve the Department's knowledge about 
industrial water use, an industrial water use study was 
initiated in i960. Questionnaires were sent to an estimated 
27,000 manufacturing establishments asking for information 
regarding water intake; kinds of use within the plant; source 
of water; water treated, recirculated, and discharged; employ- 
ment and size of plant. About 20 percent of the establishments 
responded. The results of the study were presented in Depart- 
ment of Water Resources 1 Bulletin No. 124, "Water Use by 
Manufacturing Industries in California, 1957-59". In summary, 
the report found: 

1. Brackish water is used in 13 counties and amounts to 
approximately 46 percent of all intake water reported 
as used for manufacturing. 

2. A relatively few major industry groups use most of 
the water. Among these, the food and kindred products 
group has the highest fresh water use; however, if 
brackish water is included, the petroleum refining 

and related industries group has the highest total use, 

3. During the period from 1957 through 1959 » manu- 
facturing industries used about 917*000 acre-feet 
of fresh water annually. 

4. The South Coastal area has the highest manufacturing 
water use in the State at about 266,000 acre-feet 
annually. The San Francisco Bay area total was 
253,000 acre-feet. 



A-43 



The above industrial survey is one of a series of 
studies to refine municipal and industrial water use estimates 
by accounting separately for the major components of urban 
water use. 



A-44 



NET WATER REQUIREMENTS 

As used in Bulletin No. l60- 66, net water requirements 
are the sum of the consumptive use of applied water and the 
portion of the excess applied water that becomes unavailable 
for reuse in the area, i.e., irrecoverable losses. Consumptive 
use is loss through evaporation and transpiration. Irrecoverable 
losses may occur when applied water percolates into ground water 
of poor quality, empties into water bodies of poor quality, or 
the ground water level to which it moves is at too great a 
depth for economic extraction. They may also occur when 
surface water return flows empty into stream systems from 
which it is impractical to redivert within an area. However, 
in the latter case, these waters often become accretions to 
downstream areas and are available for reuse. 

Part of the irrecoverable loss of many areas is a 
portion of the developed water that can best be termed 
"transport water". This is the quantity necessary to fill 
the distribution canals of a surface water diversion system. 
In many systems this quantity flows out of the area, unused, 
after the irrigation season. 

In Bulletin No. 160-66, net water requirements apply 
to both agricultural and urban water needs. They were developed 
for each hydrologic study area based upon estimates of con- 
sumptive use of applied water and judgment evaluation of 



A-45 



irrecoverable losses in the study area. More reliable estimates 
will be available when current studies, which will divide each 
hydrologic study area into a number of individual service areas, 
will permit a more thorough appraisal of irrecoverable losses. 



A- 46 



LIMITATIONS OF INFORMATION CONTAINED IN 
BULLETIN NO. 160-66 AND WORK IN PROGRESS 



Bulletin No. 160-66 is the first of a new series being 
published by the Department of Water Resources. The series will 
maintain the statewide water resources planning and development 
picture on a current basis. It will point up the needs for project 
services for various regions within the State and the magnitude 
and timing of future developments to meet those needs. 

To do this, the information reported should be equally- 
reliable and on a comparable basis throughout the State. In 
this respect, the water requirements reported in Bulletin 
No. 160-66 leave something to be desired. Both the amount of 
basic data available and the thoroughness of analysis vary among 
areas. As a consequence, some of the projected water requirements 
incorporate considerations that others do not. Work done in 
connection with the State Water Project service areas, for example, 
include an explicit analysis of the ability to pay for water and 
costs of water in the derivation of cropping patterns and associated 
water quantities. Comparable studies have been conducted for 
specific investigations in other areas. In many others, however, 
economic constraints affecting agricultural development have 
either not been considered or not documented. 

Scope of Water Demand Studies Under Present Program 

To correct this situation, the Department, under the Land 
Use and Classification Surveys Program and the Coordinated Statewide 
Planning Program, is making a systematic attempt to cover the entire 



A-47 



State on a comparable study level. To accomplish this, the five 
districts of the Department have been subdivided into four study 
areas. Each of these areas will be analyzed with a similar 
product in mind. Content and procedures will be standardized. 
The end product will be projected water demands through year 2020. 
These will be derived for both urban and agricultural purposes. 
Basic land use and class data will be updated and work scheduled 
to coordinate with the analytical phase of the program. The latter 
will include population and industrial projections; crop pattern 
forecasts; payment capacity analysis; identification of possible 
sources of water supply and associated water costs; determination 
of demand schedules within the range of prices corresponding to 
the estimates of water costs; and, finally, a determination of 
net water demands. 

Necessity to Review Crop Market Outlook Study 
Some of the specific data basic to the water demand 
studies need to be reevaluated in some detail. The Crop Market 
Outlook Study is a case in point. Although a recent revision of 
this study was incorporated in the projections of Bulletin 
No. 160-66, it is felt that further analysis is warranted. 
Changes are occurring so rapidly in American agriculture, both 
in the technical and policy fields, that a continuing effort 
must be made to keep abreast of these changes. The impact of 
foreign markets, in particular, must be thoroughly analyzed. 
Just a few years ago, there was concern over the large food 
surpluses in this country. Now there is concern over the extent 



A-48 



of their disappearances, largely as a result of increases in 
our food exports. These and other considerations could have a 
very significant impact on the Department's crop projections and 
estimates of future water demands. 

Reexamination of Population Estimates 
With respect to population estimates, several aspects 
require reexamination in view of both incompletely verified 
assumptions, and of changed judgments concerning certain com- 
ponents of change. The most crucial problem, from a conceptual 
point of view, has to do with expected levels of migration. Up 
to the present time, the determinants of migration have been 
expressed only in very general terms. It is intended to express 
these determinants with much greater precision. It is the belief 
of many demographic experts that the primary influence determining 
migration is differential economic opportunity, and that this 
opportunity can be most effectively expressed in terms of employ- 
ment levels. For that reason, as well as for directly determining 
industrial water demands, the Statewide Planning Office is engaged 
in an industrial outlook study which will establish anticipated 
levels of future industrial production and employment. The em- 
ployment data will be converted, through allowances for unemploy- 
ment and nonlabor force components, into employment -related 
populations. To this will be added the population attracted to 
California suDsequent to retirement. Migration between any two 
dates will then consist of the excess or deficiency of the total 
population so determined, as compared with that resulting from 
the application of assumed birth and death rates to the population 
at the beginning of the period. 

A-49 



Further developments have occurred to require changes 
in vital rates (particularly birth rates) in making future pro- 
jections of California's population. Continuing reductions in 
the experienced birth rates have prompted the Department of 
Finance to recommend a change to the Census Bureau's lower 
Series D as the standard for California projections. In addition, 
the Census Bureau has made certain revisions in the method of 
determining the birth rate series which had the effect of 
further lowering the estimated number of births to be anticipated 
in the next 20 years. Finally, the question of differentials in 
vital rates between California and the rest of the United States 
should be examined in light of experience over the considerable 
number of years since the studies which were made for Bulletin 
No. 78. 

The preparation of a set of consistent projections for 
the major regions of California is equally as important as the 
need to revise the forecasts for the entire State. Fundamental 
to this task is the development of a consistent set of assumptions 
and procedures. To achieve this consistency will require an 
objective assessment of the relative growth prospects of the 
various regions of the State and of the dynamic factors operating 
in each. It is anticipated that the industrial outlook study, 
including an analysis of regional growth characteristics, will 
serve as a basis for making regional allocations of population. 



A- 50 



Water Use Considerations 

Basically, unit municipal and industrial water require- 
ments have been developed by collecting and evaluating historic 
gross water deliveries to municipal water systems and relating 
these to appropriate populations. This approach, however, 
permits little more than generalities regarding the character- 
istics of urban water use and the importance of those factors 
likely to affect future changes. Little information has been 
collected or evaluated to correlate urban water use with the 
domestic, commercial, or industrial components of an urban complex, 
Departmental studies, however, demonstrate a need for this type 
of information. They indicate that there are great variations 
in per capita water rates from city to city and from year to 
year under apparently similar conditions. 

To improve the reliability of water demand estimates, 
the various causative factors affecting the level of water use 
are being analyzed. This is a follow-up on a study done for 
the Department by the MevA Corporation, entitled "Domestic Water 
Use Planning", October 1965. In addition to suggestions in that 
report, consideration is being given to such items as the effect 
of price, metering and personal income on unit water use rates. 

The studies reported in Bulletin No. 160-66 indicated 
the need to emphasize the planning for and designing of major 
water transportation facilities. This will require the develop- 
ment of reliable estimates of peak water delivery demands. This, 



A-51 



in turn, will require better information on monthly rates of 
unit applied water and unit consumptive use of applied water 
than is presently available for both agricultural and urban 
development. In addition, future studies to determine water 
demand, by relating ability to pay for water with probable water 
costs, will require more reliable estimates of total seasonal 
unit applied water requirements for agricultural purposes. 

Finally, it was noted in the section on net water 
requirements that the latter should be based on consideration 
of much smaller geographic areas than was done for Bulletin 
No. 160-66 in order to account, adequately, for irrecoverable 
water losses. 

Status of Studies in Hydrologic Study Areas 
It was mentioned earlier in this appendix that one of 
the objectives of the Coordinated Statewide Planning Program is 
to develop estimates of future water demands for the entire State 
of California at a more or less uniform technical level. This 
would be done within the scope of the seven steps outlined under 
the heading, Derivation of Agricultural Water Requirements, 
Page A-5. 

In the context of this objective, work done to date 
varies in the several hydrologic study areas. In the San Francisco 
Bay and Central Coastal Study Areas, for example, only preliminary 
estimates have been possible. Reliable forecasts of water demands 
will depend on the completion of basic land use and classification 



A-52 



surveys. In addition, more work is needed in the San 
Francisco Bay Hydrologic Study Area relative to future unit 
use values of applied water for such important crops as grapes, 
prunes, and pears. Although a considerable portion of the 
fruit acreage in this study area has not been irrigated in the 
past, there are strong indications that if water were available, 
irrigation would become more widespread. 

Water demand studies in the Central Valley portion of 
California are more advanced than in the San Francisco Bay 
and Central Coastal Study Areas. This is a consequence of 
special studies and investigations that have been carried on 
in the Central Valley including the joint Central Valley depletion 
study previously mentioned. Some land classification work remains 
to be done in the Delta-Central Sierra Hydrologic Study Area. In 
the San Joaquin and Tulare Basin Hydrologic Study Areas, estimates 
of the rate of irrigation development require reexamination in the 
light of land use changes that have occurred since the date of 
the last land use surveys in 1957-58. In all study areas of the 
Central Valley, including the Sacramento Basin Hydrologic Study 
Area, existing estimates of future water requirements should be 
evaluated in light of probable costs of water and the ability to 
pay for water as was done for the service areas of the State 
Water Project. 

Only reconnaissance-level estimates were made of future 
water demands in the North Lahontan and northern portion of the 
North Coastal Hydrologic Study Areas. In the southern portion of 



A-53 



the latter, estimates of future water demands of the pulp and 
paper industry will require periodic review to determine the 
actual rate of growth of this new, large water user. 

An in-depth study of probable future growth in 
Southern California was made for Bulletin No. 78. The report 
served as a basis for the estimates of future water requirements 
shown in Bulletin No. 160-66 for the South Coastal, South 
Lahontan, and Colorado Desert Hydrologic Study Areas. Much 
of the basic data and information that went into Bulletin No. 78 > 
however, are now nearly ten years old. In an area such as the 
South Coast, where change has been rapid, periodic review and 
revisions, if necessary, must be made. This not only includes 
estimates of population totals but distribution. The latter is 
particularly significant in determining the extent of urban 
development on present and potential areas of irrigated agri- 
culture. The importance of such knowledge is not limited to 
the derivation of water demands in the South Coastal Area but 
to the extent of possible shifts in agricultural production to 
other areas of the State, particularly the San Joaquin Valley. 

The need for an analysis and evaluation of unit water 
use has been described above and is applicable to many areas in 
California, especially Southern California. 



A- 54 



FIGURE A-l 



NORTH COASTAL 
SAN FRANCISCO BAY 
CENTRAL COASTAL 
SOUTH COASTAL 
SACRAMENTO BASIN 
DELTA -CENTRAL SIERRA 
SAN JOAQUIN BASIN 
TULARE BASIN 
NORTH LAHONTAN 
SOUTH LAHONTAN 
COLORADO DESERT 




HYDROLOGIC STUDY AREAS 
OF CALIFORNIA 



A-55 



LAND USE LEGEND 



The following land use descriptions are divided Into five categories. With the exception of 
"miscellaneous", the first letter of the notation on each land parcel Indicates the category in which 
the description may be found. 



First Letter 



"R" 
"N" 



Section of Legend 

Agriculture 
Urban 

Recreation 
Native 






AGRICULTURE 

Each parcel of agricultural land use is labeled with a notation consisting basically of three 
symbols. The first of these is a lower case "i" or "n" indicating whether the parcel is irrigated or non- 
irrigated. This is followed by a capital letter and number which denote the use group and specific use as 
shown in Part A below. 



C SUBTROPICAL FRUITS 



F FIELD CROPS 



P PASTURE 



Grapefruit 
Lemons 
Oranges 
Dates 
Avocados 
Olives 

Miscellaneous sub- 
tropical fruits 



Cotton 

Safflower 

Flax 

Hops 

Sugar beets 

Corn (field or sweet) 

Grain sorghums 

Castor beans 

Miscellaneous field 



Alfalfa and alfalfa 

mixtures 

Clover 

Mixed pasture 

Native pasture 

Induced high water 

table native 

Sudan 



re 



D DECIDUOUS FRUITS AND NUTS 

1 Apples 

2 Apricots 

3 Cherries 

5 Peaches and nectarines 

6 Pears 

7 Plums 

8 Prunes 

9 Figs 

10 Miscellaneous or mixed 
deciduous 

12 Almonds 

13 Walnuts 

G GRAB'] AND HAY CROPS 

1 Barley 

2 Wheat 

3 Oats 

6 Miscellaneous and mixed 
hay and grain 



T T RUCK A ND BERRY CROPS 

1 Artichokes 

2 Asparagus 

3 Beans (green or dry) 

5 Cole crops 

6 Carrots 

7 Celery 

8 Lettuce (all types) 

9 Melons, squash, and 
cucumbers (all kinds) 

10 Onions and garlic 

11 Peas 

12 Potatoes 

13 Sweet potatoes 

14 Spinach 

15 Tomatoes 

16 Flowers and nursery 

18 Miscellaneous truck 

19 Bushberries 

20 Strawberries 

21 Peppers (all types) 



V VINEYARDS 
R RICE 
I IDLE 

1 Land cropped within the 
past three years but 
not tilled at time of 
survey 

2 New lands being pre- 
pared for crop production 

S SEMIAGRICULTURAL AND 

INCIDENTAL TO AGRICULTURE 

1 Farmsteads 

2 Feed lots (livestock 
and poultry) 

3 Dairies 

4 Lawn areas 



Special conditions are indicated by the folic 
Symbols and Explanati ons 
A ABANDONED ORCHARDS AND VINEYARDS 



PART B 
Ing additional symbols and combinatic 
Examples 



Condition such that renewal of cultural 
practices would restore economic production 

F FALLOW (tilled but not cropped at time of 
survey ) ' 

"F" following symbol of crop group most 
common in the area or that of last season's 
crop, if known 

S SEED C ROP 

Crops grown specifically for seed 

X PARTIALLY IRRIGATED CROPS 

Y YOUNG ORCHARDS AND VINEYARDS 

Production commercially insignificant due 

to Immaturity 

FRACTION intercropping 

Z RECLAMAT ION 

Lands being leached of harmful salts 



1D1-A Apple orchard previously irri- 
gated but now abandoned 



Fallow land with irrigation 
facilities in a truck crop 
area 



1P1-S Irrigated alfalfa seed crop 



1P3-X Partially irrigated mixed pasture. 
Crops Irrigated for only part of 
their normal irrigation season. 

1C3-Y Young nonbearlng irrigated oranges 
1D5-Y Peaches intercropped with barley 



A-56 



LAND USE LEGEND (continued) 



uc 



UI 1 
UI 2 



URBAN COMMERCIAL 
us establishments (offices and 



Miscellanec 
retailers) 
Hotels 
Motels 

Apartments, barracks (three family units 
and larger) 

Institutions (hospitals, prisons, reforma- 
tories, asylums, etc., having a reasonably 
stable 24-hour resident population) 
Schools (yards mapped separately if large 
enough) 

Municipal auditoriums, theaters, churches, 
buildings, and stands associated with race 
tracks, football stadiums, baseball parks, 
rodeo arenas, etc. 

Miscellaneous high water use (indicates a 
high water use not covered above) 



UI - URBAN INDUSTRIAL 

Manufacturing, assembling, and general 
processing 

Extractive industries (oil fields, rock 
quarries, gravel pits, public dumps, rock 
and gravel processing plants, etc.) 
Storage and distribution (warehouses, sub- 
stations, railroad marshalling yards, tank 
farms, etc.) 
Saw mills 
Oil refineries 
Paper mills 
Meat packing plants 
Steel and aluminum mills 

Fruit and vegetable canneries and general 
food processing 

Miscellaneous high water use (Indicates a 
high water use not covered above) 



UV 



URBAN VACANT 



Miscellaneous unpaved areas (vacant lots, 
graveled surfaces, playing fields, non- 
irrigated freeway strips, raw lands within 
metropolitan areas, etc.) 
Miscellaneous paved areas (parking lots, 
runways, freeways, oiled surfaces, flood 
control channels, tennis court areas, auto 
sales lots, etc.) 



UR - URBAN RESIDENTIAL 

One and two family units, Including trailer courts 

May be followed by Development Factor or Water Use 
Factor 

Example : 

UR 41 



rlater Use Fac 



tor J \- 



Development Factor 



Development Factor : 

Percent total 
Factor Houses per acre area developed 



Water Use Factor: 






5 to 2 


3 
3 


i ,., 
to 


4 
4 


5 
5 
b 


to 

t 


6 
6 
6 


7 


or 


more 


7 


or 


more 


l 


or 


more 


7 


V 


more 



75 - 


100 


SO - 


75 


75 - 


100 


■50 - 


75 


2b - 


50 


75 - 


IOC 


50 - 


75 


25 - 


50 


- 


2b 



20 


- 30 


30 


- 40 


40 


- 50 


50 


- 60 


60 


- 70 


70 


_ 8o 


80 


- 90 


90 


- 100 


U - URBAN 


ed Urban 


Areas 



RECREATION 



RR RESIDENTIAL 



Permanent and summer home tracts within a pri- 
marily recreational area. (The estimated num- 
ber of houses per acre is indicated by a numbe 
in the symbol.) 

RC COMMERCIAL 

Commercial areas within a primarily recrea- 
tional area (includes motels, resorts, hotels, 
stores, etc.) 



RT CAMP AND TRAILER SITES 



primarily recrea- 



NATIVE 

NV NATIVE VEGETATION 
NR RIPARIAN VEGETATION 



NW WATER SURFACE 



NC NATIVE CLASSES UNSEGREGATED 



A-57 



MISCELLANEOUS 



This section describes miscellaneous symbols 
which may relate to uses described in the preceed- 
ing four sections. 



ENTRY DENIED 
Permission to ente 
MILITARY AREAS 



not obtainable 



Indicates lands owned or controlled by the mili- 
tary and is used following the land use symbol. 



Example: iFl-M Irrigated cotton in 
military area 



Indicates all type 
private, and is us 
symbol. 



; of parks, both public and 
?d following the land use 



Example: 
MIXED LAMP USE 



iS4-P Irrigated lawn area 
within a park 



Indicated by percentages following land use 

symbols 



3o 



THE RESOURCES AGENCY 
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 

YEAR OF MOST RECENT 
LAND USE SURVEY 

JANUARY 1967 

SCALE OF MILES 




STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

THE RESOURCES AGENCY 

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 



FIGURE A-4 



16-20 




SACRAMENTO VALLEY FLOOR 
HYDROGRAPHIC UNIT 



1000 2000 4000 



LAND AND WATER USE 
1961 

LOS MOLINOS QUADRANGLE 



A-59 



FIGURE A-5 



^ 



""" 




^ 


1 'I 1 




jj - 






E ■ £ 


W,„ 




n * * 


III 1,1 






1« 












' < 






h 




<s: 


< . 






-It 




<~>J 





^■< 


z 


1/ 


■." 


CM 



1 




























_ «> 


























Q -1 


























< < 


























3 K- 





















































K 


































m 


























in 


























m 












































)oo! 


























-ZtO 


























><Oh 




















































» X 




























i 








* 




* 




* 



















* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


* 


















--H ^H 




-* ■* 


•* 


o o- 


ON 


















\l\ s\ 


in 






<t •* 


•* 


















lA in 


m 


















in 





























Q 




























Z 
< 


D 


























- 1 


ii 























































111 

1- 






















































< 































s 








* 




* 




* 










(£ 









* 


* 


* 


* 


+ 












tr 


-J 










<t ■* 


-* 


On 


ON 
















Ifl m 


m 






-t .* 


-* 











Z 




z 

Q 
3 
J 

Z 






m m 


m 




















S 




♦ 



























* 


* 














* 


* 










•* ■* 


J- 














r-1 CO •* 


r>- r- 


*d in «o o> 






< 


















cm o in 
































<n 



































z 




























Q 


























Ul 




























□ 




























z 
< 


a 
























* 


J 
Q 






















































K 


■! 




* 






















< 





* 


* 














* 


* 









J 


■* ■* 


-* 














h no 


r- r- 


■n in %o on 




IT 


















eg en m 








'■'■ 






















en 






u 

z 



z 


























©""" 


en 
















m in 


in 


in tn m m 








©""' 




























>- 




(?""" 




























« i 


















































































DC 






















































"I 




























Z> 


!s 






















CM 






-* 




> 








> 




•-• <*> 


o 








;,j 


a 




Z 




o 




z 




a a 


t- 


O Q O O 




ON 


















m 


























ON 








"™io 


















00 








< 


























x a 




















































Ul Q « 


























OOI 




































-» 






























































































OHOIM 


CM 








cm 
















«"°03 


m 








m 


















o 








o 
















Q U 


cm 








oj 
















< tn 


1 








1 
















O 3 


•o 








•& 














.v z 


"- 1 























A-60 



LAND CLASSIFICATION LEGEND 



FIGURE A-6 



Each land parcel delineated on the "Classification of Lands" figures is 
classified in one of four general categories — urban, recreational, irrigable, or mis- 
cellaneous--and is labeled accordingly. These categories and the related symbols are 
explained in the following sections. 



URBAN AND RECREATIONAL LANDS 



This section defines the urban and recreational classes as indicated by 
symbols on the figures. Some of the&e lands, though well suited or presently used 
for recreational purposes, are also mapped as to Irrigability. On these lands the 
irrigable class symbol appears under the recreational class as a fraction. 



Existing and potential permanent 
and summer home tracts within a 
primarily recreational area. The 
estimated number of houses, under 
conditions of full development, 
is indicated by a number in the 
symbol, i.e., RR-3 is suitable for 
three houses per acre. 

Existing and potential picnic, camp 
and trailer sites within a pri- 
marily recreational area. 



Existing and potential commercial 
areas which occur within a pri- 
marily recreational area and which 
include motels, resorts, hotels, 
stores, etc. 

Existing race tracks, fairgrounds, 
and private, city, county, state, 
and federal parks. 

The total area of cities, towns and 
small communities presently used 
for residential commercial, recrea- 
tional, and industrial purposes. 



IRRIGABLE LANDS 

Irrigable lands are identified by notations which begin with a letter "V" 
"H", or "M". These symbols indicate the general slope conditions, and may appear 
alone or followed by (other) modifying symbols. The slope conditions indicated by 
these letters are: 



These lands are level or slightly 
sloping and vary from smooth to 
hummocky or gently undulating relief. 
The maximum allowable slope is 6 
percent for smooth, reasonably large 
bodies lying in the same plane. 



These are lands with greater slope 
and/or relief than those of the "V" 
class. They vary from smooth to 
moderately rolling or undulating 
relief. The maximum allowable slope 
is 20 percent for smooth, reasonably 
large bodies lying in the same plane. 



These are lands with greater slope 
and/or relief than those of the "H" 
class. They vary from smooth to 
steeply rolling or undulating re- 
lief. The maximum allowable slope 
is 30 percent for smooth, reasonably 
large bodies lying in the same plane. 



The description below applies to all '"V", "H", and "M" lands on which 
slope symbols appear by themselves: 

Have soils of medium or deep effective root zones; are permeable 
throughout; are relatively free of salinity, alkalinity, rock, or 
other conditions which would limit crop adaptability; are suitable 
for all climatically adapted crops, being limited only by topo- 
graphic conditions. 



A-61 



FIGURE A-6 



LAND CLASSIFICATION LEGEND (continued) 






IRRIGABLE LANDS (Continued) 

The symbols below, appended to "V", "H", or "M", indicate the described modifying conditions 



Indicates the presence of an excess 
of soluble salts or exchangeable 
sodium in slight amounts, which 
limits the present adaptability 
of these lands to crops tolerant 
to such conditions. The applica- 
tion of small amounts of amendments 
and some additional water over and 
above crop requirements to leach 
out the harmful salts may be required. 

Indicates the presence of an excess 
of soluble salts or exchangeable 
sodium in sufficient quantity to 
require the application of moderate 
amounts of amendments and some addi- 
tional water over and above crop 
requirements to effect reclamation. 

Indicates the presence of an excess 
of soluble salts or exchangeable 
sodium in sufficient quantity to 
require the application of large 
amounts of amendments and some 
additional water over and above 
crop requirements to effect recla- 
mation. 

Indicates shallow depth of the 
effective root zone, which in gen- 
eral limits use of these lands to 
shallow-rooted crops. 

Indicates the presence of a high 
water table, which in effect limits 
the present crop adaptability of 
these lands to pasture crops. 
Drainage and a change in irrigation 
practice would be required to affect 
the crop adaptability. 



L Indicates fairly coarse textures 

and low moisture-holding capaci- 
ties, which in general make these 
lands unsuitable for production of 
shallow-rooted crops. 

i Indicates very fine textures, which 
in general make these lands best 
suited for production of shallow- 
rooted crops. 

^ Indicates enough rock on the sur- 
face or within the plow zone to 
limit use of the land for culti- 
vated crops. 

-B Indicates low- lying basin and seep 
areas . 

-(L) Indicates ground cover varying 

from a light to moderately dense 
growth of low brush through a 
low-density growth of medium- 
height trees. 

-(M) Indicates ground cover varying 

from a high-density growth of low 
brush to a moderately dense growth 
of medium-height to tall trees. 

-(H) Indicates ground cover varying 
from a high-density growth of 
tall brush (raanzanita, etc.) and 
or medium-height trees to a very 
dense growth of large trees. 

-2,-4,-6, or -8 Number indicates, in 
feet, the average difference be- 
tween highs and lows due to micro- 
relief. 



MISCELLANEOUS LANDS 



Presently forested lands, or lands 
subject to forest management, which 
meet the requirements for irrigable 
land but which, because of climatic 
conditions and physiographic posi- 
tion, are better suited for timber 
production or some type of forest 
management program rather than for 
irrigated agriculture. 

Swamp and marsh lands which usually 
support a heavy growth of phrea- 
tophytes and are covered by water 
most of the time. 



/A Smooth lying valley lands which are 
affected by such heavy concentra- 
tions of salts that further detailed 
studies would be required to deter- 
mine the feasibility of reclaiming 
these lands for irrigated agricul- 
ture . 

N Includes all lands which fail to 

meet the requirements of any of the 
foregoing classes. 



A-62 



FIGURE A-7 



STATUS OF LAND 
CLASSIFICATION DATA 

JANUARY 1967 




ADEQUATE DATA 

ADDITIONAL FIELD WORK REQUIRED 
TO MEET FUTURE PLANNING NEEDS 

DATA INADEQUATE. 

RESURVEY NECESSARY FOR FUTURE 

PLANNING- 



STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

THE RESOURCES AGENCY 

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 



16-20 






SACRAMENTO VALLEY FLOOR 
HYDROGRAPHIC UNIT 



A-64 



CLASSIFICATION OF LANDS 
1962 

LOS MOLINOS QUADRANGLE 



FIGURE A-9 



*8 



I- >- 
Z Ui 
u _J 







<> 




■"■ 




1 


III 


\l) 




If) 


UI 


<r 








U 


i 


n 


.• 


7 




< 


||| 


-J 





m o> o >n « --• -< •*-» 

^i rM» m-< ffl CO r» r» 



?> o> m o o 

im < >o o r^ 



.■ 


in 

IT. 


l 





r^ •* <N * -» 



a <x a. 
a a a a a 
> > > > > 



> > >> > 



A-65 



FIGURE A- 10 



* *> * 


n 




- 






D O O J 


S 8 S 


9 I 


> o 


° 




\ \ 








1 1 


t\ 


■ 




























O 


1 


o 






o 


























(0 




a 




« 


< 




























iiM\ i 


ul 




4 




1 


























































1 B 










/ 
























I ,-" 


* \\ «ns 








/ 






















8 


A < 


g < H a 1 I 

> li *~ \v 1 




s 


f 
























£ 




t\ il n\ 




< 












Z 










4 








o 1 












o 










X 




U o 11 
















p 














11 « < 


m 














Q. 














11*° 
i \\ ^ o U 1 
\ 11 s Y » 


< 














s 

3 
CO 










































UJ 






> 














Z 












Jr" 






IT 














o 












< 






X 




/ *- 










o 












































i- 






o 






















£ 














/ o 

/ 2 










CO 








z 






\\ --Ml 




* 




/ z 

/ ** 










3 LU 

co 

CO 

< < 














\\ x 




< 


/ J 












t- _i 














V 




3 


/ / 




/ * 

/ *• 
/ ° 








ER CAPI 

BY 

FOOD C 










3 




\ \ 


11 11 




/ / 




' z 

< 
















5 




A \ 




O 


/ 




o 








EL 

s 1 














\ \ \ 






1 
























\ \ 






J 












< 














\ \ 


















x 2 














\ \ 






1 












LU 






: 








\ \ 






1 












Q 

Z 














\\ 


111 




1 1 
























\\ 


Ml 
















o 














\ 


















1- 












































\ 


















< 
































2 
































t- 






























LU 


































5 — 


































2 
































S 










































































































2 


i 


' 


5 










8 : 


i i 


5 I 


; 




% 






o 


o 



1SNO0 lUd>.) dU io X30NI 



A-66 



TABLE A-l 
Future Yield Levels by Crops in Year 2020 



Crops 



Yield in 2020 



Index 


: Uni 


ts 




(1956-60 


: pe 


r 




= 100) 


: acre 




130 


577 


bu. 




130 


6.2 


tons 




130 


3.3 


tons 




130 


14.6 


tons 




130 


13-1 


tons 




130 


4.7 


tons 




130 


2.2 


tons 




148 


9.6 


tons 




130 


.75 


ton 




172 


.95 


ton 




145 


311 


bxs.(75 lb.) 


145 


17.5 


tons 




160 


3,9^0 


lbs. 




160 


11.0 


tons 




160 


25,500 


lbs. 




157 


43,400 


lbs. 




160 


27.0 


tons 




154 


7.7 


tons 




127 


3.8 


bales 




154 


7,050 


lbs. 




154 


32.0 


tons 




127 


1,960 


lbs. 





Apples 

Apricots 

Cherries 

Peaches 

Pears 

Plums 

Prunes 

Grapes 

Almonds 

Walnuts 

Oranges 

Lemon 

Asparagus 

Cantaloupes 

Lettuce 

Potatoes 

Tomatoes 

Alfalfa 

Cotton 

Rice 

Sugar Beets 

Beans 



A-67 



TABLE A-2 

Total Irrigated Crop Acreages by- 
Major Crop Categories in California 

I960 and 2020 



Land Acreage 
(in 1, OOP's of Acres) 



Crop 



1/ 



1960^ 



2020^/ 



Hay and Grain 
Rice 
Cotton 
Sugar Beets 
Miscellaneous Field 
Alfalfa 
Pasture 
Truck 
Deciduous 
Subtropical 
Vineyard 
Fallow (Southern 
District Only) 

TOTAL 



1,067.2 


757 
240 


374.4 


811.8 


1,265 


169.7 


312 


817.3 


1,286 


1,229.6 


1,937 


1,521.1 


1,741 


920.1 


1,260 


686.8 


1,063 


329.8 


360 


446.5 


890 


162.1 


-- 



8,536.4 



11,111 



1/ Refer to DWR's Standard Land Use Legend for 
specific crops within these categories. 

2/ Gross irrigated land, including "fallow" land 
and "NR2" land. As shown, Southern District 
"fallow" entered as a separate item. 

3/ Net water service land. Excludes "fallow", 
roads and rights-of-way, farmsteads, etc. 



A-68 



4 


rH 0JH 


g 








03 




CO 














H 




■P S 

fl) 0) W 


g 




top P 






s 


S 






S5 




a 


« 



g w 



OJJ- OOtOrtOC04 O^OJONrHf-OOcOVOCO UTNCO HHiff^ 


ojrna->cncno^DOJco^-vDOfnoo^fOrnojir\c 


j ct»vo.* cv* f 


nt-^.=i-rHf-o> 


CO O OOJ O OJ 0\SCMT1K4- OJ rH OJ O rOrOCO CJDlTirHOCO 
O HCOHHOHOJVOHONHOMnHH r^i^J- jj inCT\ 
ON jj m rH OJ O rH 


ojcoino rnsHvjDOJinnofnoOHzfO\W4 o>c 
ctnvd ojomrHOOrHO p^-d- mco .=* ^> -=* co in 

r-t 


rnrrut mm< 

r-t rH i-t 


\J V£> rH <y»VO C~ 
r-i r-i 



O OJ o\ 



^t o\ 






o o^j- OJ 



CO O VD 



o a» 



WO0)O <H O OJ-P-PtoOoDOI^aip 3 

u i-cij -art bD to -h a> ^^ctHajaaJ-rH+jmuoprH^caj 

iaj^rHr^CrH ^ i a ^ c ii w ^ ^ c ^ c c a > flfl 3 > c c c c c c 5 c c g c d o ffld c 3 p ^ h o c^ 



A-69 



O^OOOOOOONOOOO t— 'JD OOOOOOCOOOOt-O h-VD Oin(^00 000 04 00 000 0COOOOOHOOOOOOlO 



) cr\mo-=f -h f-f-u 



^o ooo c\j o oc 



•\r*\=t o\mt-c> o 



t-- 1 — -=J- t*~ir\P~i=t TnrocriO f 



J OMfl^W rH 



) f-co o mc^rHcoiPtrooc 



5 

3 



l» 



o «J 



cr, o o 
t- ir\ cri 



O CM 

onoo 

CM rH 



ko t~- 



1 +JrH <L> OJC >> -OC-HCbOC CT tt <U (S.-H U 

,o h -h cq«J OUT) t* **^ rom §S!i!ri r ,H 1 23,5_,_.' 

] OC£ 111 OC tfiO ID (UTH-H'OtJOO*-»ttJa)CoG4)tt .p-P-Pl 

HJHr-t3ec:<l>-^*oJQ«)a5a)a)a)OOOa)0)t.rHrH-rHaJa!aJd(d«JflJ<ddaJa)j 



:tf9 



O O -P 3 I 
LOCO WtOE 



jgg; 



A-70 



H 



g« 



OOOOOOOOOOOOOCVJOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOJOOOOOO moo O OO OCO oo o o o oooo o o o 



) t-- ITNVO O^iCOOt 



^-=j-.=r-3-co NOi 



o m 



■3 



-\t-mmco t-f-a>c-u 



) rH rH m^r mco- 



) omt>o iti^j- rn 



CO U3 



O CO VD IT\ O 



0\ \D 



, O C C I 
Q m H J 



) ^ «J d Q a) i 



3 m in p Oh h. *j s: 
j c c c c c c c 



P+jffl (nil aJO CP ol C flHP O i) 
CC *AJ OH C aJ+ J ,C'Hi-IOCi-l,G 
i a) 3 .c -i-h °°^^22>|£^ 



A-71 



APPENDIX B 
WATER SUPPLY AND OPERATION STUDIES 



5-1 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

INTRODUCTION B-l 

THE CVP-SWP SYSTEM B-3 

COORDINATED CVP-SWP OPERATION STUDIES B-5 

Major Assumptions of the CVP-SWP Operation Studies . B-6 

Operational Criteria B-7 

Operation Study Results B-8 

SUPPORTING WATER SUPPLY STUDIES B-ll 

Consumptive Use Studies B-13 

Depletion Studies B-l4 

Accretion Study B-l6 

CVP-SWP System Water Demands B-17 

Mandatory Fish, Navigation, and 

Irrigation Demands B-19 

Sacramento Valley Accretions B-22 

Delta Operation B-23 

Deficiencies B-24 

CONTINUING WATER SUPPLY STUDIES B-25 



TABLES 



No, 



B-l Total Annual Unit Consumptive Use Potential 
by Precipitation Zone, Joint Central 
Valley Depletion Study 

B-2 Monthly Fish Flow Requirements 



B-iii 



INTRODUCTION 

Insofar as the existing Central Valley Project-State 
Water Project water system is concerned, the primary water - 
producing area of California is the great Central Valley drainage 
basin. Within the Central Valley, most of the water supply comes 
from the Sacramento River and its tributaries. The Sacramento- 
San Joaquin Delta provides a convenient focal point from which the 
surplus flows originating in the Central Valley drainage basin can 
be exported to those portions of the State with inadequate local 
water supplies. As areas within the Central Valley develop and 
Increase their use of water, the amounts of surplus water avail- 
able for export from the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta will decrease 
At the same time the demands for export of water are expected to 
progressively increase. As these demands for export of water out- 
strip the dependable water supply, new sources of water will have 
to be developed. 

The quantity of the dependable supply of water, power, 
or some other water-related product that any system of man-made 
works can produce or yield is determined by means of operation 
studies. If the project is a single dam and reservoir with a 
single purpose, such as irrigation, the operation study is simple 
and would usually be done by hand. As a project, or a system of 
project works, becomes more complex and has more than one purpose, 
the possible alternative courses of action are many. Correspond- 
ingly, operation studies become more and more complicated. Today, 



B-l 



electronic computers are used to perform complex operation 
studies. 

The network of reservoirs, powerhouses, conduits, 
and channels comprising the Central Valley Project-State Water 
Project (CVP-SWP) system is very complex. Estimating the poten- 
tial water yield of this system requires complicated operation 
studies, which, in turn, depend on a long chain of supporting 
water supply studies. 

The CVP-SWP system operation studies were made for 
two basic purposes: (l) to provide estimates of water yield of 
the system under given future conditions of development, and 
(2) to show the timing and amounts of water which will need to 
be added to the CVP-SWP system in order to fully satisfy the 
future projected water demands within the areas of origin and 
the demands of the existing CVP-SWP facilities exporting water 
from the Delta. 



B-2 



THE CVP-SWP SYSTEM 

The facilities of the CVP-SWP system which were 
included in the operation studies for Bulletin No. 160-66 are 
listed below: 

1. Central Valley Project 

a. Trinity River Division 

Clair Engle Lake 
Trinity Powerplant 
Lewiston Reservoir 
Lewiston Powerplant 
Clear Creek Tunnel 
Judge Francis Carr Powerplant 
Whiskeytown Reservoir 
Spring Creek Powerplant 

b. Shasta Division 

Shasta Reservoir 
Shasta Powerplant 
Keswick Reservoir 
Keswick Powerplant 

c. American River Division 

Folsom Reservoir 
Folsom Powerplant 
Nimbus Reservoir 
Nimbus Powerplant 

d. Delta Division 

Tracy Pumping Plant 
Delta-Mendota Canal 
Contra Costa Canal 

2. State Water Project 

a. Oroville Division 

Oroville Reservoir 
Oroville Powerplant 
Thermal it o Diversion Dam 
Thermalito Canal 
Thermalito Forebay 
Thermalito Powerplant 
Thermalito Afterbay 



B-3 



t>. North Bay Aqueduct 

c. South Bay Aqueduct 

d. North San Joaquin Division 

Delta Pumping Plant 
North San Joaquin Portion of 
California Aqueduct 

3. DWR-USBR Joint-Use Facilities 

a. Peripheral Canal 

b. San Luis Division 

San Luis Reservoir 

San Luis Pumping-Generating Plant 

San Luis Forebay 

San Luis Forebay Pumping Plant 

San Luis Canal to Mile 18 

(Dos Amigos Pumping Plant) 
Dos Amigos Pumping Plant 



B-4 



COORDINATED CVP-SWP OPERATION STUDIES 

Monthly studies of the coordinated operation of the 
CVP-SWP system were performed to determine the dependable power 
production and the firm water yield which could be maintained 
with increased diversions of water in areas tributary to the 
Delta under future conditions of development. The yield of the 
CVP-SWP system was measured at the Dos Amigos Pumping Plant 
located 18 miles south of San Luis Reservoir. This provided a 
convenient location to measure the yield of the CVP-SWP system 
for the purpose of determining the requirement for additional 
conservation and import projects. 

The hydrologic period of study for the water supply and 
operation studies was the 1928-34 historic condition. This seven- 
year period represents the most severe drought period of record 
in the Central Valley and includes the critical drought years of 
1931, 1933, and 193^. Although 1924 was drier than any of these 
three years, it occurred between more normal years of water supply. 
During the 1928-34 period, the computed mean annual natural runoff 
into the Delta was about 65 percent of the 1910-11 to 1959-60 
average . 

The CVP-SWP system was operated under these water supply 
conditions with the system demands for water and with the estimated 
depletion of water in areas tributary to the Delta which existed 
in i960 and which was projected for the 1990 and 2015 level of 
development. The system was simulated by a mathematical model 
which was programmed on an IBM 7094 electronic computer using 
Fortran II coding language. 

3-5 



Major Assumptions of the CVP-SWP Operation Studies 
Two major assumptions were fundamental to the 
operation studies. The first was the "Delta Pooling Concept" and 
the second was that of coordinated operation of the federal 
Central Valley Project and the State Water Project. 

The "Delta Pooling Concept" assumes that state and 
federal water agencies will export from the Delta only those 
waters arriving in the Delta after local upstream requirements 
(including those in the Delta) have been satisfied. Additional 
or supplemental water conservation facilities will be constructed 
when total demands for water from the State Water Project and 
the Central Valley Project exceed the yield available to the 
Projects from the Delta. 

The purpose of the coordinated operation of the CVP-SWP 
system was to combine water and power production of each facility 
within the two projects to obtain the greatest firm water yield 
at near optimum peak power output for the two projects. Required 
releases were made from the most advantageous facility regardless 
of ownership. In effect, the water supply, water yield, and 
power yield of the federal Central Valley Project and the State 
Water Project were pooled. Reservoir operation was consistent 
with each agency's long-term plans and operational constraints. 
The coordinated operation of the CVP-SWP system results In the 
greatest overall benefit of public water development by taking 
advantage of the diversity between the water supplies for and 
water and power demands on the two projects. 



B-6 



Operational Criteria 

The operation studies considered the combined project 
functions of irrigation, municipal, and industrial water supply- 
in local valley service areas, in the Delta, and for export; 
power production, and navigation on the Sacramento River; reservoir 
releases for fish; flood control; recreation; and Sacramento-San 
Joaquin Delta salinity repulsion. Each project service was met 
by the unit or units which could supply that service most effi- 
ciently. The criteria relating to these functions are discussed 
below. More specific details of many individual constraints are 
described later in the accretion phase of the studies. 

As stated previously, the main objective was, insofar as 
possible, to optimize the firm power yield and to develop the 
maximum water yield of the system. A maximum annual firm commer- 
cial power production was scheduled from the coordinated CVP-SWP 
system, using a system minimum generating capacity of about 
1,200,000 kilowatts measured at the Delta load center. The firm 
production was assumed to be generated in most cases by mandatory 
releases from reservoirs and as additional releases from the 
reservoir capable of supplying power with a minimum loss of water 
from the system, considering pump-back potentials. Power losses 
between point of generation and the Delta load center were 
deducted in the power output. 

Flood control reservations in the major reservoirs are 
defined through operating agreements with the U. S. Army Corps of 
Engineers. These agreements specify criteria for storage 
reservations depending upon hydrologlc and weather conditions. 



B-7 



Releases to maintain these storage limits were met unconditionally 
in the operation studies. 

A minimum 1,800 cubic-feet-per-second outflow from the 
Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta was maintained for repulsion of 
ocean salinity and for maintenance of adequate water quality in 
the Delta channels for agricultural and other purposes. This 
requirement was assumed to he met either by available uncontrolled 
flow into the Delta or by reservoir releases. 

Minimum reservoir storage levels were maintained at 
system reservoirs to insure an adequate water supply for mandatory 
releases in future months. In the operation studies, when any 
reservoir reached its minimum storage level, water demands not 
mandatory on that particular reservoir were met from other 
sources, if available. 

In-basin irrigation, municipal, and industrial demands 
on the CVP-SWP system were taken as mandatory requirements on a 
particular unit if that was the only facility in a location 
strategic to the service. Otherwise, the demands were met by 
the unit most efficiently able to supply the demand consistent 
with other demands on the CVP-SWP system. 

Operation Study Results 
Results of the operation study showed the annual water 
yield of the CVP-SWP system, measured at Dos Amigos Pumping Plant 
near San Luis Reservoir, while maintaining a dependable power 
yield of 1,200,000 kilowatts. Firm annual yields of water for 



the three levels of development, i960, 1990, and 2015, with the 
water supply available during the 1928-34 critically dry period 
were as follows: 



Item 



CVP-SWP System Water Yield 

CVP-SWP Contractual Demand 

Additional Water Required to 
Meet Contractual Demand 
(rounded) 



CVP-SWP System Yield Capabilities 



for Levels 


of Development in 


Central Valley 
(in thousands of acre 


-feet) 


I960 
Level 


1990 
Level 


2015 
Level 


9,500* 


4,400 


3,250 





5,389 


5,405 





1,000 


2,150 



*If sufficient Delta diversion capacity had existed. 

Although the 1990 level operation study showed a need 
to develop 1,000,000 acre-feet in project yield, It is unlikely 
that all the requirements for water service north of Dos Amigos 
Pumping Plant will be as great as the system demands in this 
particular operation study. It was estimated that the water 
demands in the American River service area and in the areas to 
be served by additional CVP exports from the Delta would be 
approximately 600,000 acre-feet per year less than that assumed 
in the CVP-SWP operation studies. Therefore, a projected system 
yield shortage of around 400,000 acre-feet was deemed more 
realistic for the 1990 level. 



B-9 



These operation study results, as modified in 1990, 
became the basis for Figure 33, "Staging of Major Conservation 
Facilities", in Bulletin No. 160-66. The basic system yield 
shown in Figure 33 was computed as the sum of the above system 
yield, at Dos Amigos Pumping Plant, and the use of authorized 
service in the Central Valley. The gradual reduction in yield 
results from increased water use in areas tributary to the Delta. 



B-10 



SUPPORTING WATER SUPPLY STUDIES 

The CVP-SWP system operation study represents the final 
stage of a series of supporting water supply studies. The water 
supply input to the CVP-SWP operation study itself was provided 
by an accretion study. In turn much of the input data for the 
accretion study was derived from consumptive use and depletion 
studies. The basic purpose of these supporting studies was to 
estimate the amounts of water under given future conditions which 
will flow into system reservoirs and into the Delta. These amounts 
were determined by analyzing the probable changes or depletions of 
historic flows which would occur under conditions of future 
development . 

At the time of the preparation of Bulletin No. 160-66, 
the Department of Water Resources and the United States Bureau 
of Reclamation were engaged in a joint Central Valley depletion 
study for the purpose of developing a common estimate of the deple- 
tionary effect of future land development within the Central 
Valley on the water supply arriving at the Delta. The first of 
these joint depletion studies, a depletion estimate for the 2015 
level of development, was finished during the summer of 1966. 
It was used as the basic water supply for the operation study 
presented at the State Water Rights Board hearings on the 
Department of Water Resources' applications for storage and 
diversion for the State Water Project. 



B-ll 



However, the framework of the DWR-USBR joint depletion 
study had been quite well established by fall of 1965 and certain 
results were ready. Therefore, as much as possible of the joint 
depletion method was included in preparation of the water supply 
input to the operation studies which were conducted for 
Bulletin No. 160-66. 

Previous DWR water supply projections have always made 
an allowance for future depletion in the amounts of water reaching 
the Delta, but the DWR-USBR Joint Depletion Study method is 
probably the most comprehensive approach ever used to estimate 
this depletion. But, because of the incomplete nature of the 
depletion studies at the time the yield estimates for 
Bulletin No. 160-66 were made, the input to the Bulletin No. 
160-66 operation studies represented a blending of the new 
depletion study method into the early DWR water supply framework. 
Essentially, the method employed was to use the previous DWR 
accretion study procedure, based on historic diversions and 
projected diversions, on the main stem of the Sacramento River 
and to use depletion study principles in estimating inflow to the 
Delta from the major remaining tributary areas. The projected 
diversions from the Sacramento River main stem were also estimated 
by depletion study methods. In general, the depletion effect in 
mountainous areas was regarded as insignificant. 






B-12 



Where the joint depletion method was employed, the 
sequence of estimating the water supply involved a consumptive 
use phase, a depletion study phase, and an accretion study phase. 
The last item, the accretion study, became the water supply and 
demand input to the coordinated CVP-SWP operation study program. 

Consumptive Use Studies 
The depletion study method requires estimating the 
total consumptive use requirements of projected land use patterns 
and then obtaining the depletion by subtracting the consumptive 
use of replaced native vegetation. The irrigated and urban 
consumptive use requirements and the estimated consumptive use 
of native vegetation were derived by a monthly consumptive use 
machine program taking into account the parameters of rainfall, 
soil moisture, potential consumptive use by various crops and 
native vegetation, and estimated historic and projected land 
use patterns. The annual crop unit potential consumptive use 
values which were used are listed in Table B-l. These values 
were developed for use only in the Central Valley drainage 
basin. 

It was assumed In the consumptive use studies that 
all water diverted for nonconsumptive purposes, such as domestic 
use inside the house, would be returned to the system. 



B-13 



Depletion Studies 

The water requirements developed in the consumptive use 
phase were used in the depletion study phase to estimate the 
effects of the projected level of development on the historic 
streamflow base. For study purposes, the Central Valley was 
divided into a number of individual study areas. 

The standard depletion study method adopted for each 
study area consisted of several basic steps and procedures, out- 
lined as follows: 

1. A presentation of historic conditions of water 
supply development and outflow. 

2. An evaluation of future increase in water requirements. 
Estimated future water needs were compared with 

water use by historic developed areas and by 
replaced native vegetation. Parameters of rainfall, 
soil moisture, and potential consumptive use of 
various crops and native vegetation were taken 
into account in determining future water needs 
and net increase in consumptive use in each 
study area. 

3. A modification of the historic water supply by 
superposition of existing and proposed future 
nonsystem water supply developments or facilities. 
The nonsystem facilities are discussed in subsequent 
paragraphs . 



B-14 



4. A comparison of the modified historic water 
supply and future water demands in order to 
evaluate the depletionary effect on historic 
flows and the need for future storage in or above 
each study area to regulate flows to provide for 
future demands. 
Depletion studies extending over the seven-year hydro- 
logic dry period were made of the larger subdivisions of the 
Central Valley and in a few of the tributary mountain basins, 
namely, the Yuba-Bear and the Sacramento River Basin above Shasta 
Reservoir. In much of the Sacramento Valley, results of the de- 
pletion study phase furnished projected diversion requirements for 
the accretion phase. In those areas draining directly into the 
Delta, the results of the depletion study phase were used as 
accretions to the Delta supply. 

Modifications of the historic water supply were intro- 
duced in several of the study areas to reflect the operation of 
reservoirs which were not operated directly in the operation 
study. These reservoirs were operated separately and the net 
effects on the streamflow were reflected in the water supply 
input of the operation of the CVP-SWP system. Those reservoirs 
included were: 

Pardee and Camanche Reservoirs New Melones Reservoir 
Millerton Reservoir Marysville Reservoir 

New Exchequer (Lake McClure) Camp Far West Reservoir 
Reservoir 

New Don Pedro Reservoir 



B-15 



Auburn, Monticello, Black Butte, and Almanor Reservoirs 
were handled In the accretion phase of the water supply studies 
as explained later. 

It was also assumed that ground water would supply a 
portion of the total irrigation requirement and that ground water 
storage reductions in excess of historic net changes would be re- 
plenished in the years following the 1928-34 hydrologic dry period 
of study. The percentage of the total irrigation demand supplied 
from ground water at projected future levels of development was 
40 percent in the San Joaquin Basin hydrologic study area, 40 per- 
cent to the east of the Delta (eastern valley portion of Delta- 
Central Sierra hydrologic study area), and an average of about 
38 percent in the Sacramento Valley. The percentages used for 
individual areas of the Sacramento Valley ranged from 20 to 50 
percent. These values were judgment assumptions based largely on 
what was known of present-day ground water pumping. The subject of 
ground water use needs more examination. Reliable data on ground 
water movement, recharge, and the interaction between surface and 
ground water is lacking in many Central Valley areas. 

Accretion Study 
The accretion study phase furnished an analysis of water 
demands (diversion requirements) on the CVP-SWP system by reaches or 
control points. The key control locations were: (l) Trinity River, 
(2) Clear Creek, (3) Sacramento River, Keswick to the Navigation 
Control Point (NCP), (4) Yuba River, (5) Bear River, (6) Feather 
River, (7) American River, (8) Sacramento River, Navigation Control 
Point to Sacramento, (9) Eastside stream group (Cosumnes, Mokelumne, 
and Calaveras Rivers), (10) San Joaquin River, (11) Sacramento -San 
Joaquin Delta, and (12) Delta to San Luis, ending at Dos Amigos 
Pumping Plant . 



The accretion study phase determined the flows available 
from uncontrolled sources and the flows available from CVP-SWP 
system mandatory releases for each stream reach and for the Delta 
under future development. The accretion study reflected the use 
of ground water and the timing and quantities of return flow to 
the river system. Auburn, Monticello, Black Butte, and Almanor 
Reservoirs were operated separately and the effects on the stream- 
flow were reflected in the water supply input of the operation of 
the CVP-SWP system. The combination of upstream depletions, 
operation of nonsystem projects, local demands, return flows, 
uncontrolled inflows, minimum flows for navigation, and minimum 
flows for fish preservation established the mandatory demands by 
reaches of each stream below the respective facilities of the 
CVP-SWP system. 

CVP-SWP System Water Demands 

Both fixed and variable demands for water service were 
included in the accretion study to set constraints on the operation 
of each CVP-SWP system reservoir. Fixed demands are those water 
diversions which remained on a constant schedule each year through- 
out the study period while variable demands fluctuated depending on 
climatic conditions. Within this study all CVP-SWP system demands 
were assumed to be fixed with the exception of those for the 
Sacramento Valley and Feather River service area water users. 

Fixed or constant water demands for each level of 
development were included for the following irrigation uses: 



B-17 



Normal 

Annual Amount 

1,000 acre-feet 


I960 


1990 


2015 





426 


852 


1,872 


2,060 


2,060 


1,070 


1,070 


1,070 


546 


546 


546 


1,250* 


1,247 


1,250 


1,203* 


1,203 


1,203 





735 


735 


34 


65 


65 


80 


80 


80 



1. Folsom South Canal 

2. Delta Uplands and Lowlands 

Channel Depletion 

3. Exchange contract (part of 

Delta-Mendota Canal) 

4. Delta-Mendota service area 

5. Federal San Luis deliveries 

6. State San Joaquin Valley 

deliveries 

7. Additional irrigation from the 

Delta for the CVP 

8. Shasta County (served from 

Whiskeytown Reservoir) 

9. Stockton and East San Joaquin 

County 

* For yield estimating purposes 

In addition to the fixed irrigation demands shown in 
the preceding tabulation variable irrigation demands for the 
Sacramento River and Feather River users were also included in 
the accretion study. 

All of the irrigation demands shown above, except for 
the Delta channel depletion, were subject to deficiencies in 
critically dry years. 

System demands for municipal and industrial uses and 
for salinity repulsion in the Delta were not assumed to be 
subject to deficiency. These demands were: 



B-l8 



1. Feather River service area 

2. City of Sacramento (Sacramento 

River) 



Annual Amount 
1,000 acre-feet 
T95TS T95T5 20T5" 



25 



4 3 



9. Additional Municipal and 

Industrial from the Delta 
for the CVP 

10. South Bay Aqueduct 

11. North Bay Aqueduct 

12. California Aqueduct below Dos Amigos 

(including losses) 

13. Contra Costa Canal 

*For yield estimating purposes. 



44 



43 



540 



49 



43 



3. 


City of Sacramento (American 
River) 


10 


201 


201 


4. 


North Fork and Natomas Ditches 


69 


69 


69 


5. 


San Juan Suburban 


20 


80 


80 


6. 


El Dorado County 





110 


110 


7. 


Salinity Repulsion 


1,305 


1,305 


1,305 


8. 


City of Vallejo 


15 


15 


15 



540 



56 


189 


189 





64 


64 


2,952* 


2,939 


2,952 


75 


195 


195 



Mandatory Fish, Navigation, and Irrigation Demands 

By agreement between the operating agencies and California 
Department of Fish and Game, minimum releases for fish preservation 
are or will be specified at the outlet works of the major facilities 
including Lewiston Reservoir, Whiskeytown Reservoir, Keswick Dam, 
Thermalito Diversion Dam and Afterbay, and Nimbus Dam. These 
releases are constant throughout each month but vary from month to 
month. They were assumed to be met in full at all times. The fish 
releases which were used in the accretion study phase are presented 
in Table B-2. 

B-19 



An agreement between the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers 
and the Bureau of Reclamation established minimum flows for 
navigation of 4,000 cubic feet per second on the Sacramento 
River at a location between Colusa Basin Drain near Knights 
Landing and Chico Landing. The Navigation Control Point (NCP) 
mandatory demand on Keswick Reservoir was the release necessary 
to bring the projected minimum flow up to 4,000 cubic feet per 
second. 

Fish, navigation, and irrigation mandatory releases 
made from Keswick Reservoir are closely related since some releases 
serve a dual purpose. The initial step in computing the total 
mandatory release began by calculating the revised flow at the 
NCP. Revised flows were determined by adding historic net water 
requirements (historic diversions less historic return flows) to 
the historic flow at the NCP and then subtracting estimated 
future net water requirements. 

The next step was the computation of accretions at the 
NCP due to tributary Inflow between Keswick Reservoir (and 
Whiskeytown Dam) and the NCP. The accretions were determined by 
subtracting the inflow of Shasta and Whiskeytown Reservoirs from 
the revised flow at the NCP and then adding the Whiskeytown 
Reservoir fish release. This residual was compared to the 
minimum flow required for navigation to see if a release for 
navigation was required at Keswick Reservoir. 

The demands for release from Keswick Reservoir for 
Sacramento Valley irrigation were determined by subtracting the 
revised flow at the NCP from the sum of Shasta Reservoir inflow 
and the storable Clear Creek inflow to Whiskeytown Reservoir. 

B-20 



If the sum of the demands at Keswick Reservoir for 
irrigation and navigation requirements were insufficient to meet 
the minimum fish flow required at Keswick Reservoir an additional 
release was made from Keswick Reservoir for fish purposes. 

The total mandatory demand at Keswick Reservoir then 
became the sum of the releases to meet fish, navigation, and 
irrigation demands. 

Sufficient flows were always available to satisfy 
irrigation demand along the Sacramento River in the reach between 
the NCP and Sacramento. These flows were made up of fish and 
navigation releases, uncontrolled flows, and irrigation return 
flows to the Sacramento and Feather Rivers. 

Irrigation demands of the Feather River service area 
comprised a mandatory release from Oroville Reservoir. These 
irrigation demands were derived from consumptive use and depletion 
studies. Total mandatory releases at Oroville also included the 
fish flow and municipal and industrial requirements. Estimated 
future discharges of the Kelly Ridge Powerhouse were assumed to 
be available to help meet the Feather River service area water 
requirements. 

Mandatory irrigation releases at Whlskeytown and Folsom 
Reservoirs were made to fulfill the demands set forth in the 
preceding section, CVP-SWP System Water Demands. 



B-21 



Sacramento Valley Accretions 

Future accretions to flows in the Sacramento Valley 
at Sacramento were estimated by assuming that all inflows into 
Whiskeytown, Shasta, Oroville, and Polsom Reservoirs would be 
held in storage except for the mandatory releases. Beginning with 
the historic flow of the Sacramento River at the I Street gage, 
the following items were added or subtracted to compute the 
accretions at Sacramento. These were: 

1. (-) Historic flows at Whlskeytown, Shasta, 

Oroville, and Folsom Reservoirs 

2. (+) Historic diversions above Sacramento 

3. (-) Historic return flows above Sacramento 

4. (-) Projected diversions above Sacramento 

5. (+) Projected return flows above Sacramento 

6. (-) Historic Yuba and Bear River inflows 

7. (+) Projected Yuba and Bear River inflows as 

determined by a depletion analysis 

8. (+) Pish releases at Keswick, Thermalito, and 

Nimbus Reservoirs 

9. (+) Navigation releases from Keswick Reservoir 
10. (+) Net change due to Black Butte and Monticello 

Reservoir operation 



B-22 



Delta Operation 

The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta was considered as the 
focal point of the water supply studies and the coordinated CVP-SWP 
operation study. The Delta operation within the accretion study 
determined the amount of water available for export to San Luis 
Reservoir, whether mandatory Delta demands could be met from un- 
regulated flows, and the releases required if the mandatory Delta 
demands could not be met from unregulated flows. If a shortage 
existed, the necessary releases were made from upstream CVP-SWP 
system reservoirs prior to export from the Delta to meet CVP-SWP 
system requirements at San Luis Reservoir and for the South Bay 
Aqueduct. Delta surpluses or shortages were computed by adding 
up all Delta inflows and comparing the total with Delta require- 
ments. 

The unregulated water available in the Delta included 
only the accretions left after net storage (inflow less mandatory 
releases) in system reservoirs had been taken out of the water 
supply at the Delta. The Delta inflow consisted of the following 
items : 

1. Sacramento Valley accretions 

2. Eastside Delta tributary streams 

3. San Joaquin River inflow 

4. Other tributary Delta inflow 

5. Precipitation on the Delta uplands and lowlands 

Delta mandatory water requirements consisted of the 
following: 



B-23 



1. Delta uplands and lowlands water requirements 

2. Exchange contract (Delta-Mendota Canal) 

3. CVP exports In the Delta-Mendota Canal for 
irrigation purposes 

4. Contra Costa Canal 

5. Additional CVP export from the Delta for 
irrigation purposes 

6. North Bay Aqueduct 

7. Salinity repulsion 

8. City of Vallejo 

9. Additional CVP export from the Delta for 
municipal and industrial purposes 

10. Stockton and East San Joaquin County 

Deficiencies 

Deficiencies or shortages in agricultural water supply 
delivered by the federal CVP and SWP facilities were taken during 
critically dry years. No deficiency was permitted on municipal 
and industrial deliveries. The deficiency criteria allowed a 
50 percent reduction in agricultural water deliveries during the 
period April through October in the years 1931 and 1933. The 
only exceptions to this pattern were the Exchange Contract, where 
the deficiency was taken as 20 percent, and within the Delta, 
where no deficiency was assumed. 



B-24 



CONTINUING WATER SUPPLY STUDIES 

The task of estimating future water supplies is con- 
stantly being revised to reflect new data, new projections, and 
new water developments. Probably the most meaningful accomplish- 
ment since the conduct of the operation studies for Bulletin 
No. 160-66 was the continued progress on the joint Central Valley 
depletion study by engineers of the United States Bureau of 
Reclamation and the Department of Water Resources. 

Both the Department and the Bureau of Reclamation are 
engaged in the planning of large-scale conservation and conveyance 
works In the Central Valley and in the California North Coastal 
Area. It is of mutual interest to develop a common framework to 
evaluate the depletionary effect on the water supply resulting 
from future land development in the Central Valley. It is also 
of mutual interest to develop a common basic water supply for 
both agencies to use in long-range planning of works which will 
affect Delta inflow. The comprehensive joint DWR-USBR Central 
Valley depletion study was designed to help fulfill this mutual 
need. The objective is to reach agreement on a projected water 
supply as presently estimated, recognizing the need for continuing 
refinement and revision as new data become available. 

Sufficient progress had been made on the joint DWR-USBR 
depletion studies so that an introductory study at the 2015 level 
of development could be presented to the State Water Rights Board 
during the summer of 1966 in connection with the hearings on the 
Department's water rights applications for the State Water Project, 



B-25 



The operation study presented In the water rights 
hearings indicated a need for an additional import of 1,550,000 
acre-feet annually to meet present CVP-SWP system contractual 
commitments. In addition, another 930,000 acre-feet average 
annual supply would be required to fully meet water requirements 
in several basin areas draining directly into the Delta. If these 
latter water shortages were to be supplied directly from the 
Delta pool (the only likely source) on a fairly uniform yearly 
schedule, additional sources providing 2,480,000 or approximately 
2,500,000 acre-feet per year of water yield would be needed in 
2015. Much of this amount would undoubtedly be derived from 
imports from the North Coastal region. 

By contrast, comparable estimates used in Bulletin 
No. 160-66 indicated a CVP-SWP system yield shortage of around 
2,150,000 acre-feet per year in 2015 after all Central Valley 
demands north of Tulare Lake Basin had been met . 

Other studies are now in progress to determine the 
system yield under several other levels of development using the 
joint DWR-USBR depletion method of estimating future flows. 



B-26 



c 

U -H * 

<D «j C 
£ -P -H 
C to 

n o $ 



£3l/H 

CD 
> CD 

c 
o 



CM 

it 



o 
it 



it 

CM 



CM 

on 



CO 


on 


m 


OA 




O^ 


CO 


it 


OJ 






U 

<D 






vo 


in 


ON 


d 


1 


it 


in 


00* 


CVJ* 


1 


1 


p 






it 


it 


m 


CO 




CVJ 


CO 


CO 


CO 






aj 

CD 

rH 


C 
O 

•H 
P 


C 

o 

•H 
-P 


00 


co 


it 


CO 


rH 


CO 


r- 


CO 


rH 


rH 




aj 

rH 


aj 
P 


aj 
-P 


VO 


in 


o> 


O^ 


VO 


it 


m 


CO 


CVJ 


VO 


1 


■H 


CD 


CD 


5F 


St 


CO 


CVJ 


in 


CVJ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 




aj 
> 
aj 

rH 
rH 

aj 


faD 
CD 
> 

CD 
> 

•H 
P 

aj 


bO 
CD 
> 

CD 
> 

■H 
P 

aj 


CO 


CVJ 


rH 


CO 


rH 


m 


^t 


o 


CO 


00 




3 


C 


C 


VO 


in 


OA 


CO 


VO 


it 


m 


CO 


rH 


m 


1 


aj 


p 


P 


3F 


it 


CO 


CM 


in 


CVJ 


CO 


m 


CO 


CO 




C 

o 
p 

CD 
P 


C 
CD 
O 

M 

CD 
ft 


C 
CD 
O 

£h 

CD 

a 

ON 


CO 


ON 


r- 


CO 


rH 


on 


co 


it 


CVJ 


CVJ 




•H 

6 

•H 


rn 


rH 


VO 


■=t 


CO 


VO 


vo 


co 


it 


t- 


rH 


in 


1 


T3 


TD 


^t 


it 


CO 


CVJ 


in 


CVJ 


co 


co 


CO 


CO 




rH 
P 

.a 

CD 


c 

aj 

CD 

P 
CO 


C 

aj 

CD 

M 
P 

co 


co 


CM 


rH 


o 


rH 


CO 


h- 


CO 


rH 


rH 


it 


3 
p 


aj 

ft 


aj 

ft 


VO 


it 


CO 


in 


VO 


CvJ 


co 


VO 


rH 


it 


t- 


co 






it 


it 


CO 


CM 


in 


CVJ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


aj 

CO 

aj 


P 
C 
CD 
O 

M 

CD 


p 
c 

CD 

o 
U 

0) 


co 


in 


CVJ 


rH 


rH 


in 


it 


o 


co 


co 


if 


e 


Oh 


a 


VO 


CO 


0- 


m 


VO 


rH 


CVJ 


LT\ 


ON 


CM 


0- 


aj 


in 


it 


it 


it 


co 


CVJ 


in 


CVJ 
-^ 

o 

^ 


CO 


CO 


CVJ 


CO 

-a 
u 

aj 


co 


CO 

c 


CM 


CO 














M 




S 




o 
















& 




Oj 




o 




•H 
P 


c 


(5 

oj 








T3 




co 




o 




O 




aj 


aj 


£> 








rH 




3 




^ 








P 


£> 


^ 






CO 


CD 




O 




o 




rH 




CD 


U 


D 






p 


•H 




<l> 








aj 




hO 


rO 








CD 


Ph 




c 




co 




o 




CD 




T3 






CD 






aj 


co 


3 


■a 


•H 




> 


o 


CD 


CD 


a 


m 


rH 




rH 


CD 


o 


u 


a 






•H 


P 


M 


<hh 




a3 




rH 


o 


3 


a 


o 


C 


CD 


M 


O 


3 


rH 


M 


U 




CD 


p 


'O 


>> 


^ 


o 


> 


o 


CD 


P 


aj 


aJ 


CD 


CD 


CJ 


aj 


•H 


CD 


-p 


p 


•H 


p 


*"3 


co 


<m 


bO 


C 


O 


CO 


g 


O 


c 


rQ 


p 


P 


CO 


O 


OS 


rH 


3 


CD 


•H 


•H 


o 


£ 


•H 





o 


aj 


•H 


^ 


Oh 


< 


CO 


O 


CC 


2 


Eh 


> 


CO 


o 


S 


K 


Ph 



B-27 



TABLE B-2 



MONTHLY FISH PLOW REQUIREMENTS 
(in thousands of acre-feet) 





Trinity 


Clear 


Sacramento 


Feather 


American 




River 


Creek 


River 


River 


River 




below 


below 


below 


below 


below 




Lewiston 


Whiskeytown 


Keswick 


Thermalito 


Nimbus 


Month 


Dam 


Dam 


Dam 


Afterbay 


Dam 


Jan. 


9 


3 


160 


50 


15 


Feb. 


9 


3 


144 


44 


14 


Mar. 


9 


2 


141 


50 


15 


Apr. 


9 


2 


137 


48 


15 


May 


9 


2 


141 


50 


15 


June 


9 


1 


137 


48 


15 


July 


9 


2 


141 


50 


15 


Aug. 


9 


1 


141 


50 


15 


Sept. 


9 


1 


232 


48 


22 


Oct. 


12 


1 


240 


50 


31 


Nov. 


15 


6 


232 


48 


30 


Dec. 


12 


_6 


160 


50 


31 



TOTAL 



120 



30 



2,006 



586 



233 



B-28 



APPENDIX C 
LEGISLATION AND COURT DECISIONS 



C-i 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

MAJOR STATE LEGISLATION IMPLEMENTING THE 

CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN -- 1956-1966 C-l 

1956 C-l 

Department of Water Resources Created C-l 

Investment Fund Created C-2 

Income from State Land Leases Routed to 

Investment Fund C-3 

Feather River Project Redefined C-3 

Appropriations for State Water Project C-3 

Appropriation for Flood Control Projects .... C-5 

Investigations in Areas of Origin C-5 

San Lorenzo River Flood Control Project C-6 

1957 C-6 

Feather River Project: Relocation Appropriation. C-6 

Budget Act of 1957 C-6 

North Bay Aqueduct Authorized C-7 

Upper Feather River Service Area of Feather 

River Project Further Defined C-7 

Small Corps Projects Authorized C-8 

Santa Maria River Flood Control Project 

Authorized C-8 

Abshire-Kelly Salinity Control Barrier Act 

of 1957 c " 8 

State Financial Assistance for Local Projects . . C-8 

Participation with United States in Planning 

Projects C-9 

Whale Rock Project Authorized C-9 



C-iii 



Page 

Klamath River Basin Compact Approved C-9 

Appropriation of Water: Terms and Conditions . C-9 

Beach Erosion Control: State Participation . . C-10 

Recreational Use of Water Supply Reservoirs . . C-10 

Pishing in Publicly Owned Domestic Water 

Supply Reservoirs C-10 

1958 C-10 

Appropriations by Budget Act of 1958 C-10 

Recreational Development at State Water Projects C-12 

Truckee River Flood Control Project Authorized. C-12 

1959 C-12 

California Water Fund Created C-12 

California Water Resources Development Bond 

Act (Burns-Porter Act) C-13 

Feather River Project Further Modified .... C-14 

California Water Plan Adopted C-14 

Davis -Grunsky Act C-15 

State Assistance to Impact Area: The Byrne Act C-l6 

Planning for Recreation and Fish and Wildlife 

at State Water Projects C-16 

Acquisition of Land for Recreation C-17 

Use of Water for Recreation and Fish and 

Wildlife C-17 

Budget Act of 1959 C-17 

Additional Investigations and Appropriations . C-19 

Black Butte and New Hogan Dams and Reservoirs . C-20 

Cache Creek Project C-20 



C-iv 



Page 

State Filings C-20 

Areas of Origin C-21 

Water Seepage C-21 

Archaeological Investigations C-21 

Clearing of Reservoir Sites C-21 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Protection .... C-21 

Dickey Water Pollution Act Strengthened .... C-22 

Flood Control Projects C-23 

Storm and Flood Damage Repair C-24 

Fishing in Water Supplies C-24 

Investigations in Watersheds of Origin .... C-25 

I960 C-25 

Budget Act of i960 C-25 

1961 C-26 

Recreation and Fish and Wildlife at State Water 

Projects: Davis-Dolwig Act C-26 

Ground Water: Porter Dolwig Ground Water Basin 

Protection Law C-27 

Sacramento River and Delta: Recreational and 

Wildlife Habitat Study C-27 

Recharge of Ground Water from Reclaimed Water . C-27 

Davis-Grunsky Act Amendments C-28 

Flood Control Projects C-29 

Organization C-29 

San Joaquin River Water Quality C-29 

Appropriations: Budget Act of 1961 C-29 

Goose Lake C-30 



C-v 



Page 

1962 C-30 

Appropriations: Budget Act of 1962 C-30 

Tahchevah Creek Flood Control Project C-31 

Davis-Grunsky Act Grant C-31 

The Cameron- Unruh Park and Recreation Bond Act. C-31 

1963 C-31 

Delta Recreation Plan C-31 

Dickey Water Pollution Control Act Strengthened C-32 

Davis-Grunsky Act Amendments C-32 

Davis-Grunsky Act Grants Authorized C-32 

Flood Control Projects C-33 

Loan Authorization to Merced Irrigation District C-33 

Agua Fria Project C-3^ 

Interstate Compact C-34 

State Filings C-34 

Budget Act of 1963 C-34 

Supplementary Appropriations C-35 

1964 C-35 

Yuba River Development Loan Authorized .... C-35 

Long Beach Tideland Revenues for the State 

Water Project C-36 

Appropriations C-36 

1965 c ~37 

Saline Water Conversion C-37 

Regional Water Resources Planning C-37 

Federal Reports C-38 



C-vi 



Page 

Water Pollution Control Law of 1965 C-38 

Water Quality Control C-38 

Lake Tahoe Study C-39 

San Francisco Bay Conservation C-39 

Floodplain Management C-39 

Flood Control Projects C-40 

Davis-Grunsky Act Grants C-40 

Water Well Reports C-40 

Geothermal Wells C-4l 

State Filings for the Appropriation of Water . C-4l 

Records of Water Diversion C-4l 

Supervision of Safety of Dams C-4l 

River Forecasting and Flood Warning C-42 

Budget Act of 1965 C-42 

1966 C-42 

Federal-State Contracts for Water Supplies . . C-42 

Nonreimbursable Costs of the State Water Project C-43 

Accruals to California Water Fund C-43 

Recreation at Federal Water Projects C-44 

Lake Tahoe Sewage C-45 

Budget Act of 1966 C-46 

FEDERAL LAWS RELATED TO WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT -- 

1956-1966 C-47 

Water Resources Planning C-48 

1958 - Water Supply Act of 1958 C-48 

1964 - Water Resources Research Act C-48 



C-vii 



Page 

1965 - Water Resources Planning Act C-49 

1965 - Public Works and Economic Development 

Act C-49 

1966 - Water Resources Research Act 

Amendments C-49 

1966 - Interim Research Contracts Act C-49 

Water Pollution Control C-50 

1956 - Federal Water Pollution Control Act . . C-50 

1961 - Federal Water Pollution Control Act 

Amendment C-50 

1965 - Water Quality Act C-50 

1966 - Clean Rivers Restoration Act C-51 

Recreation C-51 

1964 - Land and Water Conservation Fund Act . . C-51 

1965 - Federal Water Project Recreation Act . . C-51 

1965 - Whiskeytovm-Shasta-Trinity National 

Recreation Area Act C-52 

1966 - Point Reyes National Seashore Act 

Amendment C-52 

Construction C-52 

1958 - Flood Control Act of 1958 C-52 

i960 - An Act Authorizing the Construction of 
the San Luis Unit of the Central 

Valley Project C-53 

1962 - Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962 C-53 

1965 - Auburn-Folsom South Unit C-53 

1966 - Feasibility Investigations Act C-53 

1966 - Tijuana River Flood Control Project Act. C-54 

1966 - Flood Control Act of 1966 C-54 



C-viii 



Page 

Irrigation Works Assistance - Watershed Protection . C-54 

1956 - Small Reclamation Projects Act C-54 

1966 - Small Reclamation Projects Act 

Amendments C-54 

Watershed Protection C-55 

1956 - Watershed Protection and Flood 

Prevention Act Amendments C-55 

Hydroelectric Power C-55 

1964 - Northwest Intertie Act C-55 

1966 - An Act to Authorize Construction of a 

Third Power Plant at Grand Coulee Dam. C-55 

Salt Water Conversion C-56 

1958 - Salt Water Demonstration Program .... C-56 

1961 - Saline Water Conversion Act Amendments . C-56 

1965 - Saline Water Conversion Act Amendments . C-56 

1966 - AEC - Desalting Plant C-57 

Miscellaneous C-57 

An Act Approving Interstate Compact Regarding 

Boundary Between Arizona and California . . . C-57 

LITIGATION C-59 

Financial Implementation of the State Water Project. C-59 

Eminent Domain Powers of Department of Water 

Resources C-6l 

Colorado River Water Rights C-62 

Federal Central Valley Project: Application of 

l60-Acre Limitation (The Ivanhoe Cases) C-62 



C-ix 



Page 

Federal Central Valley Project: Exchange of 

Waters C-65 

Federal Central Valley Project: Taking of 

Downstream Wat ;r Rights C-65 

Federal Central Valley Project: Application of 
Area of Origin Laws; Rights of Municipal 
Water Users C-66 



C-3 



MAJOR STATE LEGISLATION IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN 

I956-I966 

Prior to 1956 the Division of Water Resources was engaged 
primarily in water rights administration and in water resources 
investigation and planning activities. While these important 
functions, except water rights administration, continued to be 
performed by the Department during the next decade, the significant 
change in the State's role was the commencement of construction of 
a major water project by the State. This project, popularly known 
as the State Water Project, is the largest single water project 
ever undertaken anywhere in the world „ Even so, the project is only 
a part of the California Water Plan, The California Water Plan is 
a guide for the development of all the water resources of the State. 
All state legislation of the past decade believed to be of signifi- 
cance in implementing the entire California Water Plan is included 
in this portion of the Appendix. 

1956 

Department of Water Resources Created . Calif. Stats. 1956 
(Ex. Sess.), Ch. 52, abolished the Office of State Engineer, the 
Division of Water Resources, and the Water Project Authority, and 
created a Department of Water Resources and a State Water Rights 
Board. Except for functions transferred to the State Water Rights 
Board, the Department succeeded to all powers and matters pertaining 



C-l 



to water or dams then vested in the Department and Director of 
Public Works, and all the powers then vested in the Division of 
Water Resources, the State Engineer, and the Water Project Authority., 
The Department also succeeded to the powers of the State Water 
Resources Board and to the powers of the Department of Finance under 
Part 2 of Division 6 of the Water Code relating to state filings for 
the appropriation of water. The State Water Resources Board was 
continued in existence within the Department, but its name was 
changed to the State Water Board and it was made an advisory body, 
(Later it was renamed the California Water Commission to avoid 
confusion with the State Water Rights Board, Calif, Stats , 1957* 
Ch 19^-1 o) It was authorized to advise the Director with respect 
to any matters under his jurisdiction, and all rules and regulations 
of the Department other than those relating exclusively to the 
internal administration and management of the Department were required 
to be submitted to the Board for approval. The Reclamation Board was 
continued in existence within the Department, but the Board continued 
to exercise its powers independently. The State Water Rights Board 
was given jurisdiction over water rights, including permits and 
licenses for the appropriation of water, court reference proceedings, 
statutory adjudication proceedings, and recordation of ground water 
extractions and diversions. Thus by this act the foundation was 
laid for the Department of Water Resources to construct and operate 
the State Water Project, 

Investment Fund Created , Calif, Stats, 1956 (Ex. Sess.), 
Ch, 29, established a basis for partial financing of the State Water 
Project by creation of the Investment Fund (later renamed the 
California Water Fund) in which was deposited the State's share of 

C-2 



the Long Beach tideland oil and gas revenues. The Act provided 
that no portion of the fund should be expended unless and until 
specifically appropriated by the Legislature. 

Income from State Land Leases Routed to Investment Fund . 
Calif. Stats. 1956 (Ex. Sess.), Ch. 53, amended Section 68l6 of the 
Public Resources Code to provide that all income in any fiscal year 
from state land leases in excess of that required for certain 
specified purposes and in excess of a sum to be transferred to the 
General Fund, should be transferred to the Investment Fund. Thus 
the Investment Fund had two sources of revenue - the Long Beach 
tideland revenues and revenues from state land leases. 

Feather River Project Redefined . Calif. Stats. 1956 
(Ex. Sess.), Ch. 54. The Feather River Project, which included 
most of the features now designated the State Water Project, was 
authorized for state construction in 1951 (Water Code Section 11260) 
as set forth in the publication of the State Water Resources Board 
entitled "Report on Feasibility of Feather River Project and 
Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta Diversion Projects Proposed as Features 
of the California Water Plan", dated May, 1951. The 1956 amendment 
further defined the Project to include modifications set forth in the 
publication of the Division of Water Resources entitled "Program for 
Financing and Constructing the Feather River Project as the Initial 
Unit of the California Water Plan", dated February, 1955. 

Appropriations for State Water Project . In the Budget Act 
of 1956, Calif. Stats. 1956, Ch. 1, appropriations were made not only 
for continuing investigations and planning for the State Water Project, 
but also for acquisition of land. For example, Item 419.5 appropriated 



C-3 



$9*350,000 "for surveys, explorations, investigations, preparation 
of construction plans and specifications; surveys of, negotiations 
for, and acquisitions of, rights-of-way, easements, and property.... 
for the Feather River Project ..." Item 419.6 appropriated $273,000 
for acquisition of dam and reservoir sites in the Upper Feather River 
Service Area of the Feather River Project „ Among the appropriations 
for investigations, Item 223 appropriated $1,041,551 for investiga- 
tions in the North Coastal area and Sacramento Valley Basin, for 
major water resource developments in California including preparation 
of plans and estimates ; for investigations of projects to meet local 
water needs in the "areas of origin"; for geological exploration on 
major structures proposed for the California Water Plan; and for 
continuing comprehensive statewide collection, compilation, and 
publication of basic water resources data. Item 223.1 appropriated 
$385,000 for completion of engineering and geological investigations, 
studies, and reports with recommendations for a construction program 
for multipurpose water development and flood control projects in the 
Upper Feather River Service Area. Item 211 appropriated $6,000 for 
a land use survey on West Walker River; Item 222 appropriated $15,000 
for investigations under the State Water Resources Act of 19^5j 
Item 224 appropriated $60,350 for investigations to be matched in 
equal amounts by local agencies; Item 225 appropriated $200,000 for 
investigation and study of the Junction Point Barrier and Chipps 
Island Barrier pursuant to the Abshire -Kelly Salinity Control Barrier 
Act of 1955; Item 226 appropriated $207,014 for water right studies 
and negotiations concerning diversion and use of waters, of the 
Sacramento River and Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta; and Item 228 
appropriated $33,767 for similar studies and negotiations with 

C-4 



respect to the waters of the American and Feather Rivers. This 
list of appropriations is not exhaustive, but is typical of the 
appropriations being made at this period of time preliminary to 
actual state construction. As noted above, acquisition of lands 
for the State Water Project began at this time. In addition, 
Item 4l8 appropriated $1,700,000 to the Reclamation Board and 
Items 419, 437-441 appropriated $5,024,500 to the Department for 
payment of costs of lands, easements and rights-of-way for federal 
flood control projects. 

Appropriation for Flood Control Projects . Calif. Stats. 
1956 (Ex. Sess.), Ch. 27, appropriated $1,000,000 for use in paying 
costs of land, easements and rights-of-way for federal flood control 
projects between sessions of the Legislature when construction funds 
for projects authorized by the State are first made available by 
Congress when the Legislature is not in session. The Act was 
clarified by Calif. Stats. 1957, Ch. 32, and subsequent Budget 
Acts extended the availability of the funds. 

Investigations in Areas of Origin . Calif. Stats. 1956 
(Ex. Sess.), Ch. 6l, added Section 232 to the Water Code, authorizing 
and directing the Department to conduct investigations and hearings 
and to prepare findings therefrom and to report thereon to the Legis- 
lature with respect to the boundaries of the respective watersheds of 
the State and the quant it it ies of water originating therein; the 
quantities of water reasonably required for ultimate beneficial use In 
the respective watersheds; the quantities of water, if any, available 
for export from the respective watersheds; and the areas which can 



C-5 



be served by the water available for export. The Act also required 
the Department to hold public hearings before adopting any findings 
reported to the Legislature. 

San Lorenzo River Flood Control Project . Calif. Stats. 
1956 (Ex. Sess.), Ch. 19, authorized the San Lorenzo River Flood 
Control Project in Santa Cruz County for state financial assistance 
pursuant to the State Water Resources Law of 1945, under which the 
State has undertaken to pay the cost of land, easements, and rights- 
of-way, including relocation of roads and utilities, required for 
construction of federal flood control projects. 

1957 

Feather River Project: Relocation Appropriation . Calif. 
Stats. 1957, Ch. 15, which became effective in February 1957, 
appropriated $25,190,000 from the Investment Fund to the Department 
for relocation of the Western Pacific Railroad tracks and State 
Highway Route 21 around Oroville reservoir. Thus construction 
of the State Water Project began in 1956 with commencement of land 
acquisition and was continued in 1957 with the start of relocation 
of the Western Pacific Railroad and State Highway Route 21 as a 
necessary prelude to construction of Oroville Dam. 

Budget Act of 1957 » Calif. Stats. 1957, Ch. 600. Item 
417 appropriated from the Investment Fund to the Department $673,000 
for studies, investigations, and geologic exploration to determine 
the best and most economical aqueduct routes for the delivery of 
water to the Lower San Joaquin Valley and Southern California. 
Other important appropriations in the Budget Act included Item 263 
which appropriated $2,682,418 for water resources investigations, 
surveys, and studies, preparing plans and estimates, and making 

C-6 



reports thereon. Item 265 appropriated $33*250 for local cooperative 
investigations. Item 265.5 appropriated $35*000 for preparation of 
a comprehensive plan for development of the water resources of the 
Upper Tule River Basin. Item 266 appropriated $65,500 for special 
water resources investigations reports. Item 415 appropriated 
$90,000 for restoration of Cache Creek Settling Basin Weir. 
Item 419 appropriated $5,410,000 to the Reclamation Board and 
Item 434 appropriated $5,868,000 to the Department for payment of 
costs of lands, easements, and rights-of-way for federal flood 
control projects pursuant to the State Water Resources Law of 
1945. 

North Bay Aqueduct Authorized . Calif. Stats. 1957, 
Ch. 2252, added the North Bay Aqueduct to the State's Central 
Valley Project (Water Code Sections 11270, 11271), and appropriated 
$1,340,000 from the Investment Fund to the Department for expenditure 
for completion of engineering studies and preparation of construction 
plans and specifications for the North Bay Aqueduct. 

Upper Feather River Service Area of Feather River Project 
Further Defined . Califo Stats. 1957, Ch. 2359, amended Water Code 
Section 11260 to exclude from the Upper Feather River Service Area 
of the Feather River Project features on the South Fork of the 
Feather River. 

American River Development . Calif. Stats. 1957, Ch. 1121, 
provides that the American River Development, as described In 
Public Law 356 of the 8lst Congress, First Session, and as 
constructed by the Federal Government, is part of the State Water 
Plan and of the State Central Valley Project. 



C-7 



Small Corps Projects Authorized . Calif. Stats. 1957, 
Ch. 254, added Sections 12750 and 12751 to the Water Code to 
authorize small flood control projects undertaken by the Corps 
of Engineers for state financial assistance pursuant to the 
State Water Resources Law of 19^5 » 

Santa Maria River Flood Control Project Authorized . 
Calif. Stats. 1957, Ch, 13, authorized the Santa Maria River Flood 
Control Project in Santa Barbara County for State financial 
assistance pursuant to the State Water Resources Law of 19^5. 

Abshire-Kelly Salinity Control Barrier Act of 1957 * 
Calif. Stats. 1957 > Ch. 2092. This Act authorized the Department 
to limit its studies of salinity control barriers in the Delta to 
the Biemond Plan as described in Bulletin No. 60 of the Department 
entitled "Salinity Control Barrier Investigation", dated March, 
1957* subject to such modifications as the Department might adopt, 
such studies being for the purposes of developing plans for 
delivery of fresh water to the counties of Solano, Sonoma, Napa, 
and Marin, providing flood protection in the Sacramento -San Joaquin 
Delta, accomplishing salinity control, improving the quality of 
water exported from the Delta, making the most beneficial use of 
the water resources of the State, and studying integration of the 
proposed project in the California Water Plan. 

State Financial Assistance for Local Projects . Calif. 

Stats. 1957, Ch. 2052, was the forerunner of the Davis -Grunsky Act. 

It added Section 12880 to the Water Code establishing the policy of 

the State to provide grants and loans to cities, counties, and 

districts for aid in construction of projects for water development 

in which there is a statewide interest, and also to provide for 

state participation in such projects. State grants and loans 

C-8 



could be made upon application to the Department, a report thereon 
by the Department, and specific authorization by the Legislature 
for each project. 

Participation with United States in Planning Projects . 
Calif. Stats. 1957, Ch. 2417, added Sections 12895 and 12896 to 
the Water Code to authorize the Department to participate with 
the United States in the planning of water projects, and in 
particular in the planning of the New Melones and the New Hogan 
projects. 

Whale Rock Project Authorized . Calif. Stats. 1957, 
Ch. 1080, appropriated over $3 million to the Department of Finance 
for construction of the Whale Rock project in San Luis Obispo 
County. Since under the State Contract Act the Department of 
Water Resources in 1956 became the constructing agency of the 
State in matters pertaining to waters and dams, the Department 
of Finance contracted with the Department of Water Resources for 
construction of the project. 

Klamath River Basin Compact Approved . Calif. Stats. 
1957, Ch. 113. This compact is now set forth in Water Code 
Section 5901, added by Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 586. It has been 
approved also by the State of Oregon and by the Congress, and it 
is in effect. 

Appropriation of Water: Terms and Conditions . Calif. 
Stats. 1957, Ch. 2082, amended Section 1257 of the Water Code to 
enumerate beneficial uses which the State Water Rights Board may 
consider in acting upon applications to appropriate water, including 
domestic, irrigation, municipal, industrial, preservation of fish 
and wildlife, recreational, mining and power purposes, and to 

C-9 



authorize the Board to subject such appropriations to such terms 
and conditions as in its judgment will best develop, conserve, 
and utilize in the public interest the water sought to be 
appropriated. 

Beach Erosion Control: State Participation . Calif. 
Stats. 1957, Ch. 2376, added Sections 335 through 339 to the 
Water Code to authorize the Department to pay one -half of the 
costs of local participation required by federal legislation for 
beach erosion control projects in this State. 

Recreational Use of Water Supply Reservoirs . Calif. 
Stats. 1957, Ch. 2412, added Sections 4050 through 4055 to the 
Health and Safety Code to require that all water supply reservoirs 
of the State, cities, counties, and districts, other than terminal 
reservoirs for the supply of domestic water, shall be open for 
recreational use by the people of the State, subject to regulations 
of the Department of Public Health. 

Fishing in Publicly Owned Domestic Water Supply Reservoirs , 
Calif. Stats. 1957, Ch. 2413, added Sections 4462 through 4468 to 
the Health and Safety Code to authorize a city, city and county, 
district, or other public agency owning or operating a reservoir 
used for domestic or drinking water purposes, toopen to public 
fishing all or any part of the reservoir and its surrounding lands, 
subject to terms and conditions. 

1958 

Appropriations by Budget Act of 1958 . Calif. Stats. 1958, 
(Second Ex c Sess), Ch. 1. Major appropriations for the State 
Water Project included Item 425, which appropriated $3,723,672 to 
the Department from the Investment Fund for surveys, explorations, 

C-10 






investigations, preparation of construction plans and specifications; 
surveys and negotiations for rights-of-way, easements and property, 
for the Feather River Project, and Item 257, which appropriated 
$3,787,056 from the Investment Fund to the Department for water 
resources investigations, surveys and studies, including seepage 
control studies along the Sacramento River Item 257.1 appropriated 
$200,000 from the Investment Fund to the Department for conducting 
water resources investigations requested by concurrent resolution 
of the Legislature. Item 425.4 appropriated $10,000,000 from the 
Investment Fund to the Department for expenditure, without regard 
to fiscal years, in cooperation with the United States in the 
construction of multipurpose projects which include flood control; 
this money subsequently was pledged to ensure the payment to the 
Federal Government of the costs of Black Butte and New Hogan Dams 
allocated to irrigation. Item 426.5 appropriated $95,000 for the 
State's share and Item 426.6 appropriated $95,000 for advancing 
the federal share of the cost of a beach erosion control project 
at Seal Beach. Item 426.7 appropriated $24,000 for the State's 
share, and Item 426.8 appropriated $32,000 for advancing the 
federal share of the cost of a beach erosion control project at 
Imperial Beach. Item 427.5 reappropriated $300,000 for acquisition 
of real property for recreational purposes in the vicinity of 
reservoirs constructed by the State. Item 428 appropriated 
$4,150,000 to the Reclamation Board for acquisition of lands, 
easements and rights-of-way for flood control projects in the 
Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys, and Item 445 appropriated 
$6,272,000 to the Department for costs of lands, easements and 



C-ll 



rights of way for federal flood control projects pursuant to the 
State Water Resources Law of 1945 and the California Watershed 
Protection and Flood Prevention Law. Item 446.2 appropriated 
$780,000 from the Investment Fund to the Department for repair 
of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project required as a result 
of the 1958 flood. Item 446.7 appropriated $15,000,000 from the 
Investment Fund to the Department for repair of storm damage to 
public real property. Item 446.8 appropriated $1,000,000 to the 
Department from the Investment Fund for expenditure, without 
regard to fiscal years, for flood fighting during emergencies 
authorized by the Director pursuant to Section 128 of the Water 
Code. 

Recreational Development at State Water Projects . Calif. 
Stats. 1958 (First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 101, added Section 345 to the 
Water Code to require the Department to plan recreation development 
associated with state-constructed water projects, in consultation 
with affected local, state, and federal agencies. 

Truckee River Flood Control Project Authorized . Calif. 
Stats. 1958 (First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 84, authorized State financial 
participation in the Truckee River Flood Control Project pursuant 
to the State Water Resources Law of 1945. This is the only project 
for which the Department has been authorized to give the assurances 
of local cooperation required by federal legislation. 

1959 

California Water Fund Created . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 140. 

Tnis Act, adding Sections 12900 through 12915 to the Water Code, 

abolished the Investment Fund and created in its place the 

California Water Fund. It provided for deposit in the fund of 

all moneys in the Investment Fund, all revenues to be received 

C-12 



by the State from Long Beach tideland oil and gas revenues, and 
revenues from state land leases which formerly were required 
under Public Resources Code Section 68l6 to be transferred to 
the Investment Fund. 

California Water Resources Development Bond Act (Burns- 
Porter Act) , Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 1762. Oh is Act, adding 
Sections 12930 through 129^2 to the Water Code, and approved by 
the people at the general election in November i960, is the major 
financing act for the construction of the State Water Project. It 
authorized the sale of general obligation bonds of the State in the 
amount of $1,750,000,000. The bond proceeds are appropriated to 
the Department, without regard to fiscal years, to construct the 
"State Water Facilities" and certain "additional facilities". The 
State water facilities are defined to include Oroville Dam and 
appurtenant features, the Upper Feather River Basin developments, 
an aqueduct system to carry water from the Delta to Southern 
California and various points in between, the North Bay Aqueduct, 
the South Bay Aqueduct, the San Luis Dam and Reservoir, levee 
protection and water transfer facilities in the Delta, drainage 
facilities for the San Joaquin Valley, and facilities for 
generation and transmission of electrical energy. $130,000,000 is 
made available exclusively for local water development facilities 
under the Davis-Grunsky Act. The Act also appropriates for the 
project all money in the California Water Fund and all accruals 
thereto, without regard to fiscal years, and provides that any 
money in the California Water Fund shall be used for construction 
of the State Water Facilities in lieu of bond proceeds. To that 
extent, an equal amount of authorized bonds are offset, and the 

C-13 



bond proceeds appropriated, for construction of such "additional 
facilities" in the watersheds of the Sacramento, Eel, Trinity, 
Mad, Van Duzen, and Klamath Rivers, as the Department shall determine 
to be necessary and desirable to meet local needs and to augment the 
supplies of water in the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta. The Act also 
authorizes the Department to construct and operate the facilities 
in accordance with the provisions of the state Central Valley 
Project Act, and authorizes the Department to enter into contracts 
with public or private corporations, entitles, or individuals, for 
the sale, delivery, or use of water or power or other services 
made available by the project. The revenues from the facilities 
are pledged first to operation, maintenance and replacement, second 
to payment of principal and interest on the bonds, third to reim- 
bursement of the California Water Fund, and fourth, as to any 
surplus revenues, for acquisition and construction. 

Feather River Project Further Modified . Calif. Stats. 
1959, Ch. 2043, further amended Section 11260 of the Water Code 
to modify the Feather River Project in accordance with the 
recommendations contained in Bulletin No. 78 of the Department 
of Water Resources, entitled "Preliminary Summary Report on 
Investigation of Alternative Aqueduct Systems to Serve Southern 
California", dated February, 1959. 

California Water Plan Adopted . Calif. Stats. 1959, 
Ch. 2053, provided for legislative adoption of the California 
Water Plan as a general guide for the orderly and coordinated 
development and utilization of the water resources of the State. 
It authorizes the Department of Water Resources to adopt such 
amendments, supplements and additions from time to time as it 

c-14 



finds necessary and desirable, which become effective when reported 
to the Legislature at any session. The Act also requires the State 
Water Rights Board, in acting upon applications for the appropria- 
tion of water, to give consideration to the California Water Plan 
in determining the public interest under Sections 1253 and 1255 of 
the Water Code. It also requires regional water pollution (quality) 
control boards to give consideration to the plan in establishing 
requirements for waste discharges. 

Davis -Grunsky Act . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 1752, 
amended Section 12880 of the Water Code added by the Grunsky bill 
in 1957, added additional sections, and provided that the chapter 
in which these sections occur shall be known as the Davis-Grunsky 
Act. The earlier 1957 Act set forth the policy of providing state 
loans, grants, and participation in local water development projects. 
The 1959 Act expanded on this policy and authorized the Department 
of Water Resources to make loans and grants up to specified maximum 
amounts without legislative approval, but with approval of the 
California Water Commission. Larger loans and grants may be made 
upon approval by the Legislature. It also provided $15 million in 
a Local Projects Assistance Fund for financing the program. It 
further provided that upon approval of the California Water 
Resources Development Bond Act by the people at the November i960 
election, the Local Projects Assistance Fund would be abolished 
and thereafter projects under the Davis-Grunsky Act would be 
financed from the $130 million made available by the Bond Act. 
Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 2163, authorized the Department to loan 
up to $1,260,000 from the Local Projects Assistance Fund to the 
South Sutter Water District for construction of an irrigation 

project. 

C-15 



State Assistance to Impact Areas: The Byrne Act . Calif. 
Stats. 1959, Ch. 2019, added Division 19 to the Water Code (the 
provisions of which were subsequently transferred by Calif. Stats. 
1963, Ch. 464, to Division 6, Part 7, Sections 12950 through 1296l), 
to provide for state assistance to local governments where construc- 
tion of water resources projects financed, in whole or in part, by 
the State creates a burden on the local government. The State will 
pay increased operating expenses of public hospitals, fire, health, 
sanitation and police protection, and other activities approved by 
the Departments of Finance and Water Resources, caused by the influx 
of workers on the project, and 75 percent of increased costs of 
emergency and indigent relief. Funds for capital outlay for 
police and fire protection, essential health services, and water 
and sewerage systems may be obtained by state loans; direct state 
expenditures may be made for temporary systems. Assistance may be 
provided only within impact areas designated by the Governor as 
provided in the Act. 

Planning for Recreation and Fish and Wildlife at State 
Water Projects . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 2047, added Section 233 
to the Water Code to require that any plans or proposals submitted 
by the Department to the Legislature for construction and operation 
of a water project by the State must include comments of the 
Department of Fish and Game and provision for any water or 
facilities necessary for public recreation and the preservation 
and enhancement of fish and wildlife resources that the Department 
of Water Resources determines to be justifiable and feasible as a 
nonreimbursable cost of the project. 



C-l6 



Acquisition of Land for Recreation . Calif. Stats. 1959, 
Ch. 2143, added Section 346 to the Water Code to authorize the 
Department to acquire land by condemnation or other means for 
recreational development in connection with state-constructed 
water projects, and to authorize for such purpose the use of any 
funds theretofore or thereafter appropriated to the Department for 
acquisition of rights-of-way, easements, and property. 

Use of Water for Recreation and Fish and Wildlife . Calif. 
Stats. 1959, Ch. 2048, added Section 1243 to the Water Code to 
provide that use of water for recreation and the preservation 
and enhancement of fish and wildlife resources is a beneficial 
use, and to require that the State Water Rights Board take into 
account, whenever it is in the public Interest, the amounts of 
water required for recreation and the preservation and enhancement 
of fish and wildlife resources in determining the amount of water 
available for appropriation for other beneficial uses. It also 
amended Section 1257 of the Water Code to make it mandatory rather 
than discretionary that the State Water Rights Board, in acting 
upon applications to appropriate water, consider the relative 
benefit to be derived from all beneficial uses of the water 
concerned. 

Budget Act of 1959 . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch a 1300. In 
addition to appropriations for various other water resources 
investigations and studies, Item 262 appropriated $3,336,530 to 
the Department from the Investment Fund (California Water Fund) 
for conducting water resources investigations, preparing plans 
and estimates, and making reports thereon. Item 262.5 appropriated 
»,000 from the Investment Fund to the Department for a comprehensive 

C-17 



study of the Colusa Basin. Item 263 appropriated $70,441 from 
the Investment Fund for nuclear engineering studies. Item 382 
appropriated $4,136,159 to the Department from the Investment 
Fund for investigations, preparation of construction plans and 
specifications, and surveys and negotiations for rights-of-way, 
easements, and property for the Feather River Project. Item 383 
appropriated $27,972,000 from the Investment Fund to the Department 
for surveys of, negotiations for, and acquisition of lands and 
rights-of-way for the San Joaquin Valley-Southern California 
Aqueduct system and the San Luis Reservoir site. Similarly, Item 
383.5 appropriated $1,000,000 for acquisition of lands for the 
North Bay Aqueduct, Item 384 appropriated $8,013,000 for construc- 
tion and land and property acquisition for the South Bay Aqueduct, 
Item 384.1 appropriated $100,000 for acquisition of lands for the 
Pacheco Pass Tunnel, Item 386 appropriated $11,883,000 for abridge 
over the west branch of the Feather River in connection with the 
railroad and highway relocation around Oroville Dam, Item 387 
appropriated $2,394,000 for construction and land acquisition for 
the Upper Feather River Dams and Reservoirs, Item 388.1 appropriated 
$13,562,000 for construction and land acquisition for the Oroville 
Dam and for relocation of the Western Pacific Railroad, and 
Item 389 appropriated $20,000 for protection and maintenance of 
structures, improvements and equipment acquired or constructed 
for the Feather River Project. All the above appropriations were 
from the Investment Fund (California Water Fund). The purpose of 
these appropriations was to continue the construction and land 
acquisition activities already undertaken so as to not delay the 
construction time schedule pending approval of the Bond Act at 

the November i960 election. In addition, Item 385 appropriated 

C-18 



$3*740,000 from the Investment Fund to the Department for expenditure 
in cooperation with the Federal Government in the construction of 
multipurpose projects which included flood control. This 
appropriation was needed as additional security to the Federal 
Government for construction of Black Butte and New Hogan Dams. 
Item 388 appropriated $1,600,000 to the Department from the 
Investment Fund for expenditure in cooperation with the Federal 
Government in the investigation, planning and construction of a 
sea water conversion plant. For payment and costs of lands, 
easements, and rights-of-way for federal flood control projects, 
Item 390 appropriated $6,000,000 to the Reclamation Board and 
Item 405 appropriated $7,688,000 to the Department. For small 
Corps projects, Item 405.1 appropriated $210,000 and Item 405.5 
appropriated $325*000. For watershed projects, Item 406 appropriated 
$1,267,300. Item 407 appropriated $42,000 to the Department for 
beach erosion control projects. 

Additional Investigations and Appropriations , Calif. 
Stats. 1959, Ch. 2090, amended Section 226 of the Water Code to 
authorize the Department to investigate the rate of use of water 
for various purposes, considering various soil conditions, and 
appropriated $250,000 from the California Water Fund to the 
Department for making such investigations. Chapter 1909 appropriated 
from the California Water Fund $130,000 to the Department for studies 
of pollution in the Sacramento River and $83,000 to the University 
of California for studies of pollution in the San Francisco Bay 
Area. Chapter 1698 appropriated $70,000 from the Investment Fund 
(California Water Fund) to the Department for expenditure either 
independently or in cooperation with others for an investigation of 

C-19 



electrical power sources in the Pacific Northwest for possible use 
in California, especially for California state water project 
pumping. Chapter 1765 appropriated $200,000 to the Department 
to investigate the water supplies for the Sacramento -San Joaquin 
Delta and $230,000 for additional studies under the Abshire-Kelly 
Salinity Control Barrier Act of 1957, including study of types and 
methods of construction of levee systems. 

Black Butte and New Hogan Dams and Reservoirs . Calif. 
Stats 1959, Chapters 177^ and 1750, authorized Black Butte Dam 
and Reservoir and New Hogan Dam and Reservoir, respectively, as 
units of the state Central Valley Project. The purpose of this 
authorization was to enable the Department to contract with the 
United States under the cooperative provisions of the State Central 
Valley Project Act to ensure repayment of the costs of the dams 
and reservoirs allocated to irrigation. 

Cache Creek Project . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 2056, 
amended the authorization in Water Code Section 12663 of the 
Cache Creek Project to adopt the Wilson Valley Reservoir site in 
place of the Guinda Reservoir site. 

State Filings . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 2101, transferred 
custody of state filings for the appropriation of water from the 
Department to the California Water Commission. Chapter 2099 added 
a provision to require public hearings by the Commission before 
any such applications are assigned or released from priority. 
Chapters 1769, 1770, and 1771 extended the exemption of state 
filings for the appropriation of water from the requirements of 
diligence for another four years. 

Areas of Origin . Calif, Stats. 1959, Ch. 2063, added 

C-20 



Section 108 to the Water Code to require that any coordinated plan 
by the Department must take into consideration the needs of the 
areas in which the water originates, and to declare that whenever 
the Legislature authorizes any project which will develop water 
for use outside the watershed in which such water originates, it 
shall at the same time consider authorization and construction of 
works necessary to develop water to satisfy the requirements of the 
watershed. 

Water Seepage . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 2128, added 
Sections 12627.3 and 12627.4 to the Water Code, declaring it to 
be the policy of the State that the costs of solution of seepage 
and erosion problems arising by reason of construction and operation 
of water projects should be borne by the project, and requiring the 
Department to include consideration of seepage and erosion problems 
in its investigations and recommendations, and to plan for the 
solution thereof as a part of project development. 

Archaeological Investigations . Calif. Stats. 1959, 
Ch. 806, added Section 234 to the Water Code to authorize the 
Department, either independently or in cooperation with others, 
to investigate, excavate, and preserve any historic or prehistoric 
ruin or monument, or any object of antiquity, situated in areas 
to be used for state water development purposes. 

Clearing of Reservoir Sites . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 984, 
added Section 1393 to the Water Code to require the State Water 
Rights Board to require clearing of reservoir sites as a condition 
in permits for appropriation and storage of water. 

Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta Protection . Calif. Stats. 
1959, Ch. 1766, added Part 4.5 (commencing at Section 12200) to 

C-21 



Division 6 of the Water Code, defining the Sacramento-San Joaquin 
Delta and declaring that the maintenance of an adequate water supply 
in the Delta sufficient for uses in the Delta and to provide a 
common source of fresh water for export are necessary, but that 
the delivery of such waters shall be subject to the county of 
origin and watershed protection provisions in Sections IO505 and 
11460 to 11463, inclusive, of the Water Code. It provides that 
among the functions to be provided by the State Water Resources 
Development System, in coordination with the activities of the 
United States in providing salinity control through operation of 
the Federal Central Valley Project, shall be the provision of 
salinity control and an adequate water supply for the users of 
water in the Delta. It provides that if a substitute water supply 
is provided for salinity control, no added financial burden shall 
be placed on the Delta water users solely by virtue of such 
substitution. It declares the policy that no waters should be 
diverted from the Delta to which the users within the 
Delta are entitled, and that in determining the availability of 
water for export, no water shall be exported which is necessary 
to meet the requirements of the Delta, including salinity control. 

Dickey Water Pollution Act Strengthened . Calif. Stats. 
1959, Ch. 1299, made numerous changes to the Dickey Water Pollution 
Act in Division 7 of the Water Code for the purpose of strengthening 
the Act. It required that the disposal of waste into the waters 
of the State be so regulated as to achieve highest water quality 
consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State. It 
provided that a discharge pursuant to prescribed requirements 
shall not create a vested right to continue such discharge, and 

C-22 



made It clear that regional boards may revise requirements. It 
required the State and regional boards, in formulating policies, 
to take cognizance of the California Water Plan. It enabled the 
regional boards to prescribe requirements as to discharges which 
began prior to the effective date of the Dickey Water Pollution 
Act. It required the reporting of material changes in the character, 
location or volume of discharge and authorized the boards to 
prescribe requirements relative thereto. It authorized the 
regional boards to allow and maintain a margin of safety in 
receiving waters, and to specify certain conditions and locations 
where no direct discharge of sewage or industrial waste would be 
permitted. Enforcement procedures were strengthened by repealing 
the cumbersome procedure for enforcement of requirements and 
providing a more direct and simplified procedure whereby the 
boards could issue cease and desist orders against violators of 
prescribed requirements and then go directly into court for a 
restraining order. Under the prior procedure the boards had 
first to hold a hearing, order correction, and then bring an 
injunction proceeding. In addition, a summary abatement procedure 
to abate a pollution or nuisance which is transitory in nature or 
is of short duration but periodic in occurrence was provided. 
Boards were authorized to institute injunction proceedings 
requiring the discharger to file required reports and to restrain 
such dischargers from making discharges in the region until the 
required reports are filed. Failure to file required reports was 
made a misdemeanor. 

Flood Control Projects . Two new projects were authorized 
for state financial assistance pursuant to the State Water Resources 

C-23 



Law of 1945. Chapters 202 and 217 , Statutes of 1959, authorized 
the project for flood protection on the Eel River, in the Sandy- 
Prairie region. Chapter 1912 authorized the project from Chico 
Landing to Red Bluff on the Sacramento River. 

Storm and Flood Damage Repair . Calif. Stats. 1959, 
Ch. 1511, enacted the Emergency Flood Relief Law (Art. 6, commencing 
at Sec. 54150, of Ch. 5 of Pt. 1 of Div. 2 of Title 5 of the 
Government Code), to provide basic legislation for state financial 
assistance for repair of real property owned by cities, counties, 
and districts, which is damaged by storm or flood. 

Fishing in Water Supplies . Calif. Stats. 1959, Ch. 493, 
added Article 2.5 (commencing at Section 4470) to Chapter 4, Part 2, 
Division 5 of the Health and Safety Code to authorize a county board 
of supervisors to request a governmental agency (any city, city and 
county, and district, but not a chartered city or a county) owning 
a body of water used for human consumption (except reservoirs which 
supply water directly without further purification) to open the 
body of water to public fishing and the surrounding land area to 
other recreational uses. The board of supervisors at the same time 
shall deposit costs of completing a coordinated plan for such use, 
up to $2,500. The governmental agency shall thereupon complete 
the plan and apply to the Department of Public Health for an 
amended water supply permit. After receipt of the amended 
permit, if the agency refuses to allow recreational use, the 
issue must be voted on by the constituents of the agency. The 
agency may fix and collect fees and establish rules and regulations 
for the public use. 



C-24 



Investigations in Watersheds of Origin . Calif „ Stats. 
1959, Ch. 2025, amended Section 232 of the Water Code (the "drop 
by drop" survey investigation provisions), to authorize the 
Department to investigate present uses of water within each 
watershed of the State, together with the apparent claim of 
water right attaching thereto. 

I960 

Budget Act of I960 , Calif. Stats, i960, Ch. 11. Since 
the California Water Resources Development Bond Act could not 
become effective until approved by the voters at the November i960 
election, additional appropriations for the State Water Project 
were made in the Budget Act of i960. For example, Item 257 
appropriated $5,8l4,54l from the California Water Fund for 
investigations, preparation of construction plans and specifications, 
and acquisition of lands and rights-of-way. Item 353 appropriated 
$21,537,721 from the California Water Fund for construction and 
land acquisition at the Oroville site; Item 354 appropriated 
$8,362,922 from the California Water Fund for construction of the 
South Bay Aqueduct; and Item 355 appropriated $4,095,059 from the 
California Water Fund for construction of the California Aqueduct, 
then known as the San Joaquin Valley-Southern California Aqueduct 
System. Item 256 appropriated $3,736,480 from the California 
Water Fund for investigations and reports relative to the 
California water planning program, and Item 255 appropriated 
$283,571 from the California Water Fund to the Department to 
conduct a comprehensive water pollution study in the Sacramento 
River. Item 371 appropriated $9,204,000 to the Department for 
lands, easements, and rights-of-way for federal flood control 

C-25 



projects under the State Water Resources Law of 19^5, Item 373 
appropriated $3,610,000 to the Reclamation Board for such projects, 
and Item 372 appropriated $1,151,000 to the Department for lands, 
easements, and rights-of-way for small watershed projects pursuant 
to the California Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Law. 
Item 374 appropriated $1,136,500 to the Department for beach erosion 
control projects. 

1961 
Recreation and Fish and Wildlife at State Water Projects: 
Davis -Dolwig Act . Calif. Stats. 1961, Ch. 867, added the Davis - 
Dolwig Act to the state Central Valley Project Act as Chapter 10 
(commencing with Section 11900) of Part 3 of Division 6 of the 
Water Code. It declares the policy that recreation and enhancement 
of fish and wildlife resources are among the purposes of state water 
projects; that the acquisition of real property for such purposes 
should be planned and initiated concurrently with and as a part 
of the land acquisition program for other purposes; and that 
facilities for such purposes be ready and available for public 
use when each project is completed. It provides that the costs 
of preservation of fish and wildlife are reimbursable by the water 
and power users, but that the costs incurred for recreation and for 
enhancement of fish and wildlife shall be nonreimbursable. It 
further declares the policy of paying the nonreimbursable costs 
from General Fund appropriations in the annual Budget Acts. It 
requires the Department to plan recreation at state water projects, 
in cooperation with state and federal agencies, through the advance 
planning stage. It authorizes the Department of Parks and Recreation 
to construct, operate and maintain public recreation facilities at 

C-26 



state water projects and the Department of Fish and Game to manage 
fish and wildlife resources at state water projects. 

Ground Water: Porter-Dolwig Ground Water Basin Protection 
Law , Calif. Stats. 1961, Ch. 1620, enacted the Porter-Dolwig Ground 
Water Basin Protection Law as Chapter 7.5 (commencing with Section 
12920) to Part 6 of Division 6 of the Water Code. It declares the 
intention of the Legislature that the Department shall initiate 
investigations, studies, plans and design criteria for construction 
of ground water basin protection projects deemed by the Department 
to be practical, economically feasible and urgently needed; and 
that upon the submission by any local agency to the Department of 
plans and design criteria for any such project, a review, evaluation, 
and any necessary revision of such plans and design criteria shall 
be made by the Department to ensure that construction will provide 
protection to the ground water basin. It appropriated $250,000 
to the Department for the I96I-I962 fiscal year. 

Sacramento River and Delta: Recreational and Wildlife 
Habitat Study . Calif. Stats. I96I, Ch. 324, directed the Director 
of Natural Resources, in cooperation with the Director of Water 
Resources, the Director of Pish and Game, and the State Reclamation 
Board to make a survey and report on the reaches and banks of the 
Sacramento River and Delta suitable to be preserved and developed 
as recreational and wildlife habitat areas. It provided for 
appointment of four members of the Legislature as a joint interim 
investigating committee to participate in the study, and appropriated 
$25,000. 

Recharge of Ground Water from Reclaimed Water . Calif» 
Stats. 1961, Ch, 1131, amended Section 4458 of the Health and 

C-27 



Safety Code, to provide a procedure for permitting water reclaimed 
from sewage to be injected via a well into a subterranean water- 
bearing stratum that is used, or suitable for or intended to be 
used, as a source of water supply for domestic purposes, The 
procedure requires a hearing and finding by the State Board of 
Public Health that the proposed recharge will not impair the 
quality of the water in the receiving aquifer as a source of water 
supply for domestic purposes. It also requires a finding by the 
appropriate regional water pollution (quality) control board that 
water quality considerations do not preclude controlled recharge. 

Davis -Grunsky Act Amendments. Calif. Stats. 196l, 
Chapters 1286 and 1723 amended the Davis-Grunsky Act. Chapter 1286 
provided that preference be given to projects involving development 
of new basic water supplies and that no funds should be loaned for 
distribution system projects except in cases which involve extreme 
hardship which jeopardizes the public health, safety or welfare. 
However, a loan may cover distribution facilities that are a 
necessary and integral part of an over-all water development 
project. Chapter 1723 authorized loans for preparation of 
feasibility reports; provided that construction costs of a dam 
and reservoir allocable to recreation for grant purposes may 
include costs of lands needed for public recreation located above 
the high water line; granted Independent power to public agencies 
to contract with the Department under the Davis-Grunsky Act; and 
made other changes. Chapter 1292 authorized a grant up to 
$3,090,100 for the Paskenta Dam and Reservoir on Thomes Creek in 
Tehama County. 



C-28 



Flood Control Projects . Calif. Stats. 196l, Ch. 211, 
authorized the Walnut Creek Flood Control Project for state 
financial assistance pursuant to the State Water Resources Law 
of 1945. 

Organization . Calif. Stats. 1961, Ch. 2037, created the 
Resources Agency, consisting of the Departments of Water Resources, 
Conservation, Fish and Game, Parks and Recreation, and also the 
State Water Rights Board, the State Water Pollution Control Board, 
each regional water pollution control board, and the Fish and Game 
Commission. 

San Joaquin River Water Quality . Calif. Stats. 1961, 
Ch. 1454, added Part 4.6 (commencing with Section 12230) to 
Division 6 of the Water Code to declare that a serious problem 
of water quality exists in the San Joaquin River between its 
junction with the Merced River and with the Middle River, which 
is of statewide interest, and that a solution to the problem is 
a responsibility of the State. 

Appropriations; Budget Act of 1961, Calif. Stats. 196l, 

Ch. 888. With the continuing appropriation in the California 

Water Resources Development Bond Act going into effect in 

November, i960, fewer appropriations for the State Water Project 

were made in the Budget Act of 1961. Item 339.1 appropriated 

$100,000 to the Division of Beaches and Parks for recreational 

facilities at Frenchman Reservoir. For payment of costs of lands, 

easements and rights-of-way for federal flood control projects, 

Item 399 appropriated $2, 075*949 to the Department for projects 

under the State Water Resources Law of 1945 » Item 400 appropriated 

$753,500 to the Department for projects under the California 

Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Law, Item 400.1 

C-29 



appropriated $50,000 to the Department for the Ulatis Creek Watershed 
Project, and Item 401 appropriated $6,155,000 to the Reclamation 
Board. Item 402 appropriated $570,968 to the Department for beach 
erosion control projects. 

Goose Lake . Calif. Stats. 1961, Ch. 1389, created the 
Goose Lake Compact Commission to formulate an interstate compact 
relative to the waters of Goose Lake. 

1962 

Appropriations: Budget Act of 19_6_2 , Calif. Stats. 1962, 
(Second Ex. Sess.) Ch. 1. In addition to appropriations for various 
investigation activities of the Department, Item 348 appropriated 
$487,866 to the Department for access roads and recreational 
facilities at Frenchman Reservoir and for onshore recreational 
facilities at Antelope Valley Reservoir. For lands, easements and 
rights-of-way for federal flood control projects, Item 408 
appropriated $10,806,348 to the Department and Item 410 appropriated 
$5,894,000 \,o the Reclamation Board for projects under the State 
Water Resources Law of 1945; Item 409 appropriated $2,759>3l4 to 
the Department for projects under the California Watershed Protection 
and Flood Prevention Law. Item 410.1 appropriated $270,000 to the 
Reclamation Board for the Sacramento River Bank Protection Project. 
Item 411 appropriated $1,265,790 to the Department for beach erosion 
control projects. 



C-30 



Tahchevah Creek Flood Control Project . Calif. Stats. 
1962 (First Ex. Sess.) Ch. 4l, authorized this project for state 
financial assistance pursuant to the State Water Resources Law 
of 1945. 

Davis Grunsky Act Grant . Calif. Stats. 1962 (First Ex. 
Sess.), Ch. 47, authorized the Department to make a grant to the 
Monterey County Flood Control and Water Conservation District not 
to exceed $3,820,000 for recreational functions incidental to the 
construction of San Antonio Dam and Reservoir. 

The Cameron-Unruh Park and Recreation Bond Act . Calif. 
Stats. 1962 (First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 24, provided authorization for 
issuance of $150,000,000 in general obligation bonds for park and 
recreational facilities. The Act provided that no funds could be 
expended on construction of reservoirs in the State Water 
Facilities, but that they could be expended for the acquisition 
and establishment of beaches, parks, recreational facilities, and 
historical monuments at or in the vicinity of any such reservoir. 

1963 
Delta Recreation Plan . Calif. Stats. 1963, Ch. 2094, 
directed the Resources Agency Administrator, in collaboration 
with the State Office of Planning, to undertake a study for the 
purpose of developing a comprehensive master recreation plan for 
the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta and along the Sacramento River. 
It appropriated $40,000 for carrying out the study. 



C-31 



Dickey Water Pollution Control Act Strengthened . 
Calif. Stats. 1963, Ch. 1463, renamed the State Water Pollution 
Control Board the State Water Quality Control Board, and authorized 
that Board to formulate and adopt a statewide policy for water 
quality control binding on other agencies of the State. 

Davis-Grunsky Act Amendments . Calif. Stats. 1963, Ch. 
2023, amended the Davis-Grunsky Act to authorize the making of 
loans and grants for projects that are primarily for recreation 
or fish and wildlife enhancement purposes; to authorize the 
making of grants for initial water supply and sanitary facilities 
needed for public recreational use of dams and reservoirs; and 
to authorize the Department to participate with local agencies 
in constructing and operating local projects up to an amount not 
exceeding $1,000,000 without specific legislative authorization. 
It also liberalized the Act in a number of other particulars. 
Additional liberalizing amendments to the Act were made at the 
same session by Chapters 53, 82, 769, 908, and 1075. 

Davis-Grunsky Act Grants Authorized . Grants in excess 
of the statutory limit were authorized to be made to the following 
agencies: Browns Valley Irrigation District for the Virginia Ranch 
Dam Project in Yuba County (Chapter 132); San Luis Obispo County 
Flood Control and Water Conservation District for Lopez Dam and 



C-32 



Reservoir (Chapter 521); Oroville -Wyandotte Irrigation District 
for its South Fork Feather River Project (Chapter 1925); Tuolumne 
County Water District No. 2 for its Tuolumne River Project (Chapter 
1932); Helix Irrigation District for Chet Harritt Dam in San Diego 
County (Chapter 1962); Placer County Water Agency for its Middle 
Fork American River Project (Chapter 1969); Nevada Irrigation 
District for its Yuba-Bear River Development (Chapter 1970); 
South Sutter Water District for its Camp Far West Project (Chapter 
1973); Siskiyou County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 
for Box Canyon Dam (Chapter 1987); Yuba County Water Agency for its 
Yuba River Development (Chapter 1993). 

Flood Control Projects. The following flood control 
projects were authorized for state financial assistance pursuant 
to the State Water Resources Law of 1945 *• Alameda Creek in 
Alameda County (Chapter 468); Mormon Slough Channel Improvement 
on the Calaveras River (Chapter 915); New Melones Reservoir Channel 
Improvement on the Stanislaus River (Chapter 918); Hidden Reservoir 
Channel Improvement on the Fresno River (Chapter 1202); Buchanan 
Reservoir Channel Improvement on the Chowchilla River (Chapter 1203); 
and the Russian River, Dry Creek Project (Chapter 2056). 

Loan Authorization to Merced Irrigation District . Calif. 
Stats. 1963, Ch. 1435, appropriated $8,000,000 from the California 
Water Fund to the Department for a loan to the Merced Irrigation 
District to be used if necessary for expenditure in anticipation 
of receipt of federal contributions for flood control for the 
District's Merced River Development. 



C-33 






Agua Frla Project . Calif. Stats 1963, Ch. 1854, authorized 
the Department to complete feasibility studies of the proposed 
Agua Pria Project on Mariposa Creek in Mariposa County, and 
appropriated $78,000 for this purpose. 

Interstate Compact . Calif. Stats. 1963, Ch. 1059, ratified 
the Oregon-California Goose Lake Interstate Compact and added it 
to the Water Code, commencing with Section 5950. (The Compact 
has been ratified by Oregon but has not been approved by the 
United States.) 

State Filings . Calif. Stats. 1963, Ch. 159* again extended 
the exemption of state filings for the appropriation of water from 
the requirements of diligence for another four years, until 
October 1, 1967. 

Budget Act of 1963 , Calif. Stats. 1963, Ch. 1050. In 
addition to appropriations for general investigations and other 
activities of the Department, the following appropriations are of 
significance: Item 262 appropriated $78,300 to the Department from 
the California Water Fund for conducting recreation surveys. Item 
262.1 appropriated $124,499 to the Department from the California 
Water Fund to assess the impact of the United States Supreme Court's 
decision in Arizona v. California on the State's water program. 
Item 362 appropriated $689,000 for recreation access roads, onshore 
development, and tree planting at various of the following state 
water facilities: Frenchman Reservoir, Antelope Valley Reservoir, 
Del Valle Reservoir, and San Luis Reservoir. For payment of costs 
of lands, easements and rights-of-way for flood control projects 
pursuant to the State Water Resources Law of 1945, Item 429 
appropriated $12,366,800 to the Department and Item 431 appropriated 

C-34 



$3,517,922 to the Reclamation Board; Item 430 appropriated 
$2,173,291 to the Department for projects under the California 
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Law. Item 432 appropriated 
$993,000 to the Reclamation Board for the Sacramento River Bank 
Protection Project. Item 433 appropriated $4,328,200 to the 
Department for Beach Erosion Control Projects. Section 3.5 of 
the Budget Act appropriated $20,000,000 out of the California 
Water Fund for schools, and Section 3.6 appropriated all amounts 
accruing to the California Water Fund during the 1963-64 fiscal 
year in excess of $10,000,000 for schools. 

Supplementary Appropriations . Supplementary appropriations 
to the Budget Act of 1963, made by Chapter 8, Statutes of 1963, First 
Extraordinary Session, included Item 31 appropriating $55,000 to the 
Department for geologic studies of ground water basins in Orange 
County, Item 31.5 appropriating $75,000 to the Department for a 
final feasibility study for Box Canyon Project on the Sacramento 
River, Item 32 appropriating $70,453 for the San Mateo County 
Coastal Investigation, and Item 33 appropriating $7,000 for a 
reconnaissance study and report on Ewing Dam and Reservoir in 
Trinity County. 

1964 
Yuba River Development Loan Authorized . Calif. Stats. 
J1964 (First Ex. SesSo), Ch. 4l, authorized the Department to loan, 
from funds appropriated but now encumbered for Black Butte and 
New Hogan Dams, not to exceed $10,000,000 to the Yuba County Water 
Agency in anticipation of federal flood control contributions for 
the Yuba River Development. (These funds are still encumbered 
under the Black Butte and New Hogan contracts, and no loan has 
been made to the Yuba County Water Agency.) 

C-35 



Long Beach Tldeland Revenues for the State Water Project . 
Calif. Stats. 1964 (First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 138, limited the amount 
of Long Beach tideland oil and gas revenues accruing annually to 
the California Water Fund to $11,000,000. 

Appropriations . Significant appropriations in the Budget 
Act of 1964, Calif. Stats. 1964 (Second Ex. Sess.), Ch. 2, included 
the following: Item 255 appropriated to the Resources Agency 
$40,000 for the Delta Master Recreation Plan studies. Item 276 
appropriated over $10,000,000 for general investigations, basic 
data collection, project planning, and similar activities of the 
Department. Item 276.1 appropriated $45,000 for a feasibility 
study and report on Ewing Dam and Reservoir in Trinity County. 
Item 277 appropriated $100,311 to the Department for recreation 
surveys. Item 327 appropriated $351,000 to the Department for 
onshore recreation facilities at Grizzly Valley, Del Valle, and 
San Luis Reservoirs; and Item 327.1 appropriated $775*000 for 
recreation facilities and access roads at Frenchman Reservoir. 
For payment of costs of lands, easements and rights of way for 
flood control projects pursuant to the State Water Resources Law 
of 1945, Item 394 appropriated $7,930,600 to the Department and 
Item 396 appropriated $7,990,406 to the Reclamation Board. Item 
395 appropriated $5,339,300 to the Department for lands, easements 
and rights of way for watershed projects under the California 
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Law. Item 397 appropriated 
$3,003,480 to the Department for beach erosion control projects. 
Section 3.6 of the Budget Act limited the amount accruing to the 
California Water Fund for the 1964-65 fiscal year to $11,000,000 
and appropriated the excess for school purposes. 

C-36 



1965 

Saline Water Conversion . Calif. Stats. 1965, Chs. 991 
and 993, enacted the Cobey-Porter Saline Water Conversion Law 
(Water Code Sections 12945 through 12949) to authorize the Department 
of Water Resources, either independently or in cooperation with any 
county, state, federal, public or private agency or corporation to 
conduct a program of investigation, study, and evaluation in the 
field of saline water conversion, and, upon specific legislative 
authorization, to finance, construct, and operate saline water 
conversion facilities. Chapters 992 and 994 added Section 12949.5 
to the Water Code to authorize the Department of Water Resources, 
in cooperation with the United States Department of the Interior, 
to participate in financing costs of construction and operation of 
a saline water conversion test center and to sell any water made 
available by such test center; these acts also authorized the 
Department to use refunds or credits from the United States 
because of the State's investment in the former plant at San Diego. 

Regional Water Resources Planning . Calif. Stats. 1965, 
Ch. 1647, added Article 4 (commencing with Section 190) to 
Chapter 2 of Division 1 of the Water Code to provide that whenever 
the State is specifically invited by federal law to participate in 
any interstate commission to plan for the regional development of 
water and related resources, the Governor shall appoint each 
California member of such commission, subject to Senate confirmation. 
Each California member shall serve at the pleasure of the Governor. 
These provisions specifically apply to the Western States Water 
Council established by the Western Governors' Conference at its 
meeting in Portland, Oregon, in June 1965. The act also provides 

C-37 



for the creation of a California Advisory Committee to advise the 
State's representatives on the regional commissions. 

Federal Reports . Calif. Stats. 1965, Ch. 55, adds Sections 
450 through 453 to the Water Code to designated the Governor as the 
state official to receive the reports of the Chief of Engineers and 
the Secretary of the Interior with respect to proposed flood control 
or reclamation projects. The Governor is required within ten days 
to transmit copies of the reports to both houses of the Legislature, 
if in session, or to the Rules Committees. Any legislative committee 
to which such a report has been assigned may submit written comments 
to the Governor. The Governor, if such comments are submitted in 
time, is required to transmit such comments to the appropriate 
federal agency, together with the other comments of the State. 

Water Pollution Control Law of 1965 . This Act, enacted 
by Calif. Stats . 1965, Ch. 1351, authorizes the State Water Quality 
Control Board to make a comprehensive waste disposal study of the 
San Francisco Bay and Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta areas and to 
develop a comprehensive plan for the control of water pollution 
in the area. It establishes a steering committee to assist the 
Board and also a technical coordinating committee. Various state 
departments, under service agreements, are required to provide 
staff assistance. 

Water Quality Control . Calif. Stats. 1965, Ch. 1656, 
amended the Dickey Water Pollution Act to make state departments 
and agencies subject to its regulatory provisions, to authorize 
the State Water Quality Control Board to determine discharge 
requirements in the event of disagreement between regional boards 
regarding requirements applicable to waste discharges affecting 

C-38 



more than one region, and to clarify the power of the State Board 
to review the action or Inaction of a regional board and its power 
to take appropriate action. Chapter 1657 changed the name of the 
regional boards from regional water pollution control boards to 
regional water quality control boards, and authorized them to 
formulate water quality control policy of a regional nature, in 
conformity with any water quality policy adopted by the State Board. 

Lake Tahoe Study . Calif. Stats. 1965, Ch. 1231, created 
a Lake Tahoe Joint Study Committee to study and develop recommenda- 
tions concerning an area-wide agency to provide for the orderly 
development of the Lake Tahoe Basin. 

San Francisco Bay Conservation . Calif. Stats. 1965, 
Ch. 1162, created a San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development 
Commission to prepare a plan for conservation of the water of the 
San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline, and requires 
a permit from the Commission for bay filling or extraction projects 
prior to the 1969 Session of the Legislature. 

Floodplain Management . Calif. Stats. 1965, Ch. 506, 
enacted the Cobey-Alquist Floodplain Management Act, commencing 
at Section 8400 of the Water Code, to provide for review, at the 
request of local government, by the Reclamation Board within the 
area of its jurisdiction and by the Department of Water Resources 
within the rest of the State, of floodplain management plans of 
cities and counties. Provides that where the appropriate public 
agency fails to establish necessary floodplain regulations within 
the area of a federal flood control project after completion of 
the federal project report and after notification by the 
Reclamation Board or the Department, the State will not appropriate 

C-39 



money to pay the cost of lands, easements and rights-of-way 
associated with that project. 

Flood Control Projects . The following projects were 
authorized for state financial assistance pursuant to the State 
Water Resources Law of 1945: Ihe project for flood control debris 
basins and channel clearing in the Santa Barbara Area (Ch. 300); 
the Redwood Creek Project in Humboldt County (Ch. 405); and the 
Corte Madera Creek Flood Control Project in Marin County (Ch. 1388). 

Davis-Grunsky Act Grants . Grants in excess of the 
statutory limit were authorized for the following projects: Ihe 
Merced River Development of the Merced Irrigation District (Ch. 143); 
the New Don Pedro Dam and Reservoir Project of the Turlock and 
Modesto Irrigation Districts (Ch. 282); the Lopez Dam and Reservoir 
Project of San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation 
District, in excess of an amount previously authorized (Ch. 338); 
an additional amount for the Box Canyon Project (Ch. 478); an 
additional amount for the Camp Far West Project of the South Sutter 
Water District (Ch. 775); the Agua Fria Project of the Mariposa 
County Water Agency (Ch. 778); the Santa Rosa Creek Reservoir 
Project of the Sonoma County Flood Control and Water Conservation 
District (Ch. 1399); the proposed water development projects of 
Calaveras County Water District (Ch. 1412); an increased amount for 
the Yuba-Bear River Development of the Nevada Irrigation District 
(Ch. 1428); and the Alisal-Gabilan Watershed Project of the City 
of Salinas and the County of Monterey (Ch. 1432). 

Water Well Reports . Calif. Stats. 1965, Ch. 1088, 
revised Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 7076) of Division 4 of 
the Water Code to require every person who intends to drill or 

C-40 



alter a water well to file a notice of intent with the Department 
of Water Resources before commencing such construction or repair, 
and to require the filing of well logs upon completion of a well 
with the Department of Water Resources rather than with the 
regional water quality control boards. 

Geothermal Wells . Calif. Stats. 1965, Ch. 1483, provides 
for regulatory control by the Department of Conservation over wells 
for discovery and production of geothermal energy. 

State Filings for the Appropriation of Water . Calif. 
Stats. 1965, Ch. 989, provided for the transfer from the California 
Water Commission to the State Water Rights Board of jurisdiction 
over state filings for the appropriation of water and the duties 
with respect to the assignment or release from priority of such 
filings. 

Records of Water Diversion . Calif. Stats. 1965, Ch. 1430, 
added Part 5.1 (commencing with Section 50100) to Division 2 of the 
Water Code to require recordation of surface water diversions, and 
diversions from subterranean streams, with the State Water Rights 
Board, with certain exceptions. 

Supervision of Safety of Dams . Calif. Stats. 1965* 
Ch. 1225, amended the Supervision of Dams Act, Part 1 of Division 3 
of the Water Code, to extend the State's jurisdiction to off -stream 
dams and over reservoirs as well as dam structures. It requires 
owners of dams to promptly report unusual occurrences that may 
affect the dams and reservoirs, to maintain suitable staffs for 
close surveillance, and to make appropriate investigations. It 
authorizes the Department of Water Resources to cancel or amend 
certificates of approval when the dams and reservoirs become 

C-41 



unsafe and to consider hazardous conditions in the vicinity of 
dams and reservoirs in determining their safety. 

River Forecasting and Flood Warning . Calif. Stats. 1965* 
Ch. 1291, added Section 236 to the Water Code to specifically 
authorize the Department of Water Resources, either independently 
or in cooperation with others, to collect hydrologic data necessary 
for river forecasting, to make forecasts of streamflow, to provide 
for flood warning, and to provide for communication necessary for 
the collection and dissemination of such information. 

Budget Act of 1965 . Calif. Stats. 1965, Ch. 757. Item 235 
appropriated $36,000 to the Resources Agency for the Delta Master 
Recreation Plan study. Item 257.5 appropriated $310,000 to the 
Department for sea water intrusion studies. For the payment of 
lands, easements and rights-of-way for flood control projects, 
Item 307 appropriated $6,122,333 to the Department and Item 308 
appropriated $5,079,992 to the Reclamation Board. Item 338 and 339 
made appropriations to the Department of Parks and Recreation for 
recreation development, including developments at various state 
water projects. Section 3.6 of the Budget Act limited accruals 
to the California Water Fund during the 1965-66 fiscal year to 
$11,000,000 from both state land leases and Long Beach tideland 
oil and gas revenues. 

1966 

Federal -State Contracts for Water Supplies . Calif. Stats. 
1966 (First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 42, added Part 4.3 (commencing with 
Section 12050) to Division 6 of the Water Code, to authorize the 
Department of Water Resources to contract with the United States 
Bureau of Reclamation for water supplies from the Washoe Reclamation 

C-42 



Project on the Truckee and Carson Rivers or their tributaries, if 
requested by the governing body of one or more of the counties 
or countywide water agencies or districts in the area where the 
water supply will be used. It also authorizes public agencies to 
contract with the Department for such water supply upon approval 
of their electorate, and the creation of zones of benefit within 
the areas of use for paying the cost of the water supply. 

Nonreimbursable Costs of the State Water Project . 
Calif. Stats. 1966 (First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 27, amended the Davis -Dolwig 
Act and provided $5,000,000 annually of Long Beach tideland oil and 
gas revenues for the nonreimbursable costs of state water projects 
allocated to recreation and to enhancement of fish and wildlife, 
and for specific recreation land costs. It requires the Department 
of Water Resources to report annually to the Legislature on cost 
allocations and specific recreation land costs. It requires the 
Department to obtain and include comments of the Departments of 
Parks and Recreation, and Pish and Game, on the cost allocations. 
It provides for the deposit of the $5,000,000 annually in the 
Central Valley Water Project Construction Fund, and appropriates 
such money to the Department for expenditure without regard to 
fiscal years for the purposes of the Fund in amounts equal to the 
amounts of allocations and specific land cost expenditures which 
have been approved by the Legislature. The appropriation is 
subject to the priority of the appropriation of $11,000,000 
annually to the California Water Fund. 

Accruals to California Water Fund . Calif. Stats. 1966 
(First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 155, in addition to providing for the 
deposit of Long Beach tideland oil and gas revenues above certain 

C-43 



amounts appropriated for other purposes (including the purposes 
of the California Water Fund and the Central Valley Water Project 
Construction Fund) in the Capital Outlay Fund for Public Higher 
Education, eliminates revenues from state land leases as a source 
of revenue for the California Water Fund. As a consequence, the 
California Water Fund is now limited to the $11,000,000 accruing 
annually from the Long Beach tideland oil and gas revenues. 
Chapter 155 provided an appropriation of $2,000,000 annually for 
the next five years from Long Beach tideland oil and gas revenues 
to the State Water Pollution Control Fund for expenditure, when 
appropriated by the Legislature, for capital outlay expenditures 
for works to prevent and correct water pollution. 

Recreation at Federal Water Projects . Calif. Stats. 
1966 (First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 143, added Chapter 1.5 (commencing 
with Section 5094) to Division 5 of the Public Resources Code, which 
chapter is cited as the Porter-Cobey Federal Water Project Recreation 
Act. It authorizes the Administrator of the Resources Agency, with 
the approval of the Director of Finance, and upon specific authori- 
zation by the Legislature as to each project, to indicate in writing 
the State's intent to agree to administer any federal multiple- 
purpose water project land and water area for recreation or fish 
and wildlife enhancement as provided in the Federal Water Project 
Recreation Act (Public Law 89-72, 79 Stat. 213). After a letter 
of intent has been authorized by the Legislature and given by the 
Administrator, further action by the State is dependent upon specific 
authorization by the Legislature. To the extent authorized, the 
Department of Parks and Recreation and the Department of Fish and 
Game may cooperate and participate with the Federal Government 

C-44 



pursuant to Public Law 89-72 in the development of recreation and 
fish and wildlife enhancement at federal water projects. In 
addition, Chapter 143 specifically authorizes the Administrator 
to indicate in writing the State's intent to agree to administer 
the project land and water areas at the Marysville Dam and Reservoir 
Project on the Yuba River for recreation or fish and wildlife 
enhancement, or both. Calif. Stats. 1966 (First Ex. Sess.), Ch. 66, 
authorizes the Department of Parks and Recreation to participate 
with the Federal Government in development of recreational 
facilities at Auburn, Folsom, Nimbus, and County Line dams, and 
also, with the approval of the Department of Fish and Game, the 
development of fish and wildlife enhancement facilities at said 
dams. 

Lake Tahoe Sewage . Calif. Stats. 1966 (First Ex. Sess.), 
Ch. 47, appropriated $1,800,000 to the State Allocation Board for 
a loan to the South Tahoe Public Utility District for construction 
of facilities for transportation of sewage effluent out of South 
Lake Tahoe Basin from Luther Pass to Diamond Valley in Alpine 
County. Chapter 137 of the same session appropriated $2,000,000 
to the State Water Quality Control Board for loans to the North 
Lake Tahoe Public Utility District and the Tahoe City Public Utility 
District for construction of sewage and storm drainage facilities 
to prevent and control water pollution in the North Lake Tahoe area. 
Chapter 48, also enacted at the same session, requires connections 
to sewer systems in the Lake Tahoe Basin area, when facilities are 
available for handling and treating the sewage and for transporting 
the effluent out of the Basin. 



C-45 



Budget Act of 1966 . Calif. Stats. 1966 (Second Ex. Sess.), 
Ch. 2. In addition to appropriations for various statewide 
investigations, of particular interest is Item 273.5 which 
appropriated $40,000 for the Upper Sacramento River Basin 
investigation, $20,000 for the North Coastal Action study, 
$50,000 for West Side Crop Adaptability study, and $145,000 for 
ground water investigations in Southern California. Item 273 
appropriated $6,281,579 for water development planning and 
$2,337*895 for water development implementation. Item 277.5 
appropriated $1,078,000 to the State Water Quality Control Board 
for the study of water quality control in the San Francisco Bay 
and Delta areas. For payment of costs of lands, easements and 
rights-of-way for federal flood control projects, Item 352 
appropriated $15*000,000 to the Department of Water Resources and 
Item 353 appropriated $5*598,786 to the Reclamation Board. Item 
354 appropriated $786,525 to the Department of Water Resources 
for beach erosion control projects. Items 398 and 399 appropriated 
funds to the Department of Parks and Recreation for recreation 
facilities to be associated with the State Water Project. Item 
400 appropriated $350,000 to the Department of Water Resources 
for distribution facilities for the San Diego sea water conversion 
plant. Section 3.6 again limited the California Water Fund to 
$11,000,000 for the fiscal year. 



C-46 



FEDERAL LAWS RELATED TO WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT 
I956 - 1966 

The principal purposes of the federal laws related to 
water resources development enacted during the years, 1956 - 1966, 
inclusive, have been to encourage and to support financially 

(1) comprehensive river basin and regional planning for the 
purpose of matching the need for water with available supplies; 

(2) water pollution control; (3) water associated recreation 
development; (4) construction of urgently needed federal multiple- 
purpose projects and (5) assistance to state and local public 
entities. Such legislation and programs have a significant impact 
upon water resources development in California. 

There also has been progress in the area of international 
cooperation. The Columbia River Treaty between Canada and the 
United States, signed in January, 196l, and a Protocol Agreement, 
signed in January, 1964, and attached to the Treaty, both of which 
are now in force, relate to a cooperative development of the water 
resources of the Columbia River Basin. 

The Treaty provides, among other things, for construction 
of three dams in Canada to regulate the flow of the Columbia River 
for flood control and power production in the United States as well 
as for benefits in Canada. The downstream benefits resulting from 
increased power generation in the United States are to be shared 
equally by the two countries, and the United States is to compensate 
Canada for the flood protection it receives. 

The State of California has concluded negotiations for 
the assignment to it of a portion of the downstream power benefits 

C-47 



to which Canada is entitled under the Treaty and which have been 

sold, pursuant to the terms of the Protocol Agreement, through 

the British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority, and the Columbia 

Storage Power Exchange (a nonprofit corporation organized for the 

specific purpose of purchasing and selling such downstream power 

benefits) to various entities in the Pacific Northwest. (The Treaty 

is printed in Senate Executive Document C, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., 

44 Department of State Bulletin 234, (February 13, 196l). The 

Protocol Agreement is printed in 50 Department of State Bulletin 

200-206 (February 10, 1964).) 

Principal federal laws related to water resources 

development enacted during the years 1956 - 1966 are: 

Water Resources Planning 

1958 Water Supply Act of 1958 . Provides for inclusion 

P.L. 85-500 

72 Stat. 297 of storage in federally constructed reservoirs 

for present or future needs of municipal or 

industrial water if state or local interests 

give reasonable assurances they will repay such 

costs within 50 years. 

1964 Water Resources Research Act . Initiated a 

FTT. 88-379 

78 Stat. 329 modest water research grant program for water 

resources development. Established water 
research centers or institutes at land grant 
colleges in each state. Authorized formation 
of regional research centers by states coopera- 
ting in such research. Authorized a matching 
fund grant program to assist states in conducting 
research approved by the Department of the 



Interior. 
C-48 






1965 Wate r Res ource s Planning Act . Objective is to 

PTTT 89-80 

79 Stat. 250 provide framework for optimum development of 

nation's water resources through coordination 

of state and federal planning activities. 

Created Water Resources Council responsible for 

continuing studies on water availability and 

requirements. Authorized formation of River 

Basin Commissions responsible as principal 

coordinating agency for all planning within 

its area. Authorized grants to states for 

comprehensive planning. 

1965 Public Works and Economic Development Act . 
PTL7 89-136 

79 Stat. 552 Authorized $500 million annually for five years 

for grants to states, and political subdivisions 
thereof, for up to 80 percent of cost of public 
works in economically distressed areas. Public 
works are defined to include water projects and 
sewage systems. Also authorized $170 million 
annually for 40-year loans for public works to 
develop lands for industrial use. 

1966 Water Resources Research Act Amendments . 
P7T7 89-404 

80 Stat. 129 Established a more adequate program of water 

research geared to national water programs. 

Authorized a grant program on matching basis 

with state agencies to provide for research. 

1966 Interim Research Contracts Act . Authorized the 

P.L. 89-672 

80 Stat. 951 Secretary of the Interior to enter into contracts 

with educational institutions, public or private 
C-49 






agencies, or persons for the conduct of 

scientific or technological research on 

problems related to authorized programs of 

the Department of the Interior. 

Water Pollution Control 

1956 Federal Water Pollution Control Act . Declared 

PTL7 84-660 

70 Stat. 498 national policy to be that states have the 

primary responsibility to prevent and control 

water pollution. Encouraged and assisted 

research relating to such prevention and control 

and authorized grants to states, municipalities 

and interstate agencies for such work. 

1961 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendment. 

PTT7 87-87 

75 Stat. 204 Authorized the Secretary of Health, Education, 

and Welfare to establish field laboratories and 
research facilities. Increased the size of 
grants for water pollution studies and construc- 
tion programs and expanded federal water pollution 
abatement authority. 

1965 Water Quality Act . Established a national policy 

P7E7 89-234 

79 Stat. 903 for prevention, control and abatement of water 

pollution, including the promulgation of water 

quality standards for interstate waters if 

affected states fail to establish acceptable 

standards by June 30, 1967. Doubled the ceilings 

on grants for construction of waste treatment 

plants from $600,000 to $1,200,000 for individual 

projects and from $2.4 million to $4.8 million 

for joint projects. 

C-50 



1966 Clean Rivers Restoration Act , Amended the 

PTC 89-753 

80 Stat. 1246 Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1956, 

as amended, by increasing grant moneys to 
states and local public agencies engaging in 
comprehensive water quality control and abate- 
ment plans for river basins and construction of 
sewage treatment works. Also increased the 
pollution abatement authority of the Secretary 
of the Interior. 
Recreation 

1964 Land and Water Conservation Fund Act . Created 
F7L7 88-578 

78 Stat. 897 a fund from entrance and user fees, motorboat 

fuel taxes, and sales of surplus property, from 
which grants to states were authorized for 
acquisition of outdoor recreation areas. 

1965 Federal Water Project Recreation Act . Created 
FT!? 89-72 

79 Stat. 213 a uniform policy for treatment and federal 

participation in development of recreation and 
fish and wildlife potential at federal water 
projects. Requires nonfederal agency to 
administer land and water areas allocated to 
recreation and to bear all costs of operation 
and maintenance and no less than one-half of 
the separable capital costs for such purposes. 
Requires repayment of such capital costs within 
50 years of first use. If nonfederal agencies 
fail to participate in such development, the 



C-51 



Federal Government will provide only minimal 
recreation facilities to protect public health 
and safety at the project. 

1965 Whiskey town -Shasta-Trinity National Recreation 
F37 89-336 

79 Stat. 1295 Area Act . Authorized the sixth national 

recreation area in the United States. This 
recreation area in Northern California is to 
be coordinated with the operation of Whiskeytown, 
Shasta, Clair Engle, and Lewiston Reservoirs. 

1966 Point Reyes National Seashore Act Amendment . 
F7C7 89-666 

80 Stat. 919 Increased the amount authorized to be appropri- 

ated for land acquisition in connection with 
the Point Reyes National Seashore from $14 
million to about $19 million and clarified 
the original Act as to the location of 
right of way for access to the area. 
Construction 

1958 Flood Control Act of 1958 . Authorized a 

T\T7 85-500 

72 Stat. 315 federal flood control contribution toward the 

cost of construction of Oroville Dam equal to 

an economically justified flood control 

allocation. Approval of the allocation by 

the Secretary of the Army and the President 

was required. Also required an agreement with 

the State of California providing for operation 

of the dam so as to produce the flood control 

benefits upon which the construction was based. 



C-52 



I960 An Act Authorizing the C onstr uction of the 

i\X7 86-488 

f4 Stat. 156 San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project . 

Authorized the Secretary of the Interior to 

construct San Luis Dam and Reservoir, the 

San Luis Canal and the Pleasant Valley Canal. 

Authorized the Secretary to contract with the 

State of California for joint-use and operation 

of these facilities. 

1962 Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962 , Authorized a 

pTlT 87-874 

76 Stat. 1171 flood protection project to be constructed by 

the Corps of Engineers on Alameda Creek at an 
estimated cost of $14,680,000 substantially in 
accordance with Senate Document 128, 87th Congress, 
This document recommended a federal flood control 
contribution by the Chief of Engineers not to 
exceed $4,080,000 toward the construction cost 
of Del Valle Reservoir of the State Water Project. 

1963 Auburn-Folsom South Unit . Authorized the 
pTLT 89-161 

79 Stat. 615 Secretary of the Interior to construct and 

operate the Auburn-Folsom South Unit of the 

Central Valley Project, consisting of the 

2.5 million acre-foot Auburn Dam and Reservoir. 

Authorized $425 million to be appropriated for 

this purpose. 

1966 Feasibility Inv estigations Act. Authorized the 
Y7Z7 89-561 

80 Stat. 707 Secretary of the Interior to conduct designated 

water project feasibility investigations, 
thirty -three of which apply to California. 

C-53 



1966 Tijuana River Flood Control Project Act . 

FTC7 89-640 

80 Stat. 884 Authorized the Secretary of State to conclude 

with Mexico an agreement for the joint con- 
struction and operation of an international 
flood control project on the Tijuana River. 

1966 Flood Control Act of 1966 . Authorized con- 

P7T7 89-789 

80 Stat. 1405 struction of flood control projects including 

Marysville Dam and Reservoir, the Knights Valley- 
Pro ject and the Corte Madera Creek Project. 
Irrigation Works Assistance - Watershed Protection 

1956 Small Reclamation Projects Act . Authorized 

PTT77 84-972 

70 Stat. 1044 50-year loans and grants not to exceed $5 

million to local public agencies for construc- 
tion of reclamation projects primarily for 
agricultural use not exceeding $10 million in 
total cost. Such construction could be any 
undertaking similar to that which could be 
constructed by Bureau of Reclamation. 
Authorized $100 million for such purposes. 

1966 Small Reclamation Projects Act Amendments . 

PTT7 89-553 

80 Stat. 376 Authorized loans and grants not to exceed 

$6.5 million on small reclamation projects 

not exceeding $10 million in total cost. 

Authorized grants for one-half of the separable 

and of the joint-use costs allocable to 

providing recreation facilities. Authorized 

an additional $100 million for such purposes. 



C-54 



Watershed Protection 

1956 Water shed Protection and Flood Prevention Act 

FTT7 84-1018 

70 Stat. 1088 Amendments . Federal assistance under the 

Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act 
(16 U.S.C. 1001) for flood prevention, erosion 
and sediment detention works constructed by- 
local public agencies was extended to include 
such assistance for municipal or industrial 
water supplies. 
Hydroelectric Power 

19^4 Northwest Intertie Act . Guaranteed consumers 

P.L. 88-552 

78 Stat. 756 in the Pacific Northwest first call on electric 

energy generated at federal hydroelectric plants 
in that region and guaranteed electric consumers 
in other regions reciprocal priority. Authorized 
the interconnection of the Bonneville power 
system with the systems of other regions of 
the country by means of high voltage trans- 
mission lines with no risk that new customers 
would be preferred. 

1966 An Act to Authorize Construction of a Third 

P7T7 89-448 

80 Stat. 200 Power Plant at Grand Coulee Dam . Authorized 

the Secretary of the Interior to construct and 

operate a third power plant at Grand Coulee Dam 

with a rated capacity of 3*600,000 k.w. as an 

addition to the Columbia River Basin Project. 

Authorized to be appropriated, $390 million for 

this purpose. 

C-55 



Salt Water Conversion 

1958 Salt Water Demonstration Program . Authorized 

"FX7 85-883 

72 Stat. 1706 the Secretary of the Interior to provide for 

the construction and operation of at least 

five salt water conversion demonstration plants 

to produce fresh water for beneficial uses, one 

of which was to be located on the West Coast. 

Authorized funds to be appropriated for such 

construction. 

1961 Saline Water Conversion Act Amendments . 

FXT 87-295 

75 Stat. 628 Authorized an expansion and extension of the 

existing saline water conversion program con- 
ducted by the Secretary of the Interior by 
encouraging and conducting research, the 
acquisition of technical personnel and 
facilities, and other measures which would 
provide for the development of practical low- 
cost means for the conversion of salt water 
for beneficial uses. Authorized to be 
appropriated, $76 million for this purpose. 
1965 Saline Wat e r Conve rsion Act A mendments . 

ptt: 89-118 

79 Stat. 509 Authorized a further expansion, extension and 

acceleration of the existing saline water 
conversion program. Authorized the construc- 
tion and use of modules and components in 
addition to the laboratory and demonstration 
plant facilities previously authorized and 
extended the program an additional five years. 
For this purpose, authorized to be appropriated 
C-56 



million and additional moneys subject to 

further authorization by Congress „ 

1966 AE C - Desalting Plant , Authorized the Atomic 

PTE7 89-648 

80 Stat. 895 Energy Commission to enter into cooperative 

arrangements with the Department of the Interior, 

the Metropolitan Water District of Southern 

California, and others for participation in 

the development, design, construction and 

operation of a large-scale, combination nuclear 

power generation and desalting project „ 

Miscellaneous 

P.L. 89-531 An Act Approving Interstate Compact Regarding 

80 Stat. 340 

Boundary Between Arizona and California . 

Granted consent of the Congress to the 

interstate compact defining the boundary 

between the States of Arizona and California 

as ratified by Arizona April 2, 1963 , and by 

California, June 6, 1963 » 



C-57 



LITIGATION 

During the decade 1956 to 1965, litigation in the state 
and federal courts resulted in a number of important water law 
decisions. Cases of particular significance to the progress of 
the California Water Plan are summarized hereafter. 

Financial Implementation of the State Water Project 

(a) Metropolitan Water District v. Marquardt , 
59 Cal.2d 159, 2ti Cal.Rptr. 724, 379 P. 2d 
28 (1963) 

This action for writ of mandate was brought in the 
State Supreme Court, as the court of original jurisdiction, to 
test the validity of the prototype water service contract between 
the State and The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 

In a lengthy decision determining many important issues, 
the court held that: 

(1) The California Water Resources Development 
Bond Act (Burns-Porter Act) is, in respect to all 
challenges levied against it, constitutional; and 

(2) All of the provisions of the contract with 
The Metropolitan Water District are valid. 

Among other matters, the decision affirmed the broad 

discretion vested in the Department of Water Resources to construct 

and operate the State Water Project; upheld the authority of the 

Department to bind itself to make all water service contracts 

substantially uniform with the Metropolitan contract; rejected 

the contention that the law required water to be priced so as to 

be within the ability to pay of agriculturalists; sustained the 

price surcharge provided in the contract for water served to lands 

in excess of 160 acres in a single ownership; declared the federal 



C-59 



excess land (l60-acre) provisions inapplicable to the State project; 
held that Metropolitan's debt limitation was not exceeded by the 
obligation imposed under the contract; and held that the ad valorum 
tax limit provided in the Metropolitan Water District Act was 
superseded by the provision of the Central Valley Project Act 
allowing a contracting district to levy the taxes necessary to 
pay water service contract obligations. 

(b) Warne v. Harkness , 60 Cal.2d 579, 35 Cal. 
Rptr. 601, 307 P. 2d 377 (1963) 

In a similar suit involving a petition for writ of mandate 
in the California Supreme Court, it was held that the Department of 
Water Resources had authority to issue revenue bonds under the 
Central Valley Project Act (Water Code Section 11100 et seq„) to 
finance the costs of constructing power facilities in the Oroville 
Division of the State Water Project. 

The court held that the Burns-Porter Act (Water Code 
Section 12930, et seq.) pledge of State Water Project revenues to 
the payment of bonds issued pursuant to that Act did not apply to 
revenues from facilities financed by revenue bonds issued under 
the Central Valley Project Act. 

(c) California Water Resources Development 
Finance Committee v. Betts , 60 Cal. 2d 595, 
35 Cal. Rptr. oil, 387 P. 2d 387 (1963) 

In this companion case to Warne v. Harkness , supra , also 

a mandamus proceeding, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of 

certain waiver provisions in bonds proposed to be issued under the 

authority of the Burns -Porter Act, and upheld the authority of the 

Burns-Porter Act Finance Committee to include the waivers In such 



C-60 



bonds. These waiver provisions would have: (l) allowed certain 
surplus system revenues to be used to back general obligation 
bonds other than Burns-Porter bonds and (2) allowed revenue 
derived from power facilities constructed with revenue bond 
proceeds to be used to back such revenue bonds. 

Both the Betts case and Warne v. Harkness were concerned 
with the relationship between the Burns-Porter Act and the Central 
Valley Project Act (Water Code Sec. 11000, et seq.); as a result 
of the favorable decision in Warne v. Harkness , the proposed waiver 
provisions became unnecessary. 

Eminent Domain Powers of Department of Water Resources 

State of California v. The Superior Court of Butte 
County (Popularly known as the Natomas Case), 
20tf Cal. App.2d 659, 25 Cal.Rptr. 363 (1962) 

In this action the State of California sought and obtained 
a writ of mandate requiring the Superior Court of Butte County to 
make an order giving the State immediate possession (during the 
pendency of condemnation proceedings) of certain lands containing 
dredger tailings owned by the real party in interest, Natomas 
Company. The Superior Court had refused to issue the order because 
it was of the opinion that the lands in question were not "to be 
used for reservoir purposes" within the meaning of Article I, 
Section 14, of the State Constitution. 

The Appellate Court decided: 

(1) The language of Article I, Section 14, permitting 
immediate possession of lands to be used for reservoir 
purposes, does not limit such immediate possession solely 
to lands to be used for reservoir sites ; if land is needed 
for reservoir construction, it is land for reservoir purposes 
whether it is the site of a dam or land containing construc- 
tion materials necessary for the creation of a reservoir; and 

(2) The dredger tailings in question are land (rather 
than personalty) as a matter of law because the only 

C-6l 



inference that can be drawn from the facts is that 
Natomas Company had always treated the tailings as 
land rather than personalty. 

Colorado River Water Rights 

Arizona v. California , 373 U.S. 546, 10 L.Ed. 2d 5^2, 

83 S.Ct. I4btt (1963) 

Decree: 376 U.S. 3^0, 84 S.Ct. 755 (1964) 

After many years of litigation between the states of 
Arizona and California, the United States Supreme Court has 
determined that California is entitled to only 4.4 million acre- 
feet of water per year from the Colorado River, instead of the 
present annual allocation of 5,362,000 acre-feet, and the new 
allotment shall continue only so long as 7.5 million acre-feet 
per year are available to the Lower Basin States below Lee Ferry 
on the Colorado River. 

This decree had a serious impact on the State Water 
Project, resulting in a decision to increase the project yield 
and the size of the California Aqueduct. 

This case is discussed in more detail at pages 30 to 
32 of Bulletin No. 160-66. 

Federal Central Valley Project: Application of 
lbO-Acre Limitation (The Ivanhoe Cases) 

The questions at issue in the Ivanhoe case,, and three 
companion cases, concern the application of the 160-acre limita- 
tion and other provisions of the reclamation laws in California. 
These were considered and acted upon by both the California 
Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. 



C-62 



The California Supreme Court, in Ivanhoe Irrigation 
District v. All Parties and Persons , 47 Cal.2d 597, 306 P. 2d 824 
(1957), refused to confirm a proposed contract with the United 
States by which the United States undertook to deliver water from 
the Central Valley Project to the irrigation district and to expend 
funds for the construction of a distribution system within the 
district. In its majority opinion the court determined that: 

(1) The title to unappropriated domestic water 
of the State is held by the State in trust for the 
water users of the State as beneficiaries, and the 
United States stands in the same trustee relationship 
as does the State; 

(2) As a purveyor of water, the United States 
Bureau of Reclamation is required by Reclamation law 
to comply with state laws relating to the control, 
use or distribution of waters for irrigation; and 

(3) Ihe 160-acre limitation contained in the 
Ivanhoe contract conflicts with California law; its 
application to an irrigator would be unconstitutional. 

This judgment was reversed by the United States Supreme 

Court in Ivanhoe Irrigation District and the State of California 

v. McCracken, et al c , 357 U.S. 275, 78 3. Ct. 1174, 2 L.Ed. 2d 1313 

(1958) In this case the court held with respect to contracts 

entered into between the two state irrigation districts and a 

water agency on the one hand and the United States on the other, 

that: 

(1) The question of title to water was not pertinent 
to the validity of the contracts since if the water rights 
held by the United States are not sufficient, it may 
acquire the needed water rights by eminent domain; 

(2) The provision of reclamation law requiring the 
Bureau of Reclamation to conform to state laws relating 
to irrigation water rights does not override the pro- 
vision of reclamation law prohibiting the sale of water 
from reclamation projects for lands in excess of 160 acres 
in a single ownership; 



C-63 



(3) Congress intended the 160-acre limitation of the 
reclamation law to be applied to the Central Valley Project; 

(4) The imposition of the l60-acre limitation is not 
a denial of due process or of equal protection of the law 
under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Federal 
Constitution; 

(5) The Federal Government may impose reasonable 
conditions on the use of federal funds, property or 
privileges; Central Valley Project water is furnished to 
irrigators at below cost and what the government subsidizes 
it may regulate; 

(6) Ihe 160-acre provision is a reasonable limit on 
the amount of federal subsidy provided to each individual; 

(7) It is also reasonable that the contract does not 
recite a definite sum due the federal government from the 
districts for the water supply facilities since at the time 
of contracting the total cost of the facilities and the 
portion of such cost to be attributed to irrigation was 
uncertain; 

(8) It is proper that the contract does not guarantee 
that the districts will obtain title to the water distribu- 
tion facilities when the districts' obligations under the 
contract have been discharged — there is a substantial 
federal subsidy to the districts and, even after 40 years, 
the districts still will not have repaid their allocated share 
of the cost of the water supply facilities: 

"it does not seem untoward for the recipients 
of a huge federal bounty to have to depend in 
small measure on the continued beneficence of 
their donor." 

In Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. All Parties and Persons , 
53 Cal.2d 692, 3 Cal. Rptr. 317, 350 P. 2d 69 (i960) and companion 
cases, the California Supreme Court again considered the contracts 
with the United States and, in light of the United States Supreme 
Court decision, affirmed the power of the districts to enter into 
the contracts and the propriety of the proceedings leading to the 
contracts' execution. 

As already noted, the California Supreme Court has since 
held that the federal excess land (160-acre) limitations do not 

C-64 



apply to lands served by the State from the San Luis facilities 
jointly used by the State and the Federal Government. ( Metropolitan 
Water District v. Marquardt , 59 Cal.2d 159 at pages 188-193.) 

Federal Central Valley Project: Exchange of Waters 
Wolfsen v. United States , 162 F.Supp. 403 (1958) (Ct.Cl. 1958) 
In this action the plaintiffs claimed that they were 
deprived of their riparian water rights in waters of a branch 
channel of the San Joaquin River by the defendent United States 
which, in connection with the construction and operation of the 
federal Central Valley Project, substituted Sacramento River waters 
for those waters formerly withdrawn from the San Joaquin. The 
holding of the court was that the plaintiffs suffered no actual 
damage as a result of the exchange of waters, and there was no 
: taking of plaintiffs' rights for which just compensation had not 
been made. 

Federal Central Valley Project: Taking of Downstream Water Rights 

Dugan v. Rank , 372 U. S. 609, 83 S.Ct. 999, 10 L.Ed. 2d 15 
TI9S3) 

This is the latest in a long series of decisions in 
the case which began in 1947 in the state courts of California 
under the name Rank v. Krug and thereafter was removed to the 
federal courts. 



Other opinions in this case are California v. Rank , 293 F.2d 
340 (C.A. 9th Cir. 1961); Rank vT~( Krug ) United States , 142 
F. Supp. 1 (D.C. S.D. Calo 1956); Rank v. Krug , 90 F. Supp. 
773 (D.C. S.D. Cal. 1950); United States v. United States 
District Court , 213 F.2d 8l8 (C.A. 9th Cir. 1954); RanF T. 
United States , 16 F.R.D. 310 (D.C. S.D. Cal. 1954) ;~Fresno v. 
Edmonston , 131 F.Supp. 421 (D.C. S.D. Cal. 1955). See also 
summary of Fresno v. California, infra. 



C-65 



The plaintiffs were claimants of water rights from the 
San Joaquin River in the reach from Friant Dam to Mendota or from 
underground waters in the Fresno area. The construction of Friant 
Dam and the diversion of the waters of the San Joaquin River to 
the Madera Canal and the Friant-Kern Canal severely diminished the 
water flow in the San Joaquin River between Friant and Mendota. 
The plaintiffs sought to enjoin federal officials from storing and 
diverting water at Friant Dam or, in the alternative, to require 
the restoration of this section of the river to its pre-project 
natural flow conditions. It was claimed that underground water 
supplies extending many miles from the river would be affected. 

This opinion by the United States Supreme Court holds 
that the proceeding against the Federal Reclamation officials is 
in fact a suit against the United States without its consent; that 
the Reclamation officials did not act beyond the scope of their 
duties when they took part of the water from the river, since 
they have plenary power to seize the water rights of riparian and 
overlying owners; that the actions of such officials were, 
therefore, not a trespass, but were rather a partial taking of 
such water rights for which the proper recourse was a suit against 
the United States for monetary compensation. Compensation is to 
be ascertained not by the amount of water taken from the river, 
but by the value of the land before and after the partial taking. 

Federal Central Valley Project: Application of Area of 
Origin Laws; Rights of Municipal Water Users 

Fresno v. California , 372 U.S. 627, 83 S.Ct. 996, 
10 L.Ed o 2d 2tt (1963) 

This is a companion case to Dug an v. Rank . The City of 

Fresno intervened as plaintiff in the Dugan case seeking, in 

C-66 



addition to the injunctive relief requested by the other plaintiffs, 
a declaration as to (l) its water rights as an overlying owner to 
underground water fed by the San Joaquin River; (2) its statutory 
priority to water for municipal or domestic purposes under California 
Water Code Sec 1460; (3) its priority rights under the California 
county of origin statute and the watershed protection provisions 
of the Central Valley Project Act (California Water Code Sec. 10505 
and Seco 11460, et seq.); and (4) its right to receive project water 
from the United States at the same rate charged for irrigation water. 
Ihe Supreme Court held that (l) insofar as injunctive relief was 
sought, the suit could not be maintained because it was one against 
the United States without its consent, the proper recourse for 
water rights seized by the United States was through a suit for 
damages; (2) the United States was not required to comply with 
California statutes relating to preferential water rights, but 
could acquire such rights by the power of eminent domain; 
(3) Fresno was not entitled to any preference for water devoted 
to municipal or domestic uses because federal reclamation law, to 
the contrary, gives first preference to water for irrigation 
purposes; (4) United States Bureau of Reclamation officials had 
properly acted within the discretion given them by law in charging 
more for water for municipal purposes than for water for irrigation. 



C-67 



APPENDIX D 
ROLE OF ELECTRIC POWER 



D-i 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

INTRODUCTION D-l 

POWER IN THE CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN D-3 

THE CALIFORNIA POWER LOAD D-7 

CALIFORNIA'S HYDROELECTRIC RESOURCES D-13 

TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN POWER D-17 

Nuclear Powerplants D-17 

Fossil-Fuel Powerplants D-19 

Fossil-Fuel Cost Trends D-20 

Extra-High-Voltage Transmission D-22 

Power Pooling Through Interconnection D-23 

Hydroelectric Plants, Including Pumped Storage . . . D-24 

Thermal Peaking Plants D-26 

Dual-Purpose Power and Desalting D-27 

MARKET FOR AND VALUE OF HYDROELECTRIC POWER D-31 

SOURCES AND COST OF POWER FOR PUMPING D-3 9 

THE FUTURE ROLE OF POWER D-45 

DEVELOPMENTS SINCE PUBLICATION OF BULLETIN NO. 160-66 . . D-47 

FIGURES 

No. 

D-l Historical and Projected Growth of Electric Power — 
Northern California, Southern California, and 
State of California 

D-2 Installed Generating Capacity for Years 19^8 to 1969-- 
Northern California, Southern California, and 
State of California 



D-iii 



TABLES 



No. 

D-l Historical and Estimated Population, Per Capita and 
Total Generation, and Maximum Demand — Northern 
California 

D-2 Historical and Estimated Population, Per Capita and 
Total Generation, and Maximum Demand- -Southern 
California 

D-3 Historical and Estimated Population, Per Capita and 
Total Generation, and Maximum Demand -- California 

D-4 Developed Hydroelectric Resources in California as of 
December 31, 1965 

D-5 Hydroelectric Plant Additions, 1956-65, Inclusive -- 
California 

D-6 Hydroelectric Plants in California Completed Since 

December 31, 1965, Under Construction, or Scheduled 
to be Under Construction by 1970 

D-7 Installed Capacity and Maximum Demand—Northern 
California 

D-8 Installed Capacity and Maximum Demand- -Southern 
California 

D-9 Installed Capacity and Maximum Demand—California 



D-iv 



INTRODUCTION 

The basic concept of electric power as an essential 
partner in water resource development was endorsed in The 
California Water Plan* and that endorsement is reaffirmed at this 
time. The contributions of electric power are optimized when each 
hydroelectric opportunity is made to yield the maximum in terms 
of power capacity and energy output and revenues, but in proper 
balance with the other demands on and for the water resources 
concerned. Furthermore, in developments such as California's 
State Water Project (SWP), where large amounts of power are re- 
quired for pumping, a major consideration is the determination 
of how to obtain and utilize the needed power at the lowest 
possible cost. This is accomplished by investigating all feasible 
alternative power sources and methods of system operation and 
selecting the most economical plan. 

The manner In which these concepts materialize, in the 
form of hydroelectric plants and definite schemes for furnishing 
and utilizing pumping power, is of necessity a matter subject to 
continuing study and evaluation. This is so because of the rapid 
advancement of electric power technology which is taking place in 
our time and also the changing nature of the needs and desires of 
society. 



* Bulletin No. 3, May 1957, referred to herein as CWP 



D-l 



Some of the figures on power data in Bulletin No. 
160-66 are slightly different than those presented herein. 
Historical data and projected loads and resources used in this 
appendix have been revised to reflect all information available 
as of December 1966. 

In general, the material on cost and value of power 
included in this Appendix D is on the same basis as that 
presented in Bulletin No. 160-66. In view of recent developments 
in this rapidly evolving electric power supply and transmission 
field, however, a qualifying statement is added at the end to 
indicate several changed factors whose impact will be more 
completely detailed in Bulletin No. 160-68, the next issue of 
this biennial series. 



D-2 



POWER IN THE CALIFORNIA WATER PLAN 

The role of power in the development of the water 
resources of California as visualized in the CWP will be out- 
lined here to serve as a backdrop against which we can measure 
the accomplishments of the past decade and compare our updated 
view of the future . 

The pumping power requirement for implementation of 
the ultimate plan was estimated to be about 12.3 million kilo- 
watts with an energy requirement of about 49 billion kilowatt- 
hours per annum. Included in the CWP were hydroelectric plants 
with a total installed capacity of about 7-8 million kilowatts 
and an average annual energy generation of about 3^ billion kilo- 
watt-hours. These figures, though substantial in relation to 
the power loads and resources of California in 1957 , were seen 
to be quite manageable when compared to the then projected 
California load of 85 million kilowatts in the year 2000. 

The power demand on a typical utility system varies 
considerably throughout the day and from week to week. The peak 
demand may be as much as three times the minimum demand, or base 
load, which occurs during the early morning hours. Hydroelectric 
plants have several important advantages over steam plants for 
supplying system peaks, following the load variations, and serving 
as standby or spinning reserve capacity. These advantages include 
factors such as greater reliability, flexibility, and speed of 
response. For these reasons it was anticipated that there would 



D-3 



be a greater demand for the development of hydroelectric power 
In a system having a relatively small amount of hydro capacity 
in comparison to its thermal plant capacity. 

The measure of the relative amounts of steam plant 
capacity and hydro capacity in a power system or area is referred 
to as the steam-hydro ratio. The steam-hydro ratio for Northern 
California at the start of 1957 based on dependable capacity was 
1.4 steam to 1.0 hydro. This ratio was expected to remain con- 
stant until about 1965 and then resume its upward trend. The 
ratio for Southern California, a hydro— deficient region, was 
2.0 to 1.0 and was expected to continue its rapid increase. 

Projections of the trends in the load characteristics 
and steam-hydro ratio indicated that there would be a sustained 
need for much additional economical hydroelectric capacity for 
peaking service in California, and that the load would readily 
absorb all of the power from the hydroelectric projects which 
were then expected to be developed in the foreseeable future. 

The at-plant site-value of hydro power used for 
evaluating the hydroelectric possibilities under the CWP, was 
estimated on a two-part rate basis to be: 

Capacity component $22.00 per kilowatt-year 
Energy component 2.8 mills per kilowatt-hour 
This value was based on the cost of alternative steam-electric 
generation. It appeared, in 1957 , that the steam plant capital 
costs, and hence the capacity component of power value, would 



D-4 



remain fairly constant for some time and that the energy com- 
ponent, as affected by a rising cost for fossil fuels, would 
trend upward despite some continuing improvements in thermal 
plant efficiencies. 

In 1957, prospects for nuclear powerplant development 
seemed quite bright but there was some uncertainty as to just 
when this power source would become competitive with fossil-fuel 
plants. It was assumed, however, that when that time came, the 
nuclear plants would supply the base load and would be complemented 
by hydro -peaking plants in the same manner as for fossil-fuel 
plants. 

It was expected that nuclear plants with their very 
low energy cost would eventually furnish large amounts of cheap 
power for offpeak pumping operations, as there is little or no 
capacity component of steam plant production cost involved in 
supplying offpeak power. Furthermore, it was reasoned that with 
the development of extra-high-voltage transmission lines, low 
cost power and energy could be made available throughout the State. 

The availability of low cost offpeak energy was expected 
to be conducive not only to offpeak aqueduct pumping but also to 
the development of hydroelectric plants utilizing the pumped 
storage principle. Pumped storage hydro plants use offpeak 
energy to pump water from a low reservoir to a higher reservoir 
and then generate higher value onpeak power during the weekday 
periods of high demand. 



D-5 



It was felt, in 1957, that the increasing steam-hydro 
ratio and future expansion of the nuclear-electric industry- 
would lead to modification of some of the hydroelectric power 
projects contemplated under the CWP. The principal change would 
be a trend to the development of hydro projects for higher 
degrees of peaking (generation for fewer hours per year during 
the periods of high demand for power), including extensive appli- 
cation of the pumped storage principle. 



D-6 



THE CALIFORNIA POWER LOAD 

The historical and estimated future power requirements 
for Northern, Southern, and total California are presented in 
Tables D-l, D-2, and D-3 and Figure D-l. 

The method employed in estimating the future power load 
involved population and annual per capita energy use projections 
for Northern and Southern California. These two elements were 
combined to give the estimates of required annual total energy 
generation. The next steps involved estimating the annual load 
factor and using it with the annual total energy generation to 
determine the annual maximum demand. 

The division of the State into Northern and Southern 
California as shown in Figure D-l is approximately on the basis 
of the service areas of the electric power systems serving the 
two areas. 

Population estimates were based on the Department of 
Water Resources 1 median projection. The sources of historical 
power data were reports of the California Public Utilities 
Commission. 

Since the year 1920, the population of Northern 
California has increased at an average annual compounding rate 
of about 3.3 percent. It is anticipated that this growth rate 
will be maintained through the year 1980. Except for the decade 
1940 to 1950, when the rates of growth were nearly comparable, 
the population has been increasing at a faster rate in Southern 



D-7 



California than in Northern California. This trend is estimated 
to continue through the 1960's. Thereafter, the rate of growth 
in Southern California is estimated to decrease to less than 
1.0 percent by the decade ending 2020, as compared to 1.5 percent 
for Northern California. 

The per capita use of electric energy during the 1920 "s 
increased at a more rapid rate in Northern California than in 
Southern California due In part to the large increase in irriga- 
tion pumping. The rates of increase during the 1930' s were 
comparable and moderate. During the period 194-5 to i960 the 
rates of increase in per capita use for the two areas were approx- 
imately equal, at an average annual compounding rate of 4.5 
percent. 

Looking to the future, it is anticipated that the de- 
clining cost of power generation in coal-fired plants and in 
nuclear plants will improve the competitive position of electric 
power in relation to other forms of energy such as gas. The 
impact of coal-fired generation, at remote locations, will be 
greater in Southern California than in Northern California, 
whereas, nuclear generation should have greater effect in 
Northern California, which is more remote from sources of fossil 
fuels. 

The growth of electric cooling and heating loads in 
homes, commercial establishments, and public buildings should 
continue to increase, the latter at a more rapid rate than in 
the past. An improved electric storage battery for the family's 



D-8 



second car and for delivery trucks is being developed. Battery- 
charging will not only increase the requirements for power but 
also electric cars and trucks will go a long way toward elimi- 
nating the largest single source of air pollution in the State's 
metropolitan areas. The electrification of public interurban 
transportation also is expected to increase the power require- 
ments in California. The Bay Area Rapid Transit District is 
constructing a 75-mile rapid-transit network to connect the City 
of San Francisco and Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Expansion 
of this system and construction of systems in other California 
metropolitan areas are anticipated. 

It is estimated that the residential and commercial 
classes of load will increase more rapidly than other classes, 
including the industrial load. The industrial load should con- 
tinue to increase, as the State develops toward industrial 
maturity commensurate with its expanding market and labor poten- 
tials. With the low cost of fuel for coal-fired plants and the 
even lower cost of nuclear fuel, it is expected that offpeak 
loads, such as battery charging, will markedly increase at such 
time as sufficient coal-fired and/or nuclear capacity has been 
installed to permit supply of offpeak energy from these sources. 

As between Northern and Southern California, it is 
estimated that per capita use will remain higher in the northern 
area in spite of anticipated decreases in the proportion of 
irrigation pumping requirement in the total Northern California 
load. It is estimated that more industrial plants of the types 



D-9 



which require large amounts of power will locate in Northern 
California. Offpeak battery charging should develop earlier in 
Southern California due to greater need for air pollution control; 
however, Northern California with its somewhat higher proportion 
of nuclear plants should eventually also experience a considerable 
expansion of offpeak load. Another factor tending to explain and 
maintain the lower per capita use in Southern California is the 
higher proportion of multiple dwellings, having lower residential 
use per customer and per capita. 

Historically, per capita energy generation after the 
year 1920 has been higher in Northern California than in Southern 
California. During the period 1955 to 1965, however, the annual 
rates of increase in per capita use were about 4.0 percent and 
4.7 percent for the northern and southern areas respectively. 
For conservatism, gradually declining future rates of increase 
in per capita generation were assumed for both Northern and 
Southern California. The forecast rate of increase after 1990 
was maintained at a somewhat higher level in Northern California. 

The Federal Power Commission's National Power Survey 
report of October 1964 indicates that the annual per capita 
generation in the United States was about 5,400 kilowatt-hours 
in 1963 and is expected to be 10,600 kilowatt -hours in I98O. 
California's per capita generation was 4,585 kilowatt-hours in 
1963 and is expected to overtake the national average early in 
the 1980' s. 



D-10 



Historically the load factor has been higher in 
Northern California than in Southern California. The estimated 
future load factors for Northern, Southern and total California 
reflect an anticipated increase in the pooling of California 
power systems. The load factors also roughly take into account 
the impact of air conditioning loads and offpeak energy require- 
ments. 

The foregoing estimates of population and annual per 
capita use growth were combined to give the estimates for re- 
quired annual total energy generation presented in the tables and 
figures. The estimated annual load factors were used with the 
estimates of annual total energy generation to determine the 
estimated annual maximum power demands. 

Referring to Table D-3 and Figure D-l, the estimated 
total California maximum demand for the year 1970 is about 25 
million kilowatts compared to 11.6 million for i960. The estimates 
for 1980 and 2000 are, respectively, about 46 million and 132 
million kilowatts. 



D-ll 



CALIFORNIA'S HYDROELECTRIC RESOURCES 

The developed hydroelectric resources In California as 
of the end of 1965 are given in Table D-4. This table lists the 
developments for each hydrologic study area and shows that the 
installed hydro capacity is about 5.4 million kilowatts. The 
average annual energy produced by this capacity is about 25.5 
billion kilowatt -hours, resulting In a plant factor* of about 
54 percent. 

Table D-5 is a compilation, by study areas, of the 
hydroelectric plant additions in California during the period 
1956 through 1965. During this decade the total capacity added 
was slightly under 2.2 million kilowatts. The average annual 
energy generation of these additions is about 8.3 billion kilowatt- 
hours for a plant factor of 43 percent. 

Table D-6 is a list of hydroelectric plants completed 
since December 31* 1965 , under construction, or scheduled to be 
under construction by 1970. About 2,000 megawatts of capacity 
will be added to California's hydroelectric capability in the 
period 1966 through 1970, and an additional 1,400 megawatts will 
be added in the next five-year period, 1971 through 1975. 

The present estimate (January 1967) of undeveloped 
hydroelectric resources is about 11.1 million kilowatts with an 
average annual energy generation of approximately 36.3 billion 



* Plant factor is based on installed capacity, whereas capacity 
factor is based on dependable capacity which for some hydro 
plants is less than installed capacity. 



D-13 



kilowatt-hours. This corresponds to an annual plant factor of 
37.5 percent for all of the undeveloped potential. The estimate 
made for Bulletin No. 3, of approximately 7.8 million kilowatts 
with about 34 billion kilowatt-hours resulted in a plant factor 
of 49.8 percent. 

Thus, while more than 2 million kilowatts of hydro- 
electric capacity were developed during the decade, 1956 through 
1965, the present estimate of total undeveloped hydroelectric 
resources is higher than the 1956 estimate. This is explained 
in part by the fact that the overall plant factor of the present 
estimate is lower than that of the 1956 estimate. 

This is the manner in which estimates change, and 
changes are natural and expected consequences of continuing 
technological developments and changes in public needs and 
attitudes, and therefore in planning criteria. 

Development of the State's resources will be continued 
to the maximum feasible extent. The increased interest in pumped 
storage hydroelectric applications may have a marked effect on 
future estimates of the potential hydroelectric development. 

The proportions of developed hydroelectric resources 
to steam-electric capacity in Northern, Southern, and total 
California, on the basis of installed capacity, are indicated 
in Tables D-7, D-8 and D-9 and Figure D-2. In 1953 the steam- 
hydro ratio was about unity (1.0) in both Northern and Southern 
California, after having been about 0.5 in both areas prior to 



D-14 



World War II. The ratio since 1953 has held fairly constant 
in Northern California at about 1.25*. In Southern California, 
however, the steam-hydro ratio has Increased continually, to 
4.5 in 1965. 



* The Northern California steam-hydro ratio of 1.4 in 1957, 
referred to earlier, was based on dependable capacity, 
whereas the ratio of 1.25 in Table D-8 was based on installed 
capacity. 



D-15 



TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN POWER 

The electric power utility field is experiencing 
technological advances which have an important bearing on water 
resources planning and development. The most significant changes 
of the decade 1956-65 occurred In the following areas: 

Nuclear Powerplants 

Fossil-Fuel Powerplants 

Fossil-Fuel Cost Trends 

Extra-High-Voltage Transmission 

Power Pooling through Interconnection 

Hydroelectric Plants, including Pumped Storage 

Thermal Peaking Plants 

Dual-Purpose Power and Desalting Plants 
Brief descriptions of these technological developments with 
estimates of further advances follow: 

Nuclear Powerplants 
Great progress has been made in the development of 
competitive nuclear powerplants during the last decade. In 1957 
experts were predicting that the total cost of nuclear power 
would be about eight mills per kilowatt-hour by 1967. That this 
prediction was not overly optimistic is evidenced by the fact 
that commercially available nuclear plants of current design 
have an estimated total power cost, based on private financing, 
of less than five mills per kilowatt hour. In fact the estimated 



D-17 



total unit cost of the 1,060,000 kilowatt unit which Pacific 
Gas and Electric Company proposes to install at Diablo Canyon 
is 4.38 mills per kilowatt-hour at 80 percent capacity factor 
(for the first three cores, having an estimated life of 7.79 
years). The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), with federal 
financing, is installing nuclear units of about the same size 
at an estimated total unit power cost of 2.39 mills per kilowatt- 
hour (based on two units, 12-year fuel warranty, and 85 percent 
capacity factor). In both cases the units are planned for 
commercial operation in the early 1970' s. It should not be 
Inferred, however, that the two total unit power cost figures 
reflect accurately the difference between private and public 
financing. In addition to the differences in fuel and capacity 
factor bases, there is the fact that the two-unit TVA plant had 
an estimated production plant capital cost of $112 per kilowatt 
compared to $145 per kilowatt for the one unit at Diablo Canyon. 

The total unit power cost of nuclear-electric genera- 
tion by light water reactors of current design is expected to 
decline to even lower value by 1980, with further decreases in 
the energy component and moderate decreases In the capacity 
component of cost of units of the same or larger sizes. 

To fully appreciate the rapid pace of nuclear power 
development, it will be recalled that prior to 1957 no electric 
power for commercial use was being derived from nuclear reactors 
in the United States. At the present time nuclear generating 
capacity, in operation or under contract, totals in excess of 



D-18 



27 million kilowatts in this country. Several large plants in 
the one-half to one million kilowatt range are under contract 
for near future construction. The Federal Power Commission 
National Power Survey report of October 1964 (PPC Advisory 
Committee Report No. 18) indicates that by the early 1970' s 
substantially all new thermal generation added in Northern 
California will be nuclear, and that by 1983 nuclear plants 
will account for 50 percent of all energy generation In California, 

Nuclear steam-electric units are expected to be used 
for peaking service in the intermediate capacity factor range, 
but with a lifetime capacity factor somewhat higher than for 
fossil fuel-fired units. Commercially feasible base load nuclear 
units of current design, having lower operating pressures and 
temperatures than modern base load fossil fuel-fired units, will 
be better adapted for peaking service than the fossil-fuel units. 

Fossil-Fuel Powerplants 

The cost per kilowatt of new fossil- fuel powerplants 
has decreased significantly since the middle 1950 's. This Is due, 
primarily, to the development of much larger boilers and steam 
turbine-generator units. The resulting "economies of scale" 
together with the effects of related advances, such as higher 
operating temperatures and pressures, reheat, etc., have reduced 
the investment costs per kilowatt by about one-third since 1957. 

In order to realize the savings of cost inherent in 
energy production at high temperatures and pressures, these large 
plants should be operated at high capacity factor. Furthermore, 



D-19 



any type of plant operation other than continuous, near constant 
loading would increase significantly the forced outage rate and 
maintenance requirements for these units due to the increased 
cycling of their complex control systems and to the imposition of 
more damaging thermal stresses on plant equipment which would 
result from too rapid or frequent changes in the level of loading. 

Notwithstanding these limitations, large fossil- fuel 
units, after initial base load operation and perhaps some modifi- 
cation for peaking service, will operate at less than maximum 
capacity factor as even more efficient units are added to the 
system. 

Fossil- Fuel Cost Trends 
Several developments in recent years have moderated the 

upward trend of fossil-fuel costs. Two such developments, 
stemming in part from the threat of nuclear-electric competition, 
were the improvements in coal mining and coal transportation 
techniques, which reduced the cost of coal both at the mine and 
at the point of use. Further progress in high-voltage transmission 
of electric power also has increased the competition in the field 
of energy transportation, and has brought remote hydroelectric 
and coal-fired plants into competition with load center steam- 
electric plants burning natural gas and oil. 

The delivered costs of electric power generated by the 
several fossil fuels will vary from one geographical area to 
another depending in part on the distances between each area and 
the sources of supply of the different fuels. Even though 



D-20 



California is relatively distant from the coal fields of Southern 
Utah, Northern Arizona, and the Four Corners, and from the hydro- 
electric resources of the Pacific Northwest and Canada, this 
State's power users will benefit from the cost-moderating influence 
of these economic energy sources. Nuclear-electric plants, which 
have no smog or fuel transportation problems, will provide a 
ceiling on the costs of all fossil fuels for use in power genera- 
tion. 

Construction of coal-fired plants at locations remote 
from California is underway, and additional construction is being 
planned. Southern California Edison Company and other partici- 
pants in Western Energy Supply and Transmission Associates (WEST) 
are constructing two 755 megawatt coal-fired generating units at 
Pour Corners, New Mexico. These units are expected to be completed 
in 1969 and 1970. Edison will own 48 percent of the generating 
capacity of these two units. Edison also will own 7 4 percent of 
the output of the 1500 megawatt Mohave Powerplant which members 
of WEST are planning to construct in Nevada, near Davis Dam on 
the Colorado River. This plant will consist of two 750 megawatt 
coal-fired units, scheduled to be completed in 1970 and 1971. 
Plans call for fuel for this plant to be transported from North- 
eastern Arizona by slurry pipeline. Edison, Arizona Public 
Service Company and San Diego Gas and Electric Company, through 
subsidiaries, are studying plans for a 5000 megawatt coal -fired 
plant on the Kaiparowits Plateau, near Glen Canyon Dam on the 
Colorado River, in Southern Utah. This plant ultimately may be 
increased to 10,000 megawatts. 



D-21 



It is anticipated that most of the new fossil-fuel 
units constructed for supply of power to the California load 
will be coal-fired. Gas and oil will still be required for 
generation in existing plants and to supply the expanding require- 
ments of the premium uses of these fuels. For some of these 
higher uses, such as house heating, gas and oil will be under 
strong competition from electric power. For these and other 
reasons the cost of gas, oil and coal are expected to remain at 
about the present levels for the next 15-20 years. Thereafter, 
any tendency to increase will be moderated by further declines 
in the cost of nuclear-electric generation. 

Extra -High-Voltage Transmission 
As a result of extensive research and development 
following World War II, the mileage of 345,000 volt transmission 
lines, in service in the United States, has increased from zero 
in 1950 to over 4,000 circuit miles at the present time. Rapid 
progress is being made on 500,000 volt transmission with more 
than 3,000 circuit miles expected to be in service by the end of 
1967. A further advance to 765,000 volts now is underway in 
Canada and the United States. The American Electric Power 
Company has ordered 765,000 volt equipment from domestic and 
foreign manufacturers for initial delivery in 1968. It is also 
expected that the required technical development will proceed to 
permit even higher voltages as needed in the future. The main 
reason for trying to achieve higher transmission voltages is simply 
that it is much less costly to transport large amounts of electric 
power over great distances at the higher voltage levels. 

D-22 



The circuit mileage figures given above were for alter- 
nating current (ac) lines; however, noteworthy progress also has 
been made in the field with direct current (dc) transmission. 
Within the last decade, the successful development in Sweden of a 
mercury arc "valve" capable of operating at voltages in excess of 
100,000 volts and currents in the order of a thousand amperes has 
reduced considerably the former prohibitive cost of converting ac 
to dc (and vice- versa) at the extra high voltages. This has renewed 
interest in dc lines as a supplement to ac systems because dc power 
transmission has several important advantages over ac for long 
distance, point-to-point transmission of large blocks of power. 
Some 1700 circuit miles of 750 Kv dc transmission lines will be 
constructed by 1970 as part of the Pacific Northwest -Pacific 
Southwest Intertie. 

This Intertie is a concrete example of the pertinence 
of extra high voltage transmission to California. It will include 
ultimately about 2000 circuit miles of 500,000 volt and 500 circuit 
miles of 345,000 volt ac lines in addition to the 1700 circuit 
miles of 750,000 volt dc lines. 

Power Pooling Through Interconnection 
The Pacific Northwest -Pacific Southwest Intertie is a 
good example of the mutual benefits of pooling through inter- 
connected operation of power systems. Major savings will be 
realized by both areas due to load and also hydroelectric 
resources diversities. Less generating capacity will be required 
to serve the integrated load, and the effective generating 
capacity of the integrated resources will be greater. 



D-23 



Initial benefits will accrue from transmission of 
Northwest surplus hydroelectric generation to replace thermal 
generation in the Southwest and from transmission of Southwest 
offpeak energy to firm up Northwest hydroelectric capacity. Until 
such time as it is needed in the Northwest, a portion of the 
Columbia River firm power resulting from the Treaty with Canada, 
( Canadian Entitlement Power) will be transmitted to Southwest 
purchasers. 

Northwest and Canadian Entitlement power will ultimately 
be required for use in the local areas. It is expected, however, 
that the Intertie will be used to transmit to the Southwest hydro- 
electric generation which Canada plans to develop in advance of 
the local need. In any case, the Intertie will continue to 
provide other advantages of pooling, including load and resource 
diversities, reduced total generating reserves, and addition of 
larger generating units for the same reliability. 

Hydroelectric Plants, Including Pumped Storage 
Hydroelectric generating units have been very efficient 
for many years, with hydraulic turbines normally operating at 
efficiencies of 90 percent or better. Thus, the opportunity for 
improving the economics of hydroelectric developments through 
higher efficiencies is limited. Savings in investment and opera- 
ting costs per kilowatt have been realized by utilizing larger 
turbines, at appropriate sites, and through increased application 
of automatic control; however, these savings have not had as great 
an impact on power costs as the development in steam plants. 



D-24 



A very substantial increase in activity has been 
noted in the development of pumped storage hydroelectric plants. 
Pumped storage hydro functions as a gigantic electric storage 
battery which stores low-value offpeak energy by using it to pump 
water from a lower to a higher reservoir from which it can be 
returned through turbines to generate power during peak periods 
when the plant output has capacity as well as energy value. A 
prerequisite for such developments is the availability of low cost 
offpeak energy for pumping, which in California will almost always 
come from thermal plants. 

Reduced equipment cost brought about by the further 
development in recent years of the reversible pump-turbine unit, 
which permits the pumping and generating operations to be combined 
in a single machine, has been a significant factor in the improved 
economics of pumped storage installations. 

In 1956 the total capacity of pumped storage hydroelectric 
units in operation in the United States was less than 88,000 kilo- 
watts. At present the total is in excess of 1,150,000 kilowatts, 
a thirteenfold Increase. 

Pumped storage is playing an important role in the State 
Water Project. The dependable capacity of the Oroville-Thermalito 
power facilities was significantly increased, and their feasibility 
enhanced, by Incorporation of pumped storage. The cooperative 
development of 1,250,000 kw of peaking power on the West Branch, 
California Aqueduct, will employ reversible pump-turbines, as will 
the San Luis Pumping Generating Plant. 



D-25 



Three continuing developments will contribute to the 
future increase of pumped storage in California. One is the 
rapidly expanding power load. Another is the increasing ratio 
of steam-electric to hydroelectric generating capacity, which 
expands the market for low capacity factor pumped storage genera- 
tion. The third development is the sharp decline in the energy 
component of cost of steam-electric generation, due to the intro- 
duction of low fuel cost coal-fired plants with extra high voltage 
power transmission, and nuclear plants. The future availability 
of low-cost offpeak power from coal-fired and nuclear-fueled 
plants, particularly nuclear plants with the continuing decline 
in the cost of nuclear fuel, will readily compensate for the 
double hydraulic loss associated with pumped storage pumping and 
generating. 

Thermal Peaking Plants 
Special designs have been developed for fossil fuel 
steam-electric units intended for use as peaking or reserve 
capacity. These moderately large units will operate at relatively 
low pressures and temperatures. The capital cost for these 
special units is somewhat less than the cost of standard base 
load units; however, the modifications required to achieve this 
saving result in a substantial decrease in generating efficiency. 
These special steam-electric peaking units become quite 
competitive with other types of peaking units in the market for 
very low capacity factor generation. The reason for this is that 
the penalty incurred due to the lower plant efficiency is relatively 
small when the plant produces electrical energy for only a small 
percentage of the time. 

D-26 



Recently, simple open-cycle gas turbines have received 
increased consideration as economical sources of peaking capacity. 
This type of plant is low in first cost and relatively quick 
starting; however, the generating efficiency is even lower than 
that of the special steam peaking plant. 

Diesel engines have been used for peaking service in 
special situations, but wide application of diesel plants on 
major power systems is not too likely since available sizes are 
too small. 

Dual-Purpose Power and Desalting 
In recent years there have been many studies of com- 
bining a water desalting plant and thermal-electric power 
facilities at the same location, to utilize a common energy 
source. Currently the most feasible scheme is the combination 
of a distillation plant with a steam-electric plant where at least 
part of the steam produced, after being extracted from a turbine 
or exhausted from a back pressure turbine, is sent to the desalter, 
for heating the saline water. 

Analyses have shown that in higher fossil fuel cost 
areas the cost of both power and converted water would be mini- 
mized by using a nuclear reactor as the energy source. One such 
development is the dual-purpose facility which is to be constructed 
under the sponsorship of the Metropolitan Water District of 
Southern California, the Federal Atomic Energy Commission, and 
the Office of Saline Water of the U. S. Department of the Interior. 



D-27 



The combination nuclear-electric and thermal distillation 
facility will include two condensing units and a non-condensing, 
or back-pressure, turbine-generator unit, supplied with high- 
pressure steam from the two nuclear reactors. The back-pressure 
unit will discharge steam at a back pressure of about 35 pounds 
per square inch absolute to a thermal desalter of the multi-stage 
flash distillation type. The combined installation will produce 
ultimately 150 million gallons of desalted water per day and a 
net electric power output of about 15OO megawatts. 

The Southern California Edison Company and the San Diego 
Gas and Electric Company will own one of the nuclear-electric 
plants; the second nuclear-electric plant will be owned by the 
City of Los Angeles. The Metropolitan Water District will own 
the back-pressure turbine-generator and the desalter. The cost 
to the utilities will be that which they would have been required 
to expend for the same amount of power from single-purpose 
nuclear- electric units. Hence, the dual-purpose development 
provides a subsidy to the desalting function. 

Studies for these dual-purpose developments should 
include thorough consideration of the area electric power needs 
and water requirements and sources in order to arrive at the 
optimum ratio of water to power production. 

Another recent development was the signing of an agree- 
ment by the United States, Mexico, and the International Atomic 
Energy Agency under which the two countries will explore the 



D-28 



possibilities for a joint undertaking of a large-scale dual- 
purpose nuclear power and desalting plant to serve the arid region 
embracing the border areas of California and Arizona and the 
adjoining Mexican States of Sonora and Baja California. 

Most studies to date have assumed that both the desalter 
and the electric powerplant would be base loaded, operating at 
80-90 percent capacity factor, but it is also possible, with 
certain equipment arrangements, to vary the amounts of water and 
power produced in order to supply peaking power to the power 
system load. However, the economic penalty incurred by operation 
of the desalter and the electric power facilities at less than 
maximum capacity could be severe by virtue of the fixed charges on 
idle equipment and would have to be justified by the value of the 
power for peaking. 

Looking to the future, other desalination processes 
which require electrical or mechanical energy, such as electro- 
dialysis, reverse osmosis, freezing, or vapor compression, could 
also be utilized to absorb the output of a base loaded thermal- 
electric plant during the power system load's offpeak hours. Some 
of these processes are easily started and stopped and this would 
further enhance the prospects for peaking operation of the electric 
power facilities. There would still be an economic penalty due 
to less than maximum utilization of the desalter. 



D-29 



MARKET FOR AND VALUE OF HYDROELECTRIC POWER 

Practically all of the State's undeveloped hydroelectric 
potential Is in Northern California. The principal market for 
this potential is Northern California; however, the recent progress 
in extra high voltage transmission is tending to expand the market 
to include the power systems south of the Tehachapi Mountains. 
The extra high voltage interties also are placing Pacific North- 
west hydroelectric development in competition with that in 
California. 

With the rapidly expanding power load there will be a 
market for the relatively limited hydroelectric energy as it 
becomes available, mainly through multiple-purpose development 
of water resources. The question now, as in 1957, is to the 
degree of peaking, or capacity factor, which can be absorbed by 
the power market. Power systems having higher proportions of 
steam-electric capacity can more readily absorb low capacity 
factor hydro generation. It follows that Southern California with 
its rapidly increasing steam-hydro ratio is a larger potential 
market for low capacity factor hydro than Northern California. 
However, the longer transmission distance involved in the delivery 
of Northern California hydro peaking power to Southern California 
will be a cost factor to be considered even though only a portion 
of the cost of the multiple-purpose transmission system would be 
allocated to this purpose. 



D-31 



In The California Water Plan studies it was assumed 
that the market would absorb hydro generation at a capacity- 
factor of about 40 percent. This was the dry period capacity 
factor, which determined the dependable capacity of the hydro 
plants. The capacity factor based on average annual generation 
was about 50 percent. Further reference to capacity factor unless 
stated otherwise will indicate dry period capacity factor. 

Anticipating a gradual increase in the steam-hydro 

ratio in Northern California starting about 1975 and a more rapid 

increase after about 1985, it appears reasonable to assume that 

the future market for the output of hydro plants installed in 

Northern California will absorb generation at capacity factors, 

as follows: 

1965-1974 1975-1984 After 1984 
Capacity Factor (#) 30 25 20 

This means that a hydro plant planned for initial 
operation in 1970 could have sufficient installed capacity for 
operation at 20 percent capacity factor after 1984. The plant 
would be operated initially at 30 percent capacity factor and 
proportionately lower dependable capacity. Alternatively, the 
plant could be designed for initial operation at 30 percent 
capacity factor but with provision for later installation of 
additional capacity to permit operation at lower capacity factor, 
and higher dependable capacity, at a later date. 

Basic to the foregoing suggestion of hydro peaking in 
the intermediate capacity factor range (20-30 percent) is the 
assumption that California's near future need of peaking at 



D-32 



I lower capacity factors will be largely supplied by other sources 
including surplus peaking capacity from the Pacific Northwest, 
additional capacity installed at the most favorable existing hydro 
plants, pumped storage units, gas turbine units, and special 
design thermal-electric units. Wherever possible these peaking 
units would be located near the load centers. 

The determination of the true value of hydro peaking 
power requires a total system study in which the system economics 
and operating reliability and flexibility are evaluated with the 
hydro unit integrated into the system and compared on the same 
basis to the integrated system with the alternative peaking equip- 
ment substituted for the hydro unit. Such a comprehensive comparison 
study is justified where a decision to construct is involved. For 
preliminary planning purposes, however, a simpler approach usually 
can be justified. 

In the planning study method, the principal measure of 
value of hydro peaking power in the intermediate capacity factor 
range is the cost of producing equivalent power in the alternative 
base load steam-electric unit which probably would be installed in 
the absence of the proposed hydro plant. (In California the steam 
alternative traditionally has been a privately financed gas- and 
oil-fired unit). However, hydroelectric capacity has several 
important advantages over the alternative steam unit which, though 
difficult to evaluate economically, should be accounted for in the 
overall measure of value. 



D-33 



Several of these advantages result from the fact that 
hydroelectric units are relatively simple, rugged machines which 
operate at low speeds whereas the modern steam-electric units 
are complex machines which operate at high speeds and steam 
temperatures. 

It follows that the hydro plant will experience far 
fewer equipment failures and require much less down time for 
maintenance. In other words the hydroelectric units have greater 
reliability and availability for serving the load than do steam- 
electric units. Hence, one kilowatt of hydroelectric capacity is 
the operating equivalent of more than one kilowatt of steam- 
electric capacity. 

Another important advantage, which is more difficult to 
assess in terms of dollars, is the hydro unit's superiority in 
speed of response to rapid changes in load requirements. A hydro 
unit can, with relative facility, go from standstill to full load 
in a few minutes and from minimum load, or even a motoring condition, 
to full load in a matter of seconds. Steam units cannot approach 
this performance. This operating flexibility explains hydro's out- 
standing advantage for supplying peaking power and serving as 
spinning and standby reserves. 

For these and other reasons, but primarily because of 
its superior availability, hydro usually is given a credit In the 
form of an upward adjustment of the at-load center estimate of 
value of capacity as measured by the alternative cost of steam- 
electric generation. Most agencies have used a capacity credit 



D-34 



ranging up to 10 percent; however, the Northeast power failure 
of November 9, 1965 and similar recent experiences in other 
regions have prompted many agencies to reevaluate the true 
worth of hydro in total system operation, including maintenance 
of system stability and restoration of service after system shut- 
down. Continuing studies appear to justify increasing the 
capacity credit but the present estimates of value were derived 
using a 10 percent credit. 

In the CWP studies the at-plant site value of hydro 
power was estimated to be: 

Capacity component $22 per kilowatt -year 
Energy component 2.8 mills per kilowatt -hour 
This value was based on a typical transmission distance between 
hydro site and load center of about 100 to 150 miles, or an 
average of 125 miles. This is only slightly less than the trans- 
mission distance between Oroville and the Northern California 
load center, in the Tesla-Tracy-Delta area. 

The estimated at-load center values of hydro power for 
future developments are, as follows: 

Date of Initial Operat ion 

1965-74 1974-84 After 1984 

Value at Load Center 

Capacity Component 
(? per kw-yr) 17.90 18.35 19.20 

Energy Component 
(Mills per kw-hr) 2.75 1.9 0.7 

It will be noted that in Bulletin No. 160-66 the estimated values 

of the energy component for the first and second periods were, 

respectively, 3.0 and 2.1 mills per kilowatt -hour. 



D-35 



These estimated values are based on fossil fuel units 
only for the initial, 1965-74 period; fossil fuel and nuclear 
units, in the proportion of two fossil fuel units and one nuclear 
unit, in the 1975-84 period ; and nuclear units only after 1984. 

In deriving the at-plant site value of hydro power, 
the at-load center capacity component of value is decreased by 
an allocated portion of the annual cost of transmission facilities 
and transmission losses. For general application, a figure of 
$1.00 per kilowatt-year per 100 miles, based on 345 kv or 500 kv 
transmission is used herein. This figure is believed to be appro- 
priate for hydro sites north of the City of Sacramento except in 
the area of the authorized Upper Eel River Development and in the 
lower Trinity and Klamath River areas. The appropriate figures 
for the annual cost of transmission facilities and losses applying 
to these sparsely-populated North Coastal areas would depend on 
the specific plan of development, including staging of generation 
and pumping. 

With 345 kv or 500 kv transmission, the transmission 
losses are so low that for planning purposes the energy component 
of value of hydro power may be assumed to be the same at the 
hydro site as at load center. 

Taking into account the effect of transmission cost and 
loss on the capacity component of value, and also the capacity 
factor estimates mentioned earlier, the estimated at-plant site 
values of hydro power for future developments in Northern 
California at a distance of about 125 miles from load center, 
are as follows: 



D-36 






19o5-74 

Capa 


1975-04 After 1984 
city Factor (#) 


30 
37 


25 20 
31 25 


Value 


at Plant Site 


16.65 


17.10 17.95 


2.75 


1.9 0.7 


7.9 


8.2 8.9 



Date of Init ial Operation 

Capacity Factor {$>) 
Dry Period 
Average Annual 

At -Plant Site Value 

Capacity Component 

($ per kw-yr) 
Energy Component 

(Mills per kw-hr) 
Total Unit Value* 

(Mills per kw-hr) 

These present estimates of total unit value of hydro 
power indicate moderate increases between successive periods in 
spite of sizable decreases in the energy component. This is 
explained by the higher capacity component of cost, and value, 
of the nuclear units compared to fossil fuel units, in combina- 
tion with successively lower capacity factors. 

The above estimates of the at-plant site two-part value 
for the three periods compare with the constant value of $22 per 
kilowatt-year plus 2.8 mills per kilowatt-hour used for The 
California Water Plan. The decline in the estimated value of 
the capacity component between the time of the CWP studies and 
the present is due to reductions in the capital cost of fossil 
fuel generating units. The decrease in the value of the energy 
component between successive periods results from the projected 
use of low-cost nuclear fuel. 



* Based on average annual capacity factor. 



D-37 






The decreases in the component of value of hydroelectric 
power, discussed above, are offset by the increase in total unit 
value, or revenue, due to the lower capacity factor for such 
power. The total unit value of power at hydroelectric plant 
sites in the CWP studies was 7.8 mills per kilowatt-hour as 
compared to the current estimates of 7.9, 8.2, and 8.9 mills per 
kilowatt-hour for the respective periods. 



D-38 



SOURCES AND COST OP POWER FOR PUMPING 

In the CWP studies the principal measure of the cost 
of power for continuous pumping was the alternative base load 
gas- and oil-fired fossil fuel unit then used in estimating the 
value of hydro peaking power. Today, as a result of technological 
developments, other sources of low cost power are becoming avail- 
able for aqueduct pumping. 

Low cost power from a mine-mouth coal-fired plant, 
presently under construction in Northwestern New Mexico, will 
be available to serve loads in California by 1969. Other coal- 
fired plants, on the Colorado River in Nevada and Southern Utah, 
are being planned for near future delivery of power to California. 
Power from these plants will be for use primarily In Southern 
California. 

Progress in the development of nuclear powerplants 
with their declining costs indicates such plants are competitive 
with mine-mouth coal-fired plants. Firm plans for construction 
of nuclear plants are underway in both Northern and Southern 
California. 

The Pacific Northwest -Pacific Southwest Intertie has 
opened up other sources of relatively low-cost power for pumping 
in California during an interim period. Canadian Entitlement 
power combined with Pacific Northwest hydro dump power will 
provide relatively economic continuous pumping power for the 



D-39 



near term. Both the Pacific Northwest dump power and the 
Canadian Entitlement power ultimately will be withdrawn for use 
in the Pacific Northwest and Canada. 

The determination of the true cost of power for a large 
pumping load requires a total system study. Such a study comprises 
comparative analyses of the costs of operating the area power 
system with and without the pumping load included as a part of 
the area power requirement. In addition to being extremely 
complex, a total system study requires very specific data re- 
garding the pumping load to be served. For example there would 
be considerable differences in the costs of furnishing pumping 
power for various degrees of service reliability, and also, for 
different locations. For preliminary planning purposes a simpler 
method than a total system study, such as that used in the CWP 
studies, normally will suffice. 

The current estimates of the future cost of power for 
continuous* pumping based on the same combinations of privately- 
financed gas- and oil-fired units and nuclear units as were used 
in estimating the value of hydro peaking power to be developed 
in Northern California are, as follows: 





Cost 


at Load 


Cent 


sr 


Capacity component 
($ per kw-yr) 


18.75 


18.30 




19.20 


Energy Component 
(mills per kw-hr) 


2.75 


1.9 




0.7 


Total Unit Cost* 


5.1 


h.2 




3.1 



* The total unit cost of power for continuous pumping was 
based on the use of power for 8000 hours per year. 

D-40 



In deriving the at-plant site cost of power for 
continuous pumping, based on the at-load center estimates, con- 
sideration must be given to the annual cost of transmission 
facilities and losses, to the pumping plant. If the transmission 
system serves several purposes, an allocated portion of the 
annual cost of transmission facilities and losses is added to 
the at-load center capacity component of cost of power. In 
certain Instances the allocated portion could be small, or even 
negative, because a power flow study might Indicate a net reduc- 
tion in transmission losses due to the transmission of power for 
pumping. 

With 3^5 kv or 500 kv transmission, the transmission 
losses are so low that for planning purposes the energy component 
of cost of power for continuous pumping may be assumed to be the 
same at the pumping plant site as at load center. 

In the CWP studies the at-load center total unit 
cost of power for continuous pumping was about 6.3 mills per 
kilowatt -hour compared to the present estimate of 5-1 mills for 
the period 1965-7^. This difference is largely explained by 
the higher capital cost of fossil fuel-fired units in the 1956 
estimate. In the present estimates of total unit cost of power 
for continuous pumping, the successive decreases for the later 
periods result primarily from the low cost of nuclear fuel. 



D-41 



In the CWP studies the energy component of cost of 
power for offpeak pumping was based on the same fossil fuel unit 
as was used in estimating the value of hydro peaking power. There 
was no capacity component of cost due to steam-electric plant cost 
of generation; however, the cost of offpeak power at the pumping 
plant did include a capacity component comprising an allocated 
portion of the annual cost of transmission facilities and losses. 

Today, with the large interconnected power system in 
California, the true cost of offpeak power can only be determined 
by a system study. Such a study would involve ascertaining the 
cost of operating the area power system with and without the off- 
peak load. 

At the present time the power system in California can 
furnish offpeak power at nominal rates. The reason is that the 
highly efficient but inflexible steam-electric units must be kept 
operating during the low load, offpeak hours. This is accomplished 
by decreasing the output of these units, with resultant low 
operating efficiency. As offpeak load is added to the area power 
system the output of the steam-electric units is increased and 
they operate more efficiently. Thus a system study would show 
an increase in production cost due to adding the offpeak load 
which was less, per kilowatt-hour, than the incremental energy 
cost for these units. 

It would appear, therefore, that the cost of offpeak 
power should be no greater than the incremental energy cost of 
the system steam-electric units whose operation was modified in 
supplying the offpeak load. 



D-42 



With the rapid addition of nuclear units with their 
relatively low fuel cost the cost of offpeak power ultimately 
will decline. 

As more and larger steam-electric units are added to 
the area power system, and the steam-hydro ratio increases, 
larger amounts of offpeak power will be available at nominal 
rates. However, the portion of this inexpensive offpeak power 
available for pumping will depend on several factors, Including 
the competition of other uses such as pumped storage pumping and 
electric battery charging. 



D-43 



THE FUTURE ROLE OP POWER 

Power requirements in California are projected to in- 
crease by more than ten times to a power demand of nearly 250 
million kilowatts by the year 2020. 

The cost of generating thermal-electric power, which is 
the principal basis for determining the value of hydro peaking 
power and the cost of power for pumping, has declined markedly 
since the CWP Studies. However, the projected lower capacity 
factors at which hydroelectric power is predicted to be generated 
will increase the total unit value, and revenue, of the hydro 
peaking power to more than that estimated for the CWP. The use 
of lower capacity factors can greatly enhance the economics of 
hydroelectric proposals if, as is usually the case, the incremental 
cost of adding capacity at the hydro site is relatively moderate. 

The estimated costs for pumping power, which exhibit a 
continuing decline as nuclear power approaches fulfillment of its 
promising potential, could greatly increase the feasibility of 
higher pumping lifts which would result in shortening or elimina- 
tion of tunnels. Furthermore, the low costs predicted for offpeak 
power could increase the feasibility of offpeak pumping schemes, 
utilizing more pumping capacity and larger conduits. Low cost 
offpeak power for pumping also would be conducive to the develop- 
ment of pumped storage hydroelectric facilities for generation of 
low capacity factor peaking power. 



D-45 



DEVELOPMENTS SINCE PUBLICATION OF BULLETIN NO. 160-66 

Since Bulletin No. 160-66 was issued, there have been 
several developments which are not fully reflected in this 
Appendix D. With the 1968 issue of the biennial Bulletin in 
prospect, it was decided to present the Appendix material on 
substantially the same basis as Bulletin No. 160-66, and include 
this qualifying statement indicating the probable impact of the 
changes. 

Three recent developments could have the effect of 
increasing the estimates of the value of dependable hydro peaking 
power in the intermediate capacity factor range (20-30 percent), 
as measured principally by the alternative cost of producing 
equivalent power in a modern base load thermal unit which probably 
would be installed in the absence of the hydro unit. 

The first development relates to the assumptions that 
the alternative thermal unit for the period 1965-74 would be a 
modern base load fossil fuel unit and that for the middle period, 
1975-84, the alternative thermal unit would be a combination of 
fossil fuel and nuclear units in the proportion of two fossil fuel 
to one nuclear. As reported in this Appendix under the discussion 
of Nuclear Powerplants in the section on Technological Develop- 
ments in Power, the National Power Survey report of October 1964 
indicates that by the early 1970 's substantially all new thermal 
generation added in Northern California will be nuclear. On this 
basis the thermal alternative for the middle period should have 
been exclusively nuclear, and the alternative for the initial 



D-47 



period, 1965-7^, should have included some proportion of nuclear. 
During the preparation of Bulletin No. 160-66, however, public 
acceptance of nuclear plants was uncertain and it was decided to 
assume a more conservative rate of nuclear expansion than predicted 
in the National Power Survey report. 

Currently the nuclear siting difficulty appears to have 
eased somewhat, with the apparent public acceptance of the Diablo 
Canyon site on the coast near San Luis Obispo for the installation 
of a 1060 megawatt nuclear unit. It now seems evident that in 
California public acceptance will pose greater difficulty in 
connection with smog-producing fossil fuel plants than with nuclear 
units. 

With nuclear units the capacity component of cost is 
higher and the energy component is lower than for fossil fuel 
units. This means that giving greater weight to nuclear units in 
establishing the thermal alternative to hydro will result in 
higher estimates of the value of hydro peaking power. 

Another development is the current reversal of the down- 
ward trend in construction cost of fossil fuel and nuclear units. 
In recent years the cost per kilowatt has been decreasing, In 
spite of continuing inflation, as unit sizes have sharply increased. 
Making allowance for normal Inflation, the cost estimates for the 
Diablo Canyon nuclear and fossil fuel alternatives indicate a 
marked reversal of the recent trend, despite the fact that the 
size of the Diablo Canyon alternatives is comparable to that of 
the largest units being constructed. 



D-48 






The present estimates of cost and value in Bulletin 
No. 160-66 and in this Appendix were based on cost estimates of 
fossil fuel units which, for several reasons, were believed to 
be below the long-range trend curve. These cost estimates were 
increased, using judgment, in arriving at the present estimates 
of value of hydro and cost of power for pumping; however, they 
were much below the Diablo Canyon cost estimates. 

The third development tending to increase the estimates 
of value, and revenue, of future hydro plants is the recent ex- 
perience with widespread power system failure, including the 
Northeast power failure of November 9, 1965. Many agencies are 
reevaluating the true worth of hydro in total system operation. 
It is anticipated that continuing studies, including probability 
studies of reliability, will reenforce the judgment of an in- 
creasing number of authorities that one kilowatt of hydro capacity 
frequently is the operating equivalent of more than 1.1 kilowatt 
of thermal capacity, the ratio used in preparing the current 
estimates of value of peaking power. 

The combined impact of these recent developments on the 
value, and revenue, of intermediate capacity factor hydro peaking 
power may well be substantial. 



D-49 



FIGURE D-l 




sanoH-nvMOiix Nonnia 




SllVMCHIM Nomiw 



FIGURE D-2 



SllVMOll* NOH1IW 



CO 



CO 



1 1 1 


1 1 1 1 


1 1 1 


MM 


MM 


M M 1 


M M 1 


1 1 
















' .'"■ : -r 
















•■•■'iiiii 












/ yvs- yyy/yA 


>- 




< 










/yy 1- // / / / /// / /7 


t>. .•'■' ' • •"■:'•.- 


'«** 


u_ ~ 










//V^V//////. 


A o 




UJQ 

h- _J 


h- 








'//<- / ///////. 


A < 




5R0 RA 
1 53 tol 
2.45 to 1 


<< 






///O-'/////// 

///<z / /////// 


</l < 

/A ° 
vA O 


««*■ 


O 


M-HYI 
956- 
965- 








7%< //////// 
'//M* //////// 
'//,\-///////s 

/////////// 


'//A ■:■■:■:'• Q 

///a x 


| 




< 














































H 












*». 














/////\:: 






o oo <s> *t cm o 

C\J 

S11VM01IM NOHIIW 



D-52 



TABLE D-l 

HISTORICAL AND ESTIMATED POPULATION, PER CAPITA 
AND TOTAL GENERATION, AND MAXIMUM DEMAND 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 



:Year 


Population 
Millions 


Annual Generation 


Load 
Factor 

% 




Per 


Capita 


Total 
: Billion Kwh 


Maximum 


Kwh 


: Annual 
: Growth 
: % 


Demand 
Million Kw 


1920 


2.073 


1,100 


--- 


2.280 


6l.O 


0.427 


1925 


2.435 


1,531 


6.8 


3.727 


60.0 


0.710 


1930 


2.738 


1,882 


4.7 


5.153 


6O.9 


O.966 


1935 


2.852 


1,796 


-1.0 


5.122 


59.8 


0.977 


1940 


3.227 


2,083 


3.0 


6.721 


59.9 


1.280 


1945 


4.190 


2,344 


2.3 


9.781 


65.6 


1.702 


1950 


4 . 802 


2,898 


4.4 


13.917 


63.6 


2.497 


1955 


5.500 


3,782 


5.5 


20.800 


63.5 


3-740 


i960 


6.541 


4,56l 


3-8 


29.832 


62.1 


5.488 


1965 


7.600 


5,576 


4.1 

ESTIMATED 


42.378 


63.8 


7.579 


1970 


8.900 


6,786 


4 . 00 


60.4 


64.5 


10.7 


1980 


11.800 


9,840 


3-75 


116.1 


65.O 


20.4 


1990 


15.400 


13,844 


3.50 


213.8 


65.5 


37.3 


2000 


19.300 


19,118 


3.25 


369.0 


66.0 


63.8 


2010 


23.100 


24,471 


2.50 


565.3 


66.5 


97.0 


2020 


26.800 


28,403 


1.50 


761.2 


67.0 


130.0 



D-53 



TABLE D-2 



HISTORICAL AND ESTIMATED POPULATION, PER CAPITA 
AND TOTAL GENERATION, AND MAXIMUM DEMAND 

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 



Annual Generation 



Year 



Population 
Millions 



Per Cacita 



Kwh 



Annual 
Growth 

io 



Total 
Billion Kwh 



Load 
Factor 



Maximum 
Demand 

Million Kw 



1920 


1.354 


1,126 


— 


1.525 


60.9 


0.286 


1925 


2.327 


1,293 


2.8 


3.009 


59-9 


0.573 


1930 


2.939 


1,5^1 


3.6 


4.530 


60.9 


0.849 


1935 


3.179 


1,488 


-0.7 


4.729 


59.8 


O.903 


1940 


3.680 


1,721 


2.9 


6.333 


59-7 


1.210 


1945 


^.365 


2,225 


5.3 


10.311 


62.8 


1.871 


1950 


5.866 


2,480 


2.4 


14 . 549 


59.4 


2.793 


1955 


7.503 


3,067 


4.4 


23.011 


60.1 


4.372 


i960 


9.176 


3,878 


4.8 


35.589 


62.4 


6.513 


1965 


11.000 


4,682 


4.6 
ESTIMATED 


53.483 


62.6 


9.758 


1970 


12.900 


6,058 


4.50 


78.2 


63.5 


14.1 


1980 


16.600 


8,966 


4.00 


148.8 


65.0 


26.1 


1990 


19.900 


13,001 


3.75 


258.7 


65.5 


45.1 


2000 


22.700 


17,473 


3.00 


396.6 


66.0 


68.6 


2010 


25.200 


21,807 


2.25 


549.5 


66.5 


94.3 


2020 


27.500 


24,696 


1.25 


679.1 


67.0 


115.7 



D-54 



TABLE D-3 



HISTORICAL AND ESTIMATED POPULATION, PER CAPITA 
AND TOTAL GENERATION, AND MAXIMUM DEMAND 

CALIFORNIA 



Year 



Population 
Millions 



Annual Generation 



Per Capita 



Kwh 



Annual 
Growth 



Total 
Billion Kwh 



Load 
Factor 



Maximum 
Demand 
■* 

Million Kw 



1920 


3-427 


1,110 


— 


3.805 


1925 


4.762 


1,415 


5.0 


6.736 


1930 


5.677 


1,706 


3.8 


9.683 


1935 


6.031 


1,633 


-0.9 


9.851 


1940 


6.907 


1,890 


3-0 


13.054 


1945 


8.825 


2,277 


3.8 


20.092 


1950 


10.668 


2,668 


3-2 


28.466 


1955 


13.003 


3,369 


4.8 


43.811 


i960 


15.717 


4,l62 


4.3 


65.421 


1965 


18.600 


5,154 


4.4 

ESTIMATE! 


95.863 
1 


1970 


21.800 


6,355 


4.28 


138.5 


1980 


28.4oo 


9,329 


3.91 


264 . 9 


1990 


35.300 


13,386 


3-68 


472 . 5 


2000 


42.000 


18,229 


3.14 


765.6 


2010 


48.300 


23,081 


2.39 


1114.8 


2020 


54.300 


26,526 


i.4o 


i44o . 4 



60.9 


0.713 


59.9 


1.283 


60.9 


1.815 


59-8 


1.880 


59.8 


2.490 


66.4 


3.454 


62.5 


5.198 


64.3 


7.783 


64.5 


11.585 


63.1 


17.337 


63.8 


24.8 


65.O 


46.5 


65.5 


82.4 


66.0 


132.4 


66.5 


191.3 


67.0 


24-5 . 7 



* non coincident except for years 1945 thru 1965. 



D-55 



. 


G 


> 


a) 


•H 


•H 


P 


tfl 




to 


M 


3'— 


U CD 


K • 


O CD 


> 


>,sl t* x: >>sz >> 


^! -H 


c-p+jo+j-p+j-p 


Sh p 


O-H Hi Ctj -H Ctj -H 


O 


CCSrHSCSG 
S-H ctS iH cti -H ti -H 


fe H 


<D 


5!^H(JHhH!j 


• W 


OtHMh^^SiJEH 


P£)v_- 



cci ctj CO -H c 

c c c ^ o 

< < < £i p 
ni c 

ti ctj ctJ o < 

■^> -^> -^> 

C C G C C 

ti ti cti ti ti 

W co CQ co CO 







G 


<p 


H 


t) 


o 


ti 


•H 




•H 


P 


Jh 


P 


fi- 1 


01 


•rH 


Jh 


CD 


G 


(!) 


>H H 


a, 






o 



m i c\j oo m-^)- co ^t- 

O I U3 O CMVO HVD 

<J\ I CTM3^ OM^CTv CT\ 

H I H rH H H H H 



O 
H 



ON LT\ C^- O^ CM 

co cho>c^cr\ 

r-\ r-i rH rH rH 



o 




•H -C* 


P 


ctj p 


01 


CD W 


P 


W 


co 





CM CO O CM CM LTiO 
O < LTNOOini^CMMD 



l>- 



V004HO 

WHinoo 





fn 


p 


O 


C P 


ti 


o'fe's. 


H 


as 


ft w 



rH 




■:: 


01 


C 


S 


3 


O W 


G 


•H 




C P 


G 


< 


ti 


o 




Sn 


•H 


• 


CO H 


bD G H 


> 


(1) 


•H 


< OS 



Ti 




CO 


>S 


H P 


H 


•rH 


01 


O S 


P 


cci W 


CO 


ft 


G 


ti 


H O 



O I CM LPi O C-- LfNCO 



CM I LTiVO lf\KQ 0-=J" 
^t O^VO LT\^J->vOCO 



O OCO O O OM3 
•< 

OgOWO CTMD CM 

H iah mo o 

H H^t" H 



oooooooo 
cMOOoooom 
t^vo o cm o o o on 



o 
t>- 

00 



o 

o 



POCMVO H-=r 



^1-^1-VOCO rH 




uo hvo cno\ 




H 






73 




CO 




w 




G 




CD 




O 




■H 


O O O OCO 


P 



COCO iN-0-=t 



o o o o o 
o o o o o 

CM CO CM OVD 



ft 

w 



+ + + I + I + I 



c 
w o pp 



« P K 
pq 08 m 



O C ft ft ft CO ft CO 
Pm ctj ft ft ft D ft 13 

CO 



p 


O Ai 




H 




a 


CD CD • 


H 


CO 


H 


3 


G P CD O O G 


Ctj 


> 


CtJ 


H 


O ti Jh s >>s o 


P 




P 


P, 


•H (h O O P P 


O 


Fh 


O 


Sn 


P CD O -H O W 


EH 


CD 


EH 


0) 


o>jCHOGcj-H 




p 




i* 


C H O H CV-H ft S 




p 




o 


^CdiMCdO^OCD 




O 




Pm 


r-oCOHfoOlMOP 




Pm 





+ + + + I 



D-56 







01 








C 




www 


CD W 


O O O T3 O 


CO CO CO 


ctj CO 






w 








ti 








Ph 




H cm m 








. . 




H 


O 


O o 






sss 




O 

13 


d 


ti a 




5 


^ 




O 
•H 


ce 


cci cci 


ti 


fn 


p p p 


CQ 


ti 


c 


C C 


^ P 


c« 


cci ctj 


N 


C 


co co co <c o 



>l 



u 


Fh 






o 


o 






o 


o 


M 


^ 


•H 


•H 


0) 


<1> 


C 


C 


d) 


a> 


o 


O 


fn 


Sh 


-p 


P 


CJ 


O 


c 

< 


3 


<D 


a) 






H 


H 


c 

s 


c 

crt 


£ 


P 


CO 


co 


i-i 


>A 



U 


h 


o 


o 


=3 


3 


3 


2 


o 


o 


•H 


•H 


T3 


-a 


-E> 


■O 






c 


c 


QJ 


0) 


0) 


<D 


o 


o 


o 


o 


3 


2 


3 


3 


-o 


T3 


bO 


bO 


D 1 


o 1 


D 1 


D 1 


•H 


•H 


^ 


u 


< 


< 


< 


< 


-D 


•O 


o 


o 










c 


c 


o 


o 


• 






• 


o 


o 






< 


< 


< 


< 


o 


o 


c 


c 










CO 


w 


«5 


a) 


• 


• 




■ 


w 


w 


w 


co 


rJ 


i-h 


J\ 


hH 







•-: 


<H H 





O 


cH 


■H 




•H 


■P 


U P 


at 


* 


•H 


^ 


a> 


C 


(!) 


|M H 


ft 






'.-'1 



t^ 


it 


on 


it 


it 


H 


O 


OA 


O 


O 


o> 


a% 


CO 


OA 


o> 


H 


rH 


H 


H 


H 



<M CvJ 
0\ CT\ 

H rH 



o 

CVJ 



o 

•h -a • 

P ai P 
P W 





^ 


p 


O 


C P 


aj 


0>R 


H 


aj 


Ph fc 





CO 


CO 


on 


o 


o 


rH 


it 


o 


LT\ 


00 


IT> 


o 




CM 


in 


CO 


rH 


CvJ 


H 


CvJ 


o 


h- 


CT\ 


CO 


in 


< 


VO 


v£> 


-3- 


LH 


VO 


OA 


co 


-=t 


r- 


CO 


CvJ 


0.1 


is; 












•v 















o 



ro 


CVJ 


ro 


CM 


o 


t-- 


CO 


on 


-3 


CO 


CO 


CM 


o 


ai 


on 


o 


ON 

m 


LTV 
O^ 


CM 

in 


i* 

H 
H 


H 

VO 


00 


CO 

CO 


it 

rH 


LTV 
O 
H 


CM 
CM 


CM 
CM 


O 

in 


CM 
O 
H 


rH 

it 


H 


rH 

-H- 



rH 




c 


01 


C 


:-; 


3 


O w 


t-1 


•H 




C P 


c 


< 


m 


o 




U 


•H 


• 


<D H 


bO C H 


> 


(I) 


•rl 


< OS 



a> 


>> 


H P 


H 


•H 


a-; 


C) 12 


P 


cri W 


to 


ft 


c 


C6 


H O 



CO 
CO 



o 

■H- 



it 



o 

it 



o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


a) 


CM 


o 


o 


o 


o 


it 


it 


0^ 


it 


co 


CM 


CO 


C\J 



in in n 



CO 
CO 



o 
o 
vo 



ON 

^1- 



m 

H 
it 



-p 


O 






a) 


c 


fe 






a> 


cd 








h 


H 


O 




crt 


Ci 


p < 


•H 


cti 


c 




^ 


>H 


!m 


a 


0) 


<U 


ni 


U 


p 


rH 


:■- 


P 


0) 


c 


£ 


o 


C 


•H 


O 


p ( 


o 


CO 


rH 


r-l 



n 


n 


T> 


T" 


•rH 


•H 


TJ 


T> 


c 


c 





u 



D-57 



c 
o 
M 

O 

o 



c 
o 

bO 

O 

O 



o 
c 

«J H 
U 

(H • 
O 

c s 



O 
C 

a cm 

Eh • 

O 

C 13 

co 



u 


Sh 


a) 


a.» 


si 


sz 


p 


p 


cti 


nS 



U 


£> 


IS 


n 


3 


O 




>H 


U 


a) 






p 


fc 


Ph 


al 


. 


. 


P.) 


1=5 


M 



a) 


Cti 


,o 


X> 


3 


3 


>H 


>< 





a 


<M H 





O aS 


■rt 


•H -P 


fn -P 


as 


oS -H 


fn 


<D C 


CU 


>H H 


P. 




u 



CVJ 


CO 


00 


.=* 


00 


H 


CO 


-=f 


t-- 


H 


o> 


IS- 


O^ 


CO 


on 


on 


in 


on 


o 


o 


CO 


CO 


in 


CO 


LT\ 


O 


O 


H 


-=t 


O 


^t 


o 


WO 


H 


wo 


^t 


G> 


o> 


0^ 


Ch 


CTi 


o\ 


O^ 


Ch 


cn 


OA 


<T\ 


ch 


Ch 


o\ 


Ch 


c^ 


CT\ 


a\ 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 


rH 


H 


rH 


rH 


H 


H 


H 



•H -d 
P a! • 
a5 cu P 

P K Ph 
C/3 



o 


m 


00 


wo 


WO 


wo 


in 


wo 


WO 


it 


in 


H 



r- 


o 


CO 


O 


in 


o 


r- 


in 


a) 


CO 


H 


o\ 


m 


en 


^" 


CO 


C-- 


tVJ 



wo 



P o 
CP 

H cS 
PhPh 



H £ 

OS C £ 

3 O W 

2 P C 

< aS O 

• cu h 

>(D'H 



^1- 

wo 



VO 

o 

H 



o 



WO 



WO 



-C( 


00 


t>- 


c- 


H 


0) 


1^- 


o 


^t 


I>- 


c 




rH 






•H 










,a 










e 










o 










o 










CO 










P 


CO 


in 


CO 


o 


c 


• 


• 




• 


03 


en 


o- 


wo 


o 



s ! in wo 



•=t 



^j- 


T3 


^t 


C) 


CU 
C 

•rH 

O 
O 

to 


WD 


C~) 


P 


O 


O 


5 


in 


00 


.H 


CM 



t3 








































CU >> 








































r-\4* 








































H-rl 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


O 


o 


OS O S 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


^J- 


o 


o 


in 


o 


o 


o 


o 


P OS W 


o 


CO 


o 


m 


o 


o 


CO 


^t" 


00 


00 


o 


.=*■ 


o 


in 


.=t 


CO 


H 


o 


o 


w P< 








































C oS 


CO 


CM 


WO 


wo 


wo 


in 


o\ 


wo 




0O 


■3- 


r-] 


D- 


in 


co 


o\ 


-=t 


CO 


o 


H O 




in 


WO 




on 


D- 


o 

H 






H 


CO 




WO 




H 


zt 


.=t 


CM 


CO 



o 

Oh 

fa 


' 


' 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


' 


' 


1 


1 


1 


+ 


+ 


1 


+ 


+ 


+ 


+ 


u 

QJ 




w 

O 
Ph 


w 

O 


Ph 


W 
Ci 


w 

O 
Pw 


Ph 


W 

o 

Ph 


H 

cS 
Ph 


w 

O 
Ph 


W 
O 

Ph 


O 

Ph 


w 

Ph 


Ph 


W 

Ph 


H 

Ph 


w 

Ph 


W 

C5 

Ph 


■a 









>J 


U 

oS 


>5 


. 


. 


Q) 


c 






















-P 






CU 


CQ 


CU 


o 


o 


rH 


o 










X 




H 


CO 


p 




c 






Cl> 




H 


B 


s 


rH 


^ 






^d 




CU 








oi 




oi 




-a 


Jh 


CQ 


H 






•H 


c 






CU 




CU 


OS 


• 


• 


H 


o 


H 




c 


O 


T3 


a! 


^ 


^ 


> 


OS 


c 


CU 


CU 




*H 


H 


o 


o 


(in 


TJ 


P< 




0) 




u 


> 


o 


o 


U 


o 


oS 


p 


Jh 


oS 


o 


^3 


B 


jss 




05 


^ 




Ph 


W 


as 




,o 


S3 


<D 




S 


oi 


CJ 


p 




as 






J5 


Jh 


a> 


oi 




^! 


H 


P 


•H 


•H 


P 


H 


CU 


bO 




w 


u 


00 


s 


fq 


o 


O 


S 


P 


bD 


o 


■H 


P 


^ 


!h 


C 


OS 


H 


H 


^ 


CU 


CU 




7S 


p 


p 


X) 


o 


H 


•rH 


^3 


^ 


^ 


oS 


OS 


CU 


o 


o 


o 


o 


!h 


cu 


cu 


u 


u 


3 


H 


Ph 


< 


P5 


m 


PQ 


m 


U 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


u 


p 


o 


p 


p 


p 


W 



D-58 





fH 






rH 


o 


fc 




n 




w 






-P 










x 




w 


M 


-P 


5 






r-\ 


0) 


C 


d) 


CD 


CO 


o 


a 




r-\ 


CD 


o 


<D 


0) 


W 


o 






cri 


u 


-p 


U 


r< 










fo 


o 


rH 


O 


o 




• 


!h 








•rH 






ta 


fe 


m 


CO 




>» 




-P 


-p 








.o 


-P 


u 


CO 


CO 


cd 


• 


• 


• 


3 


•H 


f-> 


Uh 


a 


ffi 


co 


s. 


& 


>H 


Pm 



fi< fo pn, 





C 


<M rH 





O cd 


- 1 


•H 


+j 


U -P 


cd 


CO -H 


<-, 


<D c 


CD 


>HH 


a, 




o 



HrHr-HOrnvOCMCM 
CMCMCMrHOOitCM 

Hf-Hi-HrHr-HrHrHrH 



in 


IT\ 


~t- 


CO 


o 


CM 


in 


-t 


in 


in 


CTi 


Oi 


o^ 


CT\ 


0> 



<J\ <J\ a\ 



ON VO 
CM O 
CTv ON 



o 






th -a 




-p 


Cti 


• 


CO 


(1) 


-P 


-P 


fTJ 


lr., 


CO 







o 


t— 


CO 


CO 


o 


CM 


o 


-=t 


in 


CM 


o 


r*- 


in 


vo 


[— 


it 


CO 


it 


H 


rH 


o\ 


t- 


m 


VO 


it 


LT\ 


H 


m 


on 


t- 


CO 


rH 


OA 


it 


H 


UN 


it 


CM 


H 


co 


rH 


it 


CM 


it 


CO 


CO 


VO 


.=1- 


in 


in 


H 


00 


m 


CM 



-P o 

C-P 

CO CJ>& 
H CO 
PL, En 



in on o\ cr\ vo vo 



VO CO CO 



in t-- vo 



it 


CM 


on 


CO 


c-- 


co 


CO 


en 


^ 


C— 


CO 


CM 


N- 


H 


in 


o 


in 


it 


t- 


CO 


t- 


nj 


in 


in 


m 


D^ 


-=J- 


it 


o 

rH 


VO 


VO 


^t 


e- 


CO 



rH 




£ 


CO 


C 


3 


3 


O W 


C 


•rH 




C -P 


c 


< 


ert 


o 




tn 


•H 


• 


a) 


rH 


bO G rH 


> 


0) 


■H 


< o 


--. 



VO 

vo 



m c^ oa t>- 



0.1 


-rt- 


in 


CM 


VO 


0! 


CM 


vo 


co 


o 


in 


CT\ 


Ch 


h- 


VO 
OJ 


co 
en 


CM 
it 


cn 

CO 


H 

in 


CO 


on 


m 


CM 


CM 


on 


CO 













































H 4-> 










































H -rH 


O 


O 


o 


o 


O 


c ) 


o 


( > 


o 


o 


c > 


< ) 


o 


o 


(-> 


o 


on 


o 


o 


o 


CO O S 

-p co 5 


O 


CTi 


c > 


o 


O 


f ) 


( > 


LT\ 


o 


in 


o 


o 


o 


o 


< > 


o 


H 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O'l 


o 


o 


O 


O 


VO 


on 


o 


fr- 


o 


o 


CM 


LO 


O 


itf 


N- 


on 


it 


o 


to a, 


•\ 






































^ 


G cd 


CM 


in 


o 


o 


VO 


ro 


rH 


0> 


VO 


it 


o 


CO 


■=r 


o i 


it 


VO 


on 


VO 


VO 


CM 


H CO 


H 




rH 


rH 










in 


t>- 


o> 


CM 


CM 


m 












H 



+ + 







c6 


O 


O 














Sh 


r, 


S 






0) 




p 




(M 










H 




c 






/^ 


r* 






T3 




co 




G 


a.) 


<1) 






id 




r4 




O 


a> 


0) 






93 


Cfl 


P. 


>> 


•p 


Jn 


rH 


p< 


O 


CO 


:-■ 


Jh 


Q) 


r-\ 


o 


o 


•H 


U 




O 


0) 


CO 


•H 






M 


cd 


0) 


$H 




H 


£q 


■p 


-p 


m 


H 


H 


Ph 


o 


cd 


co 


cri 


cd 


G 


•H 


•H 


cfl 


f--. 


ffi 


H) 


ffi 


K 


H 


w 


r-l 


S 



PM Cm PL, PL, 



D-59 



O 


O 


o 




s 


B 


B 




hfl 


to 


bn 




C 


G 


G 




•H 


•H 


•rl 




■rt 


-a 


Tj 




rH 


H 


H 


cri 


d 


3 


3 


-i ' 


co 


of 


n( 


rH 


a, 


p, 


a. 


CJ 


C/J 


co 


co 


> 



p 



>> o 

-p p 

•H C 

C 0) 

>tH 6 

?-. s 

EH fn 



•H • 








•H 


u c 




C > 








Q C 


o o 




•H -H 








03 


o 




^H P 




M 


*i 


C • O 


U -H 




Eh 




<l> 


d) 


CO Jh -H 


0) X3 








V 


d) 


O O U 


> 2 








fc 


h 


•H 0) 


H K 




U 




o 


o 


^ U S 


•h q 


C 


O 


>> 






CD d> < 


CO • «J 


CO 




P 


!h 


!h 


s > 


fa o 


O 


Fh 


•H 


d> 


CD 


< H • 


• • -H 


•H 


03 


C 


> 


> 


• -rH fc 


flco ^ 


Pn 


Q) 


•H 


H 


H 


Ph CO 


•H^CD 


<d 


H 


5h 


•H 


•H 


• ' ' • 


fn 6 


JLj 


CO 


Eh 


0Q 


CO 


co co 


Eh < 


<! 





c 


<Mr-l 





O 0) 


•rH 


tH 


P 


^ P 


cd 


CO iH 


fn 


<D C 


0) 


>HH 


a 




o 



p oj • 

03 d> +> 

p K fo 
co 



u 
P o 

CP 

H n3 



H XI 
OS C S 
3 o w 

C -H 
C P C 

< 03 O 

• 0) H 

WCri 
> <D -H 

< o s 



inininononon.=j-itit 

VOVOVOVOVOVOVOVO^t 
HHrHHHi-li-lrHH 



on 


it 


H 


m 


no 


it 


in 


LT> 


in 


vo 


VO 


VO 


VO 


VO 


VO 


VO 


LA 


m 


CT\ 


en 


(T\ 


CTi 


oa 


0^ 


Ch 


o> 


U> 


H 


H 


<H 


H 


H 


H 


rH 


H 


H 



S 


00 


in 


in 


o 


vo 


o 


H 


OJ 


OJ 


Ch 


in 


S 


o 


o 


H 


O 


0.1 


VO 


oo 


Ch 


VO 


-3- 


oo 


o 


H 


S 


it 


ro 


VO 


VO 


H 


■3- 


•=t 


0J 


VO 


00 


^ 




vo 


^f 


H 


S 


■st 


LPl 


it 


o 




.=* 




C») 



in 


en 


S 


■=t 


vo 


in 


00 


it 


m 


in 


00 


s 


it 


OJ 


H 


in 


H 


O^ 


ir 


en 


on 
in 


s 
in 


o 

in 


in 
in 


on 
•=t 


00 

en 


00 


H 

it 


H 

vo 


OJ 

s 


H 

•=t 


vo 

■St 


m 

it 


on 
on 


OJ 

-3- 


CO 
VO 


in 

OJ 


vo 

S 


a 


H 

in 



o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


VO 


VO 


VO 


in 


m 


O 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


f- 


it 


o 

S 
on 


OJ 
OJ 

in 


00 
00 

vo 


CO 

it 


o 

H 
H 


VO 

s 

H 


OJ 


en 
in 


H 
OJ 

o 


-3- 


H 
it 


0A 
O 
it 


in 
o 

in 


VO 
0^ 


m 
vo 

OJ 


OJ 


in 
in 


H 


OJ 

o 

Si 


o 

OJ 

in 



T3 














a) >t 














H P 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


HtH 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


j! US 


o 


o 


c> 


C7> 


a) 


OJ 


p oi kl 


•\ 


•\ 


^ 


#\ 


*\ 


*\ 


w ft 


o^ 


it 


in 


o\ 


oo 


OJ 


C 03 


s 


o 


m 




OJ 


in 


H O 




H 


H 









on on t- 



o 
o 
o 

m 

OJ 



K 


K 


rt 


(M 


P4 


P-1 


a) 


CO 


U) 


t> 


C3 

u 
oi 


t3 



•H 


M 


c 




Pn 


■3 


g 




t 


•H 


O 


<H 


TS 


K 


P 


03 


•■ 




w 


d) 


o 


>. 


CD 


H 


H 


rH 


^J 


T3 


CO 


H 


^1 


O 





M 






d) 






d) 






Jh 




CI 


O 




o 






p 


w 


cri 


w 


c 


P 


•H 


■H 


w 


5 


h 


03 


01 


& 


£ 


h-l 


co 


CO 


D- 


60 





w 


g 


K 


« 


cJS 


[3 


W 


w 


rt 




co 


CO 


fi-i 


co 


13 


D 



c 






H 






.M 






cri 






H 




U 


CO 






u 






03 




o3 


OJ 






fa 


>j 


Td 


> 




m 


tM 








P 


!m 




O 






w 


fci 


0) 


•H 


•H 


C 


c 


•rH 


CO 


^ 


O 


hn 


C 


X> 


O 


•H 


H 


4-J 


X! 


to 


T) 


•H 


>, 


•H 


rt 


•rH 


XI 


H 


rH 


3 


!h 


01 


a 


CD 


£ 


o 


•H 


o 


»-3 


Eh 


1-2 


t> 


O 


CO 


K 


B 


fa 




h h h 



3 


3 


h 


Jh 


fn 


H 


erf 


H 


O 


a 


CJ 


erf 

rH '— 


W 


CO 


s 


s 


5 


CO • 


•H 


•rH 


o 


o 


O 


•H > 


q 


c 


rH 


rH 


H 


C -H 


S 


erf 


H 


H 


H 


CO n 


+3 


-p 


•H 


•H 


■H 


-P 


w 


co 




> 


Is 


CO • 

Cm 


fr, 


Ph 


Cm 


Cm 


Cm 


Cm CO 





C 


U H 





O erf 


•H 


•H 


+J 


S* -P 


Rj 


erf iH 


'm 


<D C 


<D 


>H H 


ft 




U 



on 


H 


rH 


CD 


-=t- 


on 


on 


■=* 


C7\ 


o\ 


ON 


IS\ 


H 


-l> 


,H 


H 



(T> 


t^ 


o 


cn 


o 


rH 


CM 


en 


LPv 


J- 


a> 


0A 


CT\ 


o^ 


o\ 



CM 
H 



Q 



•m >d 


00 


CTN-Ci 0> 


-p as • 


VO 


O C H 


erf <1) -P 


CM 


H erf CM 


-P Cm Cm 


•* 


•\ *\ 


W 


H 


CM H 



-P o 

C -P 
erf o\" 
rH erf 
Cm Cm 



M 




.C 


Si 


c 


:■- 


•^ 


o ^ 


c 


•rH 




C -P 


c 


< 


erf 


'.> 




fn 


•H 


• 


C) 


rH 


MCH 


> 


C) 


•H 


< o 


;■; 



-3- 
3- 



1^ 


LT\ 


^r 


h- 


CO 


H 






CO >> 










rH -P 










H -rH 


O 


o 


o 


O 


erf O !3 


o 


m 


o 


O 


-P erf ^ 


H 


o 


o 


VO 


to ft 






* 




C cd 


CTi 


ON 


H 


CO 


H O 


00 


cn 


in 


.rH 



O 


O 


VO 


in 


t>- 


cn 


t>- 


in 


LO 


On 


on 


CM 


CO 


CO 


■=f 


o 


o 


vo 




CM 




VO 


o 




m 


^t- 


03 






• 2- 

^t- erf 

o o 



o o 

LT\ O 

l>- CO 

o 

CM 



r- 


H 


in 


CO 


.=* 


H 


vo 


o 


in 


00 

a 1 


VO 

a- 


o 

in 


H 




vo 
vo 


o 

in 



o 



o 



vo 



o 
o 



o 

o 

VO 



H 



o 
o 



CO 



+ + 



+ + 



w 


q 


Cm 


W 


W 


W 


W 


w 


W 


CO 


5 


<8 


c8 


c8 


c8 


<% 


<« 


c8 


CS 


§ 


o 


O 


o 


3 


3 


3 


O 


Cm 


Cm- 
Cm 1 


Ph 


ft 


Ph 


Ph 


ft 


Ph 


P-i 



D-61 



>: 

P, 

u 

I 



c 

•H < 

El ' 

erf 

O • 
1-3 O 

C 
erf 
CO 



C3 

C^CM 

erf 

o • 
h> o 

C 
erf 

CO 



o • 

1-3 O 



erf 

o 

tn 
C! 

•rH 

iH 
ft 



Sn 



c 

<hHO 

O Hi'rH 

tH -P 

u -p crt 
cO -p Fh 
<d C <d 
>h h a 
o 



3 


Fh 








3 


pi 














0) 


o 








CO 


c« 














H 










H 


H 














W 


£ 


m 






CO 


co 






Fh 


> 






■H 


o 


0) 


c 




•H 


•H 






CD 


-ri 






C 


H 


0) 


•H 




C 


C 


CO 




> 


(A 






cd 


H 


Fh 


3 




cd 


cO 


3 




•H 








-p 


■H 


a 


cr 




-P 


-P 


cO 




K 


CD 


CD 


a) 


CO 


13 


CO 
H 


co 
o 

h> 


CD 


CO 


co 


H 

co 

•H 


0) 


>> 
Fh 


| 


| 


| 


1*h 


1* 


CD 




O 


U< 


[x< 


C 


CJ 


Fh 


H 


H 


H 






bl) 


c 


Fh 






cO 


Fh 


CD 


O 


O 





• 


• 


q 


CO 


CD 




• 


P 


0) 


£ 


73 


73 


p 


^ 


a 


< 


w 


y 


S 


S3 


CO 


S 


O 


H 


H 


H 



on 


o 


o 


O 


U3 


>- 


r^ 


oo 


vo 


o 


Vi) 


H 


CM 


OJ 


rH 


LfN 


LTN 


ITN 


CM 


vn 


on 


on 


ON 


ON 


ON 


ON 


Ch 


a\ 


ON 


on 


H 


H 


H 


H 


<-\ 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 



<tf 


crt 


cri 


O 


o 


n 


h> 


hi 


hi 


C 


c 


C 


cO 


(0 


a) 



oo co en ro 



ON 

tH 



ON 
H 



ON 

H 



O 

-P cO • 

cO CD -P 

-P K fc 
CO 



-P O 

C -P 
CO 0"^5 



CM CO 
H it- 
it it 



o 



it 


it 


LfN 


O 


H 


a> 


U3 


it 


O 


a) 


it 


CM 


H 


m 


it 



o 

ON 



ON 

3 



O 



t- V£) CO 



CO 
LTi 
CO 



it 

oo 



oo 

CO 



ON 
CO 



VO 

on 
co 



in 
^o 



& 

cO 
O 
h> 



rH 




fi 


cO 


c 


r-: 


3 


o M 


C -H 




C -P 


G 


< 


m 


o 




Fh 


•H 


• 


a> 


H 


MCH 


> 


<i> 


.. 


< o 


2 



*,o 


it 


VO 


it 


0O 


ON 


H 


O 


00 


O 


r- 


ON 




vo 


H 


b- 


UN 


CO 


CM 


O 


o-i 






CM 




CM 






H 


kO 



ON 


m 


>- 


r- 


r- 


CM 


on 


oo 


>- 


it 


oo 


0O 



o 


>j 










































H -H 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


o 


o 


O 


o 


O 


crt 




t ^ 


o 


CJ 


o 


CO 


o 


O 


o 


O 


LTN 


o 


o 


o 


ON 


o 


ITN 


o 


o 


o 


o 


■p 


crt 


',- J 


ON 


CO 


it 


o 


o 


o 


ON 


H 


CM 


o 


o 


ON 


ON 


o 


N- 


ITN 


o 


LTN 


o 


m 


Oi 










































n 


<Tl 




H 


CM 


H 


it 


CM 


it 


ON 


r- 


H 


LfN 


o 


OO 


KO 


r- 


r- 


^O 


it 


00 


o 


H 


o 




CO 


H 




on 




LfN 




m 


on 


OO 
H 


t- 




CM 


vo 


LTN 


O 
H 


oo 


LfN 


CO 



+ + 



+ + + + 



H 


H 


W 


w 


w 


w 


w 


H 


S 


s 


o 


o 


o 


u 


o 


o 


H 


H 


CO 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


C/J 





C 
























o 


o 


o 




o 
























s 


fe 


S 


w 


£ 






























s 


w 




Ch 






>l 




Fh 






CD 


o 


^i 


M 


^ 


R) 


•H 




Ch 


CD 


CO 


<U 




CD 




G 


W 


Fh 


CD 


CD 


Q) 


H 


^s 




O 


■P 


r-i 


rH 


£ 


3 




tH 


C 


-H 


CD 


CD 


CD 


w 




CO 


Si 


•H 


H 


W 


o 


D 1 


>s 


CO 


CO 


CD 


Fh 


Fh 


Jh 


•H 


• 


H 


M 


fc: 


CD 


-o 


o 


CD 


Fh 


crt 


Fh 


Ph 


O 


O 


C) 


C 


CI 


CD 


o 


CD 


C 


Fh 


rH 


.C 


Fh 


o 


CI 










nl 




bll 


Fh 


CO 


B 


crt 


rH 


o 


CD 


o 




CI 


Wl 


bn 


w 


P 


• 


q 


<D 


o 








g 


X 


£ 


o 


crt 


o 


•H 


•H 


•H 


C/J 


< 


< 


W 


>H 


M 


n 


w 


U 


S 


k1 


n 


pq 


pq 


pq 



D-62 





c 


In rH 


O 


o a 


•H 


■H 


■4J 


!-! 4-> 


cd 


ci -H 


Sh 


CD C 


0) 


>H H 


sx 




O 



•H 


bO 


bD 


bO 






(1) 
















3 


C 


C 


C 






rH 
















a 1 


•H 


•H 


•H 






3 
















a) 


W 


1^ 


W 






Eh 
















o 














£ 


.C 


x: 


















CO 




Cd 


cd 


a 










c 

cd 
CO 


Ph 


Ph 


Ph 


£ 


bD 


Ph 


a> 


OJ 


0) 


(1) 


c 


c 


c 








U 


C 




S 


£ 


S 


H 


5h 


fn 


Jn 


a 


fe 


S 


CD 


•H 


g 


cd 


Cd 


cd 


3 

En 




0) 


CD 



o 


f- 


00 


CO 


H 


OJ 


.=!• 


0> 


<J\ 


ro 


Q\ 


|>- 


r- 1 


ro 


rH 


OJ 


LO 


LA 


OJ 


vo 


H 


CM 


OJ 


rH 


O 


o 


OJ 


^-| 


o^l 


o\ 


CT\ 


0i 


Ci 


Ox 


0> 


o> 


On 


Oi 


Oa 


Ch 


0> 


rH 


H 


rH 


H 


rH 


H 


H 


H 


H 


rH 


H 


H 


H 



« 

o 

Ph 

H 
hi 

< 

o 

H 

DO 

W 

o 



2 

Cd 


hi 



o 






•H T3 




-P 


cd 


• 


as 


CD 


P 


-p 


K 


Ph 



-P O 

C -P 
aS o f5 
rH cd 
PhPh 



«j c s 

3 o w 

C -H 

C -P C 

< cd O 
>h -H 

• CD rH 

bO C -H 

> CD -H 

< O 2 



T3 

<D >> 
rH 4-> 
H -H 

0i O ; 
-P cd [ 

m a. 

C cd 
H O 



o 


CTv 


o, 


^r 


o 


CO 


o 


0- 


co 


•-* 


vo 


o« 


rH 


oo 


on 


.=* 


OJ 


t-- 



0J 


KO 


CO 




iS- 


n 

CD 


H 


M0 


1>- 


CO 


o\ 


-H- 




cn 


O 


no 


O 


LO 


LO 


yo 


•H 
CO 

cd 

pq 

a> 


=t 


c 

•H 
rO 

S 
O 

o 

co 


on 


vo 


.=* 


o 


o 


-=}- 


ro 


LO 


■p 
c 


e- 


OJ 


o 


H 


VO 


t- 


rH 


o 


td 


LO 


t- 


iS- 


Lf> 


--T 


LT\ 


:-' 


0, 


H 


in 


-^ 


LT\ 




LO 


ro 


EH 


.=}■ 


Ph 


ro 




H 



O 


O 


o 


UD 


o 


ro 




*\ 


o 


o 


rH 


OJ 




H 



VO 
H 



OJ 
CO 



LO 


o 


iS- 


H 


o 


t- 


^ 


t^ 


OJ 


c- 


s- 


rH 


co 


co 


OJ 



o 



o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


rH 


o 


o 


o 


CO 


o 


o 


LO 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o^ 


o 


OJ 


o 


■H- 


H 


CO 


OJ 


00 


CO 


o 


a 


o 
















* 












o 


H 


r>- 


LO 


oo 


^t 


^f 


OJ 


H 


OJ 


0.1 


v o 


CO 


rH 
. — 1 


ro 


CT\ 


CO 




-=± 












rH 


CO 



vo 



VO 

oo 
in 



+ + 



4- + 



+ + 



[--1 


W 


w 


w 


w 


H 


c« 


c8 


=8 


c8 


c8 


S 


a 


o 


3 


O 


3 


O 


FM 


Ph 


Pm 


Ph 


Ph 


Ph 





























o 


o 








H 

O 




H 


OJ 




c 


fn 




H 


OJ 


ro 




s 


;-; 




H 
cd 

■p 

o 




o 

Ph 


H 

crj 


. 


. 




o 


> 




o 


o 


o 


OJ 

H 


<D 


Jh 
OJ 






& 


•p 
o 


O 


o 

is; 




ctf 


•H 
K 


> 
•H 


823 


s 


S 


Eh 


> 
-•H 


> 

•H 




EH 


H 
crj 


p> 
o 


Eh 


£ 


^ 




O 


CO 


PC 






CO 


rH 


Ph 


Ph 


H 




-P 


H 




o 


o 


CO 


c 


bD 


QJ 


CD 


OJ 


Q) 





c 


G 


0) 




?H 


S 




rH 


H 


cti 


fn 


C 


rH 


& 


* 


5 


s 


fn 


fn 


,H 




o 






a 


a5 


cd 


<u 


•H 


^ 


crj 


cd 


oS 


o 


OJ 





o 




Ph 


S 




Ph 


pq 


m 


D-63 


W 


EH 


W 


w 


bcj 


hJ 


W 


w 


pq 





H 

« 

o 

H 

< 





C 


<M rH 





O 83 


T-! 


■H 


4-' 


U -P 


nl 


ctf tH 


fn 


0) C 


CD 


>H H 


ft 




O 



o 


•h -a 


•P ctf • 


aj <D -P 


•P K ft 


CO 



CO 



h- 


in 


LO 


O 


t>- 


a> 


CO 


VO 


l>- 



a 


ft 


& 


ft 


ft 








•H 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


CO 


CO 


CO 


Pn 


.c 


£ 


£l 


x: 


.c 


C 


C 


c 




ca 


CO 


co 


w 


CO 


CD 


0) 


<D 


hn 


■H 


•H 


•H 


•H 


•H 


5 


IS 


S 


•H 


m 


m 


m 


pq 


ft) 


O 


o 


O 


m 



-=t 


o 


CO 


CO 


LO 


i>- 


00 


CO 


CM 


CM 


in 


Ch 


CO 


C\) 


rH 


O 


<H 


O 


o 


H 


in 


in 


LTv 


CM 


O 


o 


o^ 


cri 


CT. 


CJ\ 


o^ 


O^ 


Ch 


o> 


G\ 


O^i 


o> 


o^ 


o^ 


H 


H 


H 


iH 


H 


H 


H 


rH 


H 


H 


H 


rH 


H 



o 


CM 


D- 


H 


CO 


O 


r- 


vo 


O 


VO 


CO 


^t 


in 


VO 


CM 


CO 


t^ 


t^ 


CM 


CM 


CM 



CO 



H -C 
PS «5 



S-. 




-P O 




C -P 




<d o^ 




rH a 




P-I fe 


CM 




CO 



rH .C 




ctf C S 




3 O « 




C -M 




C -P c 




< a o 




^ -H 


o 


• CD H 




MCH 


CTv 


> CD -H 


H 


<OS 





T3 

H -p 

H -H 
Ctf O f 
•P as i 

co & 
c nj 
h o 



H 



CO 

•3- 



IS- G\ 00 CO 



C-- co in in in in 



CO 


o^ 


o 


o 


CO 


o 


CO 


O^ 


o 


o 


o 


CO 


vo 


o 


in 


CM 


•3- 


VO 


in 


(^ 


in 


VO 


■=!■ 


.3- 


-3- 


in 


C>- 


vo 



vo 

CO 



o 

ON 



00 

rH 



o 

CO 
CO 



o 

00 



o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


CM 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


a 


o 


O 


o 


CO 


^1- 


o 


^t 


CO 


vo 


00 


in 


00 


in 


in 


in 


CM 


VO 


in 








•\ 
























cvj 


00 


o 

H 


cvj 


t^ 


vo 


vo 


CO 


H 


0- 

co 


co 


co 


CO 




H 



W W W H W W 







ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


ft 


N 


(x| 


ett 


cK 


<« 


cH 


o-! 


O 


O 


13 


13 


U= 


& 


:.- 


to 


co 


9 


3 


3 


y 


y 






(-1 


l-J 


l-J 


r-1. 


.-i 



c 

ctj 

rH 
ft 



C 



ft 
O 

.c: 



ft 
o 



D-64- 



o 



pq CQ m CQ 



ft 
O 

x: 

CO 

•H 
P3 



4) 

If 

O 
O 






bQ 

rl 

o 



0) 





cti 


a$ 




c 


O 




* 






o 


c 

•H 




c 


aj 




a) 


S 




o 






•H 


a> 


o 


u 


TD 


T3 


a> 


•rH 




Js 


CO 


o 




P 


rH 


H 


W 


o 


rH 


0) 


o 


< 


Is 



c 


C 


cti 


cvi 


o 


O 


c 


c 


3 


■H 


u 


«j 


H 


S 



cd 


id 


C 


c 


cd 


aj 


o 


o 


c 


C 


3 


ctf 



o 

M 

W 
[Xj 

O 
H 

ud 

Eh 
O 

W 

a 

w 
o 

p 





C 


<W H 


o 


O 0} 


■H 


•H 


P 


Sh P 


nj 


05 -H 


Sh 


0) C 


0) 


>HH 


a. 




o 



o 






•H T3 




P 


nj 


• 


efl 


03 


4-1 


co 


W 


fe 



-P o 
C P 

td oVn 



<-i 




.c 


03 


c 


~: 


^5 


o x 


C 


•H 




C P 


C 


< 


b3 


o 




fn 


■H 


• 


0) 


rH 


W C rH 


> 


a; 


•rH 


< O 


i : 



C-- 00 



0> 

H 



o 



rH 



co vo 






CM 


t~ 


^r 


CO 




rH 


rH 


^f 


in 


>£) 


in 


< 


^ 


:=* 


0> 


o> 


o^ 


a> 


B 


a» 


CJ\ 


r-\ 


H 


rH 


rH 




rH 


H 



C30 

OJ 

vo 



<: cm <; 



CO 

vo 



o 

vo 









<d >5 




rH P 


O 


H -rH 


O 


0) OS 

P 05 5 


VO 




W Q< 


in 


G 05 




H O 





o 
o 

vo 



o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


co 


o 


VO 


o 


o 


CO 


o 


o 


IA 


00 


<D 


Ch 


rH 








* 


•\ 




o 




-3- 


0> 


OA 


vo" 


H 






rH 


CO 
H 


o 



a, 


1 


1 


Pm 






Sh 


ft 


PM 


<D 


§ 


<8 


g 




E3 


5 


p 


5 


< 


< 




rH 


p 







05 


05 


05 


05 


a5 • 


a5 • 


re 


Eg 


•H • 


•H • 


•rH ■ 


•rH • 


•H P 


•H P 


n 


rn 


rH P 


U P 


U P 


rH P 


rH • 


t-i • 


CO 


to 


Q) . 


0) • 


<u • 


CD • 


CD H 


CD H 


t=) 


£> 


ftH 


ftH 


ftH 


ftH 


& 


& 






S 


B 


s 


S 


s 


s 







H 










rH 










05 




ft 


p 




> 




O 


C 






H 


U 


05 




p 


05 


P 


rH 




C 


P 




P' 


CD 


o5 


O 


C 


£h 


CD 


w 


Eh 


o 


1) 


s 


a5 




.c 


' ; 


•rH 


<D 




ft 


o 


05 


H 




•rH 


Cm 


W 


Ch 




co 





CM 


•H 
d) 


CO 


^1" 


H 

o5 
P 


05 
P 
O 




O 




O 


O 


O 


EH 


ft 


S 


0) 


s 


s 


EH 




•H 




H 








cu 


£ 


ft 


P 


ft 


ft 




p 


rH 


O 


^S 


O 


O 




o5 


^ 


r< 


O 


Sh 


^ 




P 


EH 


P 


P 


P 


p 




m 



D-65 



in 
i 
Q 

W 



53 
O 
H 
Eh 
H W 

9> 
Q H 
< CO 

il 

as 

PL, 

in 

ovo 

H CTi 



w 

W LA 
O Ch 
« H 
Q 









-H 








a> 








> 








•H 








« 








d 




<H H 


o 




O 


CO 


•i ! 






•H 


P 




U 


P 


CO 




CO 


•H 


fH 




CD 


d 


CD 




>H H 


Q 








o 


H 


d 






CO 


o 






3 


■H 


d 




d -p 


o 




d 


CO 


•hx; 


<=C 


SnrH 


:■: 




CD 


H W 


bO d 


■H 




> 


CDS 




>aj 


C3 






r - 








o 


>3 






r-l 


P 






H 


•H 






'.V, 


O 


d 


;-: 


4J 


CO 


•HW 


10 


a 






C 


CO 






H 


o 


V 

■ ' 

b'J 

H 
O 


CD 

•:: 
6 

P 

C 

EC 

H 

h 
CD 

:■ 
i 






fs 


. 






T> 


. 






>> ^ 






K <; 



OJ 
VO 



£1 




' > 


^ u u 


>H 


CD CD CD 




.d .dx: 


• 


,M p p-p 


kn 


CD CO CO CO 




CD CD CD CD 


w 


Jh pL, pn, fx, 



CO 



Jh U 



•H > 

Q -H 

Q 

>J 
p >J 

•H P 
d-H 

•H d 
^ -H 

EH ?H 
^-'EH 



0) CD - — Eh X ^ 

•H £} £ » — CD CD 

U .p P • CD CD 

CD cO CO 5h • £-i Sn 

S CD CD O 5h O O 

< U fc fin >j O >3 

0) P to P Sh U 

• «• ».C<>«— Idk-HCDCD 

SHppnifxiP^ |x f p[x H (x H d-HC0d>> 

C04-5 +)-P -P CO -H J-, CD -H rH rH 

co ^ • • • .h tH -h • cd • • u an Jh -h -h 

fflCQSSSMHfMCOfeWCOEHCOOBWW 



•H > 
CDQ 



i CD -iH 



<•* 



d 

o 
o 

•H 

•H ^ 
5hK 



mco co mco in in in^f en a cn^t -=r <r\=t <h ro on in 

vo Ln mvo mvo vo vo vo vo vo vo vo vo vo vo vo vo vo vo 

o^o^CT\ONOAcr\o^crvcr\cr\c^aACT\0^crNa\cr\crscrN o\ 

HHHi-lr-lr-HrHrHHt-lr-IHf-lrHHrHrHf-lfH H 



rHOJLnooooooooovDvomoooo 



ir\-=t iHooJOOJcoojooovocurnHaN mvo on 

COCO HWHNWCOH-4rlS 4-tTiOO O^VO 

oj h m m mvo t-n t-h in-^r ^t in cm 



ooooooooooooooooooo o 
o o o mo o o o o o o o mo o o o o m o 
HOC04WOOOO o\co airoooooow o 



-=t vo crvx> .=*■ aw- m n- o>co cm 
H-rooHWSOi^ oj in 



O-^t omroH 
mono poroc-- 



•H bO d 

VO t— Ch Sh T3 



CD O 

CD d 

?H CO 



• rH CO 

OKJOH 

S > O -Q 

/3 CO 

S-P'HCO 

3 P fH 

Sh 3 CO CD 



O 'H d U 

• • T3 ffl « P CO O fc ^TD > 

O O ca CD P to P u 

S S O -H >j CD H CO d CD -H -H d 

H H H r Q -D -H -H hO d ^3 O 

CDPPO-Hi-1 %-, O & U'V -H >j.H 

Ori'du^fljooditto^oc: 



CO 



QfflOQM^f4Soyfe5JWb[Hb^O 



D-66 



iS t3 t? =8 eg to c3 cS cB H H H ffl ffl tq pq p 

/■K rh r^ t-^ r^ ^-r- *t» ^» m m m rr\ ^ 



OOOOOOOOOSS&WWcoco 

fXi CL, p^ fl, PL, ex, fl, CM P-, O O O £3 ^3 tD ^5 CO CO W CO 









fn 








0) 








:-• 








■ i 








« 












<H 


H 


G 




o 


CO 


- 1 






•H 


P 




?H 


-P 


co 




CO 


•H 


h 




CD 


d 


CU 




>H H 


a 








o 


H 


d 






CO 


o 






3 


•H 


d 




d +3 


o 




c 


CO 


•h .d 


<q 


£h 


r-l 


3 




CD H ^ 


bO d 


•H 




> 


CDS 




<0 






TJ 








cu 


>5 






H 


-P 






H 


-.-■1 






CO 


CJ 


d 


|3 


-P 


CO 


•H W 


w 


CL 






d 


CO 






H o 












U 








<D 








ti 
























O 








i > 








c 








to 








i-i 








- : 








:-< 








«.< 








:• 

















I!, 






o 








•H 








b| 








o 








H 








O 








Jn 








■a 


<D 






:>, ^ 






K < 



to 


CQ 










3 


3 










03 


CO 










H H 










CQ 


cq 




H 






•H 


•rl 




CO 




d 


d 


d 


CQ 


> 




•H 


cO 


CO 


3 


•H M 


3 


-P -P 


co (X 


CD 


D 1 


CO W H 




0) 


TO 






CQ 


>> Sn 


O 


• 


a 


•H 


!hOI-S 


pH pH 


d 


*h 










CO 


CD 


bOd 


• 


• 


p.d 


•H 


CO 


S S co 


o 


FP CO 



IS- C--CO o vo o 
IT\ iTv LTiVO LAVO 
CT\ CT\ CTv Ch C7\ CT\ CT\ 

rH rH H rH rH rH 



\o 



O O LP\0 o o o 



O^iH O O r-HVD 
t- LTvCO O Ln^t" 
CM VD liS| 



O O O O O O O 

O O O O O OVO 

0> O O^rH O O CO 

rH -3" OMS-LTiO ON 

co in h (oh co 



d 


CJ 


•H P 


CQ 


3 o 


•H 


cr-H 


O 


cO S-i 


d 


O P 


co 


1-3 CQ 


U 


•rH 


Ph 


W -Q 




c8 co 


d H pq 


CJ c- 


: CO O O 


P-, c« O 


CO CO CO 



CO 

cr\ 



O H 


o 




H 




o 

EH 


CQ 






o 




3 


>> 




Cm 


CO 


CO CQ 


CD 






CD 


H H 


r-l ^ 




.d 


U 


CQ H 


CQ CJ >»i— 1 P 


< 


•H CD 


•a O fn 


CO 


O 




d d 


^ rH Sh P 


g 




co d 


CO rH CD 


Jh 


: ; 




p o 


01 2 .d 





C3 




CO Q 


PQ EH O PwS 





CQ CQ 

bO bO 
d d 

•H -H 



ss w 



COCO CvJ 
LPvLTvVO 
OAONOA 

HHH 



rH ms 

rH mm 
oornH 



co 

m 



o 
m 



o 


o o o 


o 


o 


o 


o o 


o 


o 


MD 


o o o 


o 


o 


o 


CM O 


CO 


m 


CO 


CM O H 


oo 


C\J 


CO 


-*o 


.=* 


m 




«\ »\ *> 


*> 












C-- 


t^irvt 


VO 


m 


CO 


on 


co 


on 


oo 


o^m^t 


t-r 






on 


oo 


( 


-=t 


H 


(M 










H 



dH 


CO 


03 


o 


c^ 




CO 


do 


•H 




rt 


d 


g 


CO 




o 


a> 


•H 


-a 


u 


•H 


CD 


CO 


>: 




< 



s< 



vo m 



< o 
so 



o 




•H 


& 




« 


,d 




CQ 


o 


CQ 


bO 


rH 


CO 


d 


CO 


CO 


•H 


CQKK 



D-67 





cu- 




yl 




CL 


H 


< 




B 


CO 


EH 




M 


+3 


O 






o 


EH 






EH 






X> 




W 




o 


CO 


EH 




d 


CD 


< 


p 


W 


U 


EH 


r-H 


CL 


< 


CO 


CD 


•H -P 






CQ 


d o 






Q) 


fH H 






o 


EH CM 






o 








TJ 








cO 








u 








o 








^1 

















o 









o 

Ch 







C 


• 


• 


o 


m P -H 


>H 


•H 


p 




c 


cd 


• 


H 


h 


P 




<D 


to ft 


ft 


fa 


O O 



O 






O 








> 














3 






3 








•H 














-o 






T3 








Q 


^-^ 












0) 






a> 










• 












3 






3 








U 


> 












& 






& 








o 


•H 












< 






< 








M 


* Q 












a 






03 








0) 


0)^J 












•H 






•H 








> 


<D CD 












c 






C 








rH 


Sh CO 




X 


c 


*| 


C 


u 






m 


P 


P 


c 


•H 


o u 




Jh 


a3 


Jh 


aj 


o 






o 


o 


U 


03 


co 


CJ 




O 


o 


o 


o 


ft 






ft 


3 


P" 


o 


— ■* 


Jh 




fa 


•H 


fa 


•H 


tH 






•H 


■a 


T3 


•H 


c 


0) w 






M'-- 


^^ 


M 


H 






rH 


0) 


CU 


Jn 


«J 


> <u 




0) • 


<U > 


0) • 


<u 


03 






03 


3 


2 


CO 


o 


rH > 




H > 


S "H 


H > 


s 


O 






CJ> 


D 1 

< 


O 1 
< 


Jj 


•H 


•HH 
CO -H 




T3 -H 


•5 ft 


T3 -H 
T3 P 


"^ 


xi 






£ 








a> 


CO 


M 


■H 


X c 


Sc 


^d 


o 






o 


03 


03 


M 


S 


^J 


a> 


S C 


M O 


M 


c 






C 


•H 


•H 


M 


<; 


>H^ 


0) 


— ' aj 


O O 


—•03 


o 


cti 






03 


C 


C 


o 




O U 


h 


o 


fa ft 


o 


fa 


U 


m 


U 


?H 


fe 


h 


fa 


^ 


fa O 


O 


C -H 


XI 


G -H 




m 


CO 


CO 


m 


O 


O 




Sh 


fa 




O *H 


<D 3 


O U 


CU 




£ 


x: 




ft 


ft 


£ 


O 


CO 


CO 


O <l) 


H ft 


O CO 


H 


-p 


-P 


p 


p 


•H 


•H 


p 


fa 


<D • 


rH 


■H S 


t3^ 


•H S 


•O 


to 


oj 


03 


to 


H 


H 


2 




C! O 


H 


X>< 


t3 


X < 


■a 


00 


CO 


CO 


0) 


ct3 


03 


o 


o 


OC0 


0) 


3 


•H 


3 


•H 




ft 


fa 


13 


O 


O 


03 


CO 


1-3— ' 


c5 


a: 


S 


K 


2 


rH| 










CM 


















H 


00 


CO 


H 


CvJ 


cm 


00 


CO 


CO 


H 


t-- 


t^ 


1^ 


t-- 


C>- 


VD 


VD 


t^- 


t>- 


i— 


VO 


<o 


0- 


fc- 


vo 


MD 


vo 


MD 


Ch 


Ch 


Ch 


Ch 


Ch 


ch 


Ch 


Ch 


Ch 


CTi 


ch 


Ch 


Ch 


ch 


H 


H 


H 


H 


H 


rH 


H 


H 


H 


H 


rH 


H 


H 


rH 



\D 



V 




•H T3 


• 


P 03 


•P 


o3 CO 


Ch 


P X 




CO 





Ti 


>5 


<u 


P 


rH 


•H 


rH 


O ^ 


a3 


03 X 


-P 


ft 


CO 


a3 


C O 


M 





o 

H 



V£) 



O 

o 
o 

it 



o in o 

^ ro [~- 

H it CO 
H 



VO 
O 



o 

CD 



o o o 

o in o 

o cm o 

O H LT\ 

O t- H 

CvJ 



o 
o 
o 

o 

co 



o 
o 

CvJ 
Ch 

l>- 



Ch 
o 

CvJ 



o 
o 

CO 

Ch 
o 

H 



Ch 

CO 



ft 












& 












p^ 












CO 












CO 












H 

CO 


1 


1 


g 


g 


s 


(■J 


Q 


P 


P 


P 


p 


c 












< 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 




p 


p 


p 


p 


■p 


CO 


ct3 


03 


o3 


oi 


o3 


o 


p 


P 


P 


P 


p 


^ 


co 


CO 


co 


co 


CO 



>>>> 


>>>> 


>> >> 


S>> >5 


P o 


P o 


P o 


P O 


C C 


q c 


G C 


c c 


3 CO 


H CO 


d CO 


p CO 


O M 


O bD 


O M 


O bD 


o< 


o<t; 


o< 


o< 


M M 


H M 


Ih h 


M M 


CO CO 


CO CO 


CO 0) 


CO CO 


O P 


CO P 


O P 


O P 


o3 ct3 


ri cs 


ct3 03 


o3 oi 



















CO 










5 
















c 




M 










O 








* 








O 




o 








^ 


T3 




P 




O 






d 


>> 


^ 


c 


^ 






M 


03 




C 




p 


* 




O 


§ 


o 


•H 


5h 


CO 




O 


CO 




03 


* 


•H 


CO 




o 


O 


v_^ 


O 


^i 




fa 


S 




H 


o 


H 


H 


id 


s 


o 


ft 




fa 


03 


C 








C 


•H 


03 


H 


•H 


c 






O 




P 


O 


CO 


£ 




$H 


03 


s 


•H 


^ 


o 


d 


CO 


c 


to 




p 


H 


o 


^ 


CO 


P 


M 


> 


CO 


p 


p 


•H 


CO 


G 


to 


T3 


C 


O 


s 


to 


CO 


O 


M 


p 


> 


•H 


§ 


C 


O 


rH 


T3 


CO 


,o 





03 


.c 


w 


>> 


O 


a> 


§ 


3 


O 


O 


Ct3 


•H 


M 


X 


ft 


O 


fH 


O 


ft 


o 


P 


u 


r-D 


P 


ft 


2 


fa 


o 



D-68 







c 




• 





P P 


■H 


>H 


•H -P 




a 


a; 


• 


H 


fn 


P 




Q) 


CO fa 


ft 


w 


O O 



TJ 


>> 


Q) P 


H 


•H 


H 


V •? 


o3 


o3 ^ 


-P 


Ph 


co 


o3 


C O 


H 





n 







X 






£ 






■d 






u 






P 






ai 






o 






03 






2 






fa 






fa 






a 1 

< 






£ 


















p 






W 






a3 






P 






p 






•H 






o 







o 


CD 


CD 


P 






S 




LJ 


fa 


P 


< ' 


U 










1 


.p 


| 


1 


o 

fa 


(h 


fn 


cd 


aj 


H 


p 


H 


H 


•H 


(d 


fl3 


,Q 


,o 


o 


u 


O 


O 


H 


<u 


CD 


3 


3 


3 


o 


3 


p 


03 


pq 


pq 


>H 


>H 


Eh 


s 


EH 


Eh 


O 


vo 


vo 


H 


rH 


H 


ON 


o 


vo 


[>- 


VO 


vo 


t- 


D- 


£*- 


vo 


S- 


v 


VO 


a> 


o\ 


Ch 


o\ 


C\ 


o\ 


OA 


o\ 


ON 



O T3 










•H 03 ' 










P 0)f 










o3 ^^ 


O 


o 


o:> 


o 


P 


CO 


CO 


CD 


•=f 


CO 


-=}- 


^1- 


on 


cvi 



>o 

ON 

H rH r-l r-{ r-i 



o vo 

IS- H 
t~- CO 











P 












O O 












P -H 




p 


G 






tQ P 




o 


O 






CD P 




•H 


•H 






Xi CO 




P 


P 






O -H 




03 


03 


>> 


>J 


SO 




hO 


bO 


o 


o 






•H 


•H 


>.C 


>>C 


xi a 




P P 


h P 


p a) 


P 0) 


c o 




P o 


P O 


£ hO 


C hO 


o3 -H 




H -H 


H -H 


3< 


B< 


P 




p 


p 


O 


O 


.M 03 




n3 p 


03 -P 


o p 


o P 


o to 




T3 CO 


T3 w 


0) 


Q) 


O -H 




03 -H 


03 -H 


o3 p 


03 P 


H p 


H 


> P 


> fa 


,Q 03 


& 03 


h ^ 


«? 


a) 


cu 


^5= 


3^3 


3 H 


3 


s 


S 


>H 


>H 


EH 


Ph 



pg 

H CO 

to 





CM 








O 




=fc 


jd 






P 






P 


<D 


CO 


■a 


p 


P 


03 


P 


£ 


cu 


G 


03 


fa 


03 


o 


fa 


cvi 


H 




bfl 


P 




rH 


fa 


O 


H 


P 


c 


P 




hO 


O 


o3 


O 


P 


G 


o3 


O 


S 


P 


CD 


V 


o 








^ 


p 


•rH 


|2 


<: 


5 


O 


g 


£ 


CU 


<D 


CU 


Ph 


n 


O 


s 


S 


S 



o 



o 

•H 
P 
o3 

hfl 

•H P 
P O 
U -H 
H U 
P 
t3 co 
Q) -H 
O fa 
Jh 



P 
O 
■H 

P 
03 
h3 

•H P 
5h O 
U -H 
H fn 
P 
73 CO 
CU -H 
O O 



vo 


vo 


vo 


VO 


OA 


Q\ 



o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


LO, 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


CO 


CO 


vo 


CM 


o 


o 


o 


LT\ 


o 


o 


H 


CM 


•* 
























cvi 


vo 


CM 


vo 


D-- 


f- 


o 


I>- 


-~t 


o\ 


eg 


LT\ 


cvi 


CO 


'■■-' 


^t- 


o 


H 


CT\ 


VO 


CM 




CVI 



1 





03 




,o 


u 


0) 


cu 


p 


^ 


o 


& 


fa 


cu 




£ 


CO 


o 


•H 


t< 


3 


fa 


fa 


^ 


C 


cu 


<a 


S 


CO 



co 



XI • 
UO 
SCO 
-PON 
H 
bO 

C O • 
•H P C^- 

Ti OOON 
ccj C--H 
P CT\ 

UrHC 

•H 
Qj ^ 
6 X3 T) 
3 O <D 

pj-H H 



S CU GJ 

S 0,-P 
o3 CO 

.H O 0) c 
CXIT1.C -H 

CU CO 0) 

5 box 
O M C 

fa -H -H O 
U -P 
<U P 3 
hO-H TD P 
«3 C -H 
h ?T3 C 
O <U 3 

P rH H 

CO (SH-O 

■Hai C 

■o p -p o 
cu -H to cj 

O- C C CD 

6 H vH CO 



^1 



* rHl 



D-69 



TABIE D-7 

INSTALLED CAPACITY AND MAXIMUM DEMAND 

(Thousand Kilowatts) 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 



Year 


Fuel 
Capacity 

737 


Hydro 
Capacity 

1,513 


Fuel- 
Hydro 
Ratio 

O.67 


Total 
Capacity 

2,250 


Maximum* 
Demand 

2,125 


Margin * 
1o 


1948 


5-9 


19^9 


821 


1,628 


0.50 


2,449 


2,295 


6.7 


1950 


1,116 


1,810 


0.62 


2,926 


2,497 


16.8 


1951 


1,527 


1,810 


0.84 


3,337 


2,907 


14.8 


1952 


1,752 


1,905 


0.92 


3,657 


3,143 


16.4 


1953 


1,962 


1,905 


1.03 


3,867 


3,4io 


13.4 


1954 


2,500 


1,907 


1.31 


4,407 


3,598 


22.5 


1955 


2,624 


2,182 


1.20 


4,806 


3,740 


28.5 


1956 


2,839 


2,182 


1.30 


5,021 


3,952 


27.O 


1957 


2,843 


2,246 


1.27 


5,089 


4,291 


18.6 


1958 


3,051 


2,765 


1.11 


5,816 


4,334 


34.2 


1959 


3,051 


2,765 


1.10 


5,816 


4,925 


18.1 


i960 


3,371 


2,906 


1.16 


6,277 


5,488 


14.4 


1961 


3,697 


2,953 


1.25 


6,650 


5,887 


13.0 


1962 


4,210 


3,303 


1.27 


7,513 


6,031 


24.6 


1963 


4,565 


3,489 


1.31 


8,054 


6,080 


32.5 


1964 


5,165 


3,746 


1.38 


8,911 


6,923 


28.7 


1965 


5,493 


4,052 


1.36 


9,545 


7,579 


25.9 


1966 


5,518 


4,496 


1.23 


10,014 


8,329 


20.2 


1967 


6,218 


5,114 


1.22 


11,332 


8,947 


26.7 


1968 


6,943 


5,952 


1.17 


12,895 


9,569 


34.8 


1969 


6,943 


6,734 


I0O3 


13,677 


10,246 


33.5 



^Historical through 1965 

Note: Installed capacities and historical and estimated maximum 

demands are from California Public Utilities Commission's 

Electric Power Surveys. 

D-70 



TABLE D-8 

INSTALLED CAPACITY AND MAXIMUM DEMAND 
(Thousand Kilowatts) 

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 



Year 


Fuel 
Capacity 

1,254 


Hydro 
Capacity 

1,789 


Fuel- 
Hydro 
Ratio 

0.70 


Total 
Capacity 

3,043 


Maximum* 
Demand 

2,4-21 


Margin' 


1948 


25.7 


19^9 


1,578 


1,630 


0.97 


3,208 


2,637 


21.7 


1950 


1,628 


1,640 


0.99 


3,268 


2,793 


17.0 


1951 


1,558 


1,671 


0.93 


3,229 


3,088 


4.6 


1952 


1,698 


1,803 


0.94 


3,501 


3,350 


4.5 


1953 


1,988 


1,852 


1.07 


3,84o 


3,561 


10.8 


1954 


2,382 


1,852 


1.29 


4,234 


3,922 


8.0 


1955 


2,832 


1,857 


1.53 


4,689 


4,372 


7.2 


1956 


3,407 


1,867 


1.83 


5,274 


4,810 


9.6 


1957 


3,885 


1,900 


2.04 


5,785 


5,088 


13.7 


1958 


4,452 


1,903 


2.34 


6,355 


5,591 


13.7 


1959 


4,995 


1,903 


2.63 


6,898 


5,9^1 


16.1 


i960 


5,620 


2,033 


2.76 


7,653 


6,513 


17.5 


1961 


6,444 


2,l6l 


2.98 


8,605 


7,118 


20.9 


1962 


7,150 


2,260 


3.16 


9,4lO 


7,685 


22.4 


1963 


8,173 


2,158 


3.79 


10,331 


8,311 


24.3 


196^ 


9,037 


2,158 


4.19 


11,195 


8,944 


25.2 


1965 


9,772 


2,177 


4.49 


11,949 


9,758 


22.5 


1966 


11,023 


2,177 


5.06 


13,200 


10,530 


25.4 


1967 


12,253 


2,177 


5.63 


14,430 


11,375 


26.9 


1968 


12,703 


2,273 


5-59 


14,976 


12,199 


22.8 


1969 


13,063 


2,983 


4.38 


16, 046 


13,303 


20.6 



^Historical through 1965 

Note: Installed capacities and historical and estimated maximum 

demands are from California Public Utilities Commission's 

Electric Power Surveys. 

D-71 



TABLE D-9 

INSTALLED CAPACITY AND MAXIMUM DEMAND 
(Thousand Kilowatts) 









CALIFORNIA 








Year 


Fuel 

Capacity 

1,991 


Hydro 

Capacity 

3,302 


Fuel- 
Hydro 
Ratio 

0.60 


Total 
Capacity 

5,293 


Maximum* 
Demand 

4,532 


Margin* 
% 


1948 


16.8 


19^9 


2,399 


3,258 


0.74 


5,657 


4,873 


16.1 


1950 


2,7^4 


3,450 


0.80 


6,194 


5,198 


19.2 


1951 


3,085 


3,481 


O.89 


6,566 


5,816 


12.9 


1952 


3,450 


3,708 


0.93 


7,158 


6,321 


13.2 


1953 


3,950 


3,757 


1.05 


7,707 


6,685 


15.3 


1954 


4,882 


3,759 


1.30 


8,641 


7,089 


21.9 


1955 


5,^56 


4,039 


1.35 


9,495 


7,783 


22.0 


1956 


6,246 


4,0^9 


1.53 


10,295 


8,670 


18.7 


1957 


6,728 


4,146 


1.62 


10,874 


9,150 


18.8 


1958 


7,503 


4,668 


1.61 


12,171 


9,838 


23.7 


1959 


8,0^6 


4,668 


1.72 


12,714 


10,692 


18.9 


i960 


8,991 


4,939 


1.82 


13,930 


11,585 


20.2 


1961 


I0,l4l 


5,114 


1.98 


15,255 


12,561 


21.4 


1962 


11,360 


5,563 


2.04 


16,923 


13,427 


26.0 


1963 


12,738 


5,647 


2.26 


18,385 


14,120 


30.2 


1964 


14,202 


5,904 


2.26 


20,106 


15,743 


27-7 


1965 


15,265 


6,229 


2.45 


21,494 


17,337 


24.0 


1966 


l6,54l 


6,673 


2.48 


23,214 


18,791 


23.5 


1967 


18,471 


7,291 


2.53 


25,762 


20,315 


26.8 


1968 


19,646 


8,225 


2.39 


27,871 


21,768 


28.0 


1969 


20,006 


9,717 


2.06 


29,723 


23,480 


26.6 



■"■Historical through 1965 

Note: Installed capacities and historical and estimated maximum 

demands are from California Public Utilities Commission's 

Electric Power Surveys. 

D-72 



APPENDIX E 
THE COLORADO RIVER 



E-i 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

INTRODUCTION E-l 

EARLY HISTORY E-5 

The Colorado River Compact E-6 

The Boulder Canyon Project Act E-7 

The Seven-Party Water Agreement E-8 

The Mexican Water Treaty E-10 

The Central Arizona Project E-ll 

LITIGATION BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT E-13 

RECOGNITION OF NEED FOR REGIONAL WATER PLANNING E-17 

The Pacific Southwest Water Plan E-17 

FIGURES 
No. 

E-l Water Supply Estimates and Historic Events 
1922-65 Colorado River Basin 



E-iii 



INTRODUCTION 

Two events occurred almost simultaneously which have 
provided catalysts for western states water planning. They were 
the U. S. Supreme Court decree in Arizona v. California , dated 
March 9, 1964; and a general agreement in the early 1960's that 
there will not be enough water from the Colorado River to supply 
the long-range needs of the Colorado River Basin States. The 
Court decree and the agreement on overall water supply deficiency 
from the Colorado River constitute two of the most important 
developments related to water resources planning which have 
occurred since publication of The California Water Plan. 

A brief account of the legal and hydrologic history of 
the Colorado River as it pertains to California will help to 
explain these events and why they have become catalysts for western 
states water planning. Even though encumbered by perhaps the most 
intense, prolonged controversy over water rights of any major 
river system in the country, the main stream of the Colorado 
River has been either the locale or the starting point for many 
unprecedented large-scale water projects. At one time, about 
30 years ago, the highest dam, the largest reservoir, the biggest 
hydroelectric powerplant, and the largest and longest aqueducts 
and canals in the world were Colorado River projects. Those 
facilities and others constructed since have been instrumental 
in the development of the largest concentration of population 
and wealth of any like desert area in the world. 



E-l 



Much of the strife in the Basin stemmed from insistence 
that western water law embodied in the phrase "first in time, 
first in right" would not provide adequate protection for slower- 
growing upstream areas. The upstream areas sought -- and even- 
tually received -- water right protection from the fast-growing 
downstream areas. However, there was an unfortunate underlying 
premise that future water supply could be forecast with sufficient 
accuracy to enable the reservation of supposedly a safe part of 
the supply for the slower-growing areas. But as time passed, 
water availability studies were consistently revised downward 
and apprehension began to grow. About the time the Supreme Court 
rendered its opinion and entered a decree, the states of the Basin 
finally realized that inbasin water supplies to fully satisfy 
supposedly "safe" apportionments as embodied in the Colorado River 
Compact of 1922 and the Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928 could 
not be permanently guaranteed. The need for interbasin water 
planning then achieved the public acceptance that it has long 
deserved. 

For these reasons, the impetus for western states water 
planning is derived largely from these two events, and the obvious 
fact that the Colorado River Basin is extremely important to the 
west. At the outset, however, it is emphasized that the success 
of any long-range plan for augmenting the water supplies of the 
Colorado River Basin will depend largely upon formulation of a 
plan which allows for "staging". Staging means timing the 



E-2 



development of water projects to fit the needs of the market — 
in other words, scheduling the construction of dams, reservoirs, 
aqueducts, and other works so that the supply of water resulting 
from such projects can readily he absorbed by the demand which 
exists at the time. 

Lead time in regional planning is also an important 
factor. Experience in California indicates that 25 years is the 
minimum lead time for major water projects. This means that 
water from long-distance sources should not be expected to reach 
the Southwest before the 1990 's. 



E-3 



EARLY HISTORY 

Irrigation in Arizona and California in the Lower Basin 
of the Colorado River developed much more rapidly than in the 
four states of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. The 
Palo Verde Valley In California appropriated water as early as 
the 1870' s, and the Imperial Valley has appropriations dating 
back to the 1890' s. The first diversions in Arizona in the lower 
river began in 1904 in the Yuma area. A few years later, the whole 
natural flow of the river was appropriated, and the river was 
dry for long periods in the summer at the Mexican boundary. 
During this period, upstream development increased gradually 
and leveled off in the early 1920 's. Nevertheless, the spring 
floods, depositing great quantities of silt and raising the 
riverbed several feet in some years, were a continuing menace 
to lands in the Imperial Valley below sea level and to lands in 
the Yuma Valley in Arizona. 

A major multiple-purpose reservoir project was a 
necessity — not only for flood control and power, but also to 
make possible any further development in the Colorado River 
Basin „ But the four states in the Upper Basin knew that the 
Lower Basin had a big population advantage, better lands, flatter 
contours, and a longer growing season. They feared that if the 
flood waters were stored, that Arizona, California, and Nevada 
would appropriate all of them, unless the Upper Basin could 
insulate itself against the law of prior appropriation. The 



E-5 



great storage dam was to be located on the river which constitutes 
the Nevada-Arizona border, enabling Nevada to use water from the 
main stream of the Colorado River for the first time. The Upper 
Basin States got some of this insulation in the 1922 Colorado 
River Compact. 

The Colorado River Compact 

The Colorado River Compact was signed by representatives 
of all seven basin states at Santa Fe, New Mexico, November 24, 
1922, subject to ratification by their Legislatures and the consent 
of Congress. 

Article II of the Compact defines the Colorado River 
system as including the main stream and its tributaries. The 
Upper Basin is defined as the drainage area above Lee Ferry 
(a point on the river in northwestern Arizona) near the Utah 
border, and the Lower Basin as the drainage area below that 
point. Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming were named as 
the states of the Upper Division and Arizona, California, and 
Nevada as the states of the Lower Division. 

Negotiators gave up in their attempts to allocate all 
the water and to allocate to individual states. They decided on 
allocating beneficial consumptive uses instead of flow of the 
stream, and made a general division between the Upper and Lower 
Basins. Allocation to states was left to the future. To provide 
a safety factor, the Compact allocations for beneficial con- 
sumptive use were thought to amount to only about 75 percent of 
the total usable streamflow in the Basin. 



E-6 



In 1923, all the Basin States but Arizona ratified 
the Compact. Arizona's Legislature rejected the Compact because 
of Arizona's desire to exclude the Gila River from Compact 
accounting. In 1925, at the suggestion of the State of Colorado, 
seven-state ratification was waived and the other six states 
ratified the Compact again as a six-state document and presented 
it to Congress. 

The Boulder Canyon Project Act 

The Boulder Canyon Project Act, after three unsuccessful 
bills, was enacted in December 1928. However, Section 4(a) 
provided that it should not take effect unless, at the end of 
six months, the President should proclaim that the Colorado 
River Compact had been ratified by seven states, or failing that, 
had been ratified by six states, including California, and in the 
latter event that California's Legislature had enacted a statute 
in terms prescribed by the Congress limiting California's use of 
Colorado River water. 

The President, on June 25, 1929, proclaimed the failure 
of seven-state ratification, and the success of six-state ratifica- 
tion. The six-state Compact and the Project Act thereupon became 
effective, authorizing the construction of Hoover Dam and the 
Ail-American Canal, on the further condition that the benficiaries 
contract in advance to pay their costs. California's Legislature 
had enacted its Limitation Act in the spring of 1929, which was 
to limit the State's use of Colorado River water to not more 



E-7 



than 4,400,000 acre-feet a year of the quantity apportioned by 
Article III (a) of the Colorado River Compact, plus one-half of 
any excess or surplus waters unapportioned by the Compact. 

During the period from 1930 to 193^* contracts for 
storage and delivery of water from Lake Mead were executed under 
the terms of the Project Act by the Secretary of the Interior 
with the Southern California agencies concerned. Before the 
execution of the contracts, it was necessary for these California 
agencies to agree among themselves as to the division or allocation 
of Colorado River water to which California would be entitled under 
the limitation placed upon the State by the Project Act and accepted 
by act of the State Legislature. On November 5* 193° , the Depart- 
ment of the Interior requested that this be accomplished with the 
assistance and approval of the State Division of Water Rights, 
and further suggested that the agreed allocation be included as 
a uniform clause in all of the water contracts. 

The Seven- Party Water Agreement 
On August 18, 1931* after several months of negotiations, 
the California agencies concerned signed an agreement (subsequently 
known as the "Seven-Party Water Agreement") apportioning among 
themselves the waters of the Colorado River available for use in 
California under the Compact and the Project Act. The amounts and 
priorities were as follows: 



E-* 



3,850,000 



Annual 
Priority quantity 

No. Agency and Description in acre-feet 

1. Palo Verde Irrigation District .... 

104,500 acres in and adjoining 
existing district 

2. Yuma Project (California Division). 

Not exceeding 25,000 acres. . . . 

3. (a) Imperial Irrigation District and 
lands in Imperial and Coachella 
Valleys to be served by 

Ail-American Canal 

(b) Palo Verde Irrigation District .... 
16,000 acres of adjoining mesa 

4. Metropolitan Water District, City 
of Los Angeles and/or others on 
coastal plain 550,000 

5. (a) Metropolitan Water District, City 
of Los Angeles and/or others on 

coastal plain 550,000 

(b) City and/or County of San Diego . . 112,000 

6. (a) Imperial Irrigation District and 
lands in Imperial and Coachella 
Valleys to be served by 

Ail-American Canal ) 300,000 

(b) Palo Verde Irrigation District .... 
16,000 acres of adjoining mesa 

TOTAL 5,362,000 

A seventh priority concerning all remaining water avail- 
able for use in California was apportioned for agricultural use in 
the Colorado River Basin in California. 

Between 1930 and 1936, the State of Arizona attempted 
unsuccessfully three times to bring suit in the U. S. Supreme Court 
over Colorado River matters. Work on the projects authorized by 
the Boulder Canyon Project Act continued. Hoover Dam began to 
generate power in 1936. Construction was initiated on the 



E-9 



All -American Canal In 1934, and the first significant use of the 
Canal was made in 1940. The Metropolitan Water District of 
Southern California financially obligated itself and constructed 
the Colorado River Aqueduct to furnish Colorado River water to 
the South Coastal Plain around Los Angeles. Deliveries began in 
19^1. 

By 1944, several new events happened. Arizona belatedly 
passed an act to ratify the Colorado River Compact and also 
obtained a Hoover Dam water delivery contract signed by the 
Secretary of the Interior for 2,800,000 acre-feet of water each 
year. Nevada, in 1942 and 1944, secured contracts with the 
Secretary for 300,000 acre-feet per year. 

The Mexican Water Treaty 
The State Department in 1944 announced the terms of the 
proposed Colorado River water treaty with Mexico. The terms were 
endorsed by Arizona and the Upper Basin States but opposed by 
California and Nevada. The proposed treaty would grant 1,500,000 
acre-feet of Colorado River water each year to Mexico in return 
for Mexican concessions on the Rio Grande. This was about twice the 
amount that Mexico had been able to use before the Hoover Dam was 
built to control and salvage flood waters under a statute which 
declared that such water should be used exclusively within the 
United States. The Senate ratified the treaty in 1944, and it 
became effective in November 1945. 



E-10 



The Central Arizona Project 
Proposals to authorize construction of the Central 
Arizona Project were actively before the Congress from 1946 to 
1952, and as far as Arizona was concerned the project was of utmost 
importance. This project would divert 1.2 million acre-feet of 
main stream Colorado River water into the Phoenix and Tucson areas 
each year. 

Because the Colorado River Compact and the Boulder 
Canyon Project Act do not provide for a division of waters among 
States in the Lower Basin, there were differences of opinion con- 
cerning the availability of water for the Central Arizona Project. 
To resolve this controversy, a committee in the U. S. House of 
Representatives recommended in 1951 that Arizona apply to the 
U. S. Supreme Court. 



E-ll 



LITIGATION BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT 

In 1952, Arizona, temporarily putting the Central Arizona 
Project on the shelf, brought suit against the State of California 
and the water-using agencies in Southern California in the U. S. 
Supreme Court. This suit was not decided until the decree was 
entered in March of 1964 — more than 12 years after it was initiated. 

Although the decree settled several controversial issues, 
it reserved the key issue of allocating shortage for subsequent 
decision by the Secretary of the Interior subject to actions by 
the Congress. 

One Important issue settled by the litigation was 
whether the water in the Lower Basin tributaries should be con- 
sidered in the interstate allocations (the legal position held by 
California), or whether the apportionment should be made from the 
main stream alone (the position of Arizona). 

Interpreting the legislative intent of the Boulder 
Canyon Project Act and deferring interpretation of the Colorado 
River Compact, the Court ruled in favor of the latter division. 
Under the decree, Arizona and New Mexico were assigned sole use 
of the Gila River, the principal tributary in the Lower Basin. 

The decree awarded 4.4 million acre-feet a year to 
California, 2.8 million acre-feet a year to Arizona, and 0.3 
million acre-feet to Nevada, provided that 7.5 million acre-feet 
is available in the Lower Basin. The Court also ruled that 
supplies in excess of 7.5 million acre-feet be shared alike by 
California and Arizona (with the possibility of a small part of 
Arizona's share going to Nevada), but left the allocation of an 

E-13 



annual supply of less than 7.5 million to the Secretary of the 
Interior, or to a future Congressional action. 

Even with 7.5 million acre-feet of water available each 
year in the Lower Basin (an unlikely event because studies indicate 
that the permanent supply will be less than 6 million acre-feet), 
California's share (4.4 million acre-feet) is 0.7 million less 
than that being used now and 1.0 million less than has been 
planned for use by projects already constructed. Deduction of 
4.4 from 6.0 million acre-feet would leave Arizona and Nevada 
only 0.6 million more than present use. This Is not nearly enough 
to satisfy either decreed rights or needed additional water 
supplies. 

The prospect of reduced diversions from the Colorado 
River for California, unless augmentation is accomplished as 
upstream areas deplete the downstream flow in ever- increasing 
amounts, is but a forerunner to water problems that all the basin 
states will face. Ground water supplies are being overdrawn in 
many areas, in Arizona alone by about 2 million acre-feet each 
year. 

The litigation convinced most of the water leaders in 
the Colorado River Basin that no state can effectively insulate 
itself legally in a water-short river basin. The decision in 
Arizona v. California spelled out the division of 7.5 million 
acre-feet among Arizona, California, and Nevada although there 
now appears to be only a remote chance that there will be 7.5 
million acre-feet to permanently divide. The fundamental issue 



E-14 



of how to divide shortages was put in the hands of the Secretary 
of the Interior and the Congress, no doubt recognizing that the 
only satisfactory solution to the Colorado River dilemma would be 
to augment its supply. 



E-15 



RECOGNITION OP NEED FOR REGIONAL WATER PLANNING 

The Colorado River Board of California and the Depart- 
ment of Water Resources have been concerned for many years about 
the ability of the Colorado River water supply to meet future 
demands. Figure E-l shows how the estimates of dependable water 
supply on the Colorado River have been revised with the passage 
of years and the timing of those estimates with important decisions 
on the Colorado. 

In the Department of Interior's report on the Pacific 
Southwest Water Plan, an annual water supply shortage in the South- 
west of some 3*5 to 4 million acre-feet was forecast to occur by 
the year 2000 unless additional water supplies are imported. 
Recurrence of drought conditions, water quality considerations, 
and other problems may mean a greater impending shortage. 

The Pacific Southwest Water Plan 
Anticipating that the Colorado River decision was 
imminent -- and would soon result in renewed efforts in the Lower 
Basin to authorize and build new projects -- Wayne N. Aspinall, 
Chairman, Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, U. S., House of 
Representatives, in November 1962 requested that the Secretary of 
the Interior review the situation and develop a regional plan of 
water resources development for the Pacific Southwest. On 
August 26, 1963, only about two and one-half months after the 
Supreme Court of the United States rendered its opinion in 
Arizona v. California, the first report of the Secretary of the 



E-17 



Interior on the Pacific Southwest Water Plan was mailed to the 
Governors of the seven Colorado River Basin States for review 
pursuant to provisions of the 1944 Flood Control Act. 

The report proposed a Phase I development for immediate 
needs and a Phase II development which required additional investi- 
gation to take care of growing future needs. Total cost was 
estimated at approximately $4 billion, about half in each phase. 

The largest features of Phase I would include the Bridge 
and Marble Canyon power developments on the Colorado River between 
Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the Central Arizona Project to divert 
1,200,000 acre-feet a year from the river into the Phoenix-Tucson 
area and enlargement of the California Aqueduct to bring an addi- 
tional 1,200,000 acre-feet a year into Southern California from 
north coast California streams as replacement for the Colorado 
River water to be taken for the Central Arizona Project. 

Phase II included expansion of the Central Arizona 
Project to a diversion capacity of 2,400,000 acre-feet a year, 
an aqueduct to export a second Increment of 1,200,000 acre-feet 
a year from Northern California and deliver it to Lake Havasu on 
the Colorado River, and storage and regulating reservoirs on the 
Trinity River, California. 

The report proposed establishment of a regional develop- 
ment fund to finance the works with water and power revenues, 
primarily the power revenues from the Bridge and Marble plants 
and from the Hoover-Parker-Davis system after payout of existing 
cost obligations. 



E-18 






After receiving comments from the states and other 
federal agencies, in accordance with the 1944 Flood Control Act, 
the Secretary of the Interior, on February 14, 1964, transmitted 
to the President, through the Bureau of the Budget, a modified 
report on the Pacific Southwest Water Plan. The revised plan 
incorporated most of the comments of the State of California. 
However, no bill was introduced in the Congress to authorize the 
Pacific Southwest Water Plan. 

The two reports caused considerable controversy in the 
State and to a lesser extent in the West, but they served an 
important purpose which was to emphasize the need for regional 
water resources planning. Consequently, unprecedented efforts 
have been made among the states in the Southwest, and within the 
State of California, to resolve differences for the common good. 

Attention recently has been concentrated on finding 
ways to protect existing project uses and Compact rights until 
the Colorado River water supply is augmented. Attention has also 
been turned to coordinating efforts so that legislation and 
studies by the Bureau of Reclamation and other concerned federal 
agencies leading to augmentation may proceed. An agreement was 
reached between Arizona and California early In 1965 which 
resulted in 40 identical bills being introduced In the Senate and 
the House to authorize the Lower Colorado River Basin Project. 
These bills would provide: 



E-19 



1. The Secretary of the Interior would be authorized 

to Investigate sources of water and to plan projects 
for the importation of at least 2.5 million acre-feet 
annually into the main stream of Colorado River below 
Lee Ferry, and to report within three years. 

2. Existing main stream users in Arizona, California, 
and Nevada would be protected against shortages in 
the basic supply for consumptive use of 7.5 million 
acre-feet a year as against the Central Arizona 
Project, although California's protection would be 
limited to 4.4 million acre-feet per annum of 
consumptive use. The protection would cease when 
works were completed to permanently deliver at least 
2.5 million acre-feet a year into the main stream 
from outside sources which the President proclaimed 
could supply this quantity without adverse effect on 
the satisfaction of the foreseeable water require- 
ments of the areas of origin. The quantity of 
imported water needed to bring the consumptive use 
from the main stream in the Lower Basin up to 7.5 
million acre-feet a year would be made available at 
Colorado River prices. 

3. The Secretary would be authorized to construct the 
Central Arizona, Bridge Canyon, and Marble Canyon 
Projects. 



E-20 



4. The Secretary would be directed to provide for 
adequate and equitable protection of the interests 
of the states and areas from which water would be 
exported to the Colorado River, including assistance 
from the development fund to be established by the 
Act, so that ultimate water requirements of the 
areas of origin could be satisfied at prices to 
users not adversely affected by the exportation. 

5. Into the fund would be deposited all authorized 
appropriations and all project revenues including 
the power revenues from the Bridge and Marble Canyon 
projects and from the Hoover, Davis, and Parker 
projects after these latter have paid out. The 
fund would be applied to repayment of the cost of 
the entire project including the cost of importa- 
tion works when subsequently authorized. 

Hearings on the proposed new Colorado River Basin legis- 
lation were held before a House subcommittee in late summer 1965 
and in May 1966. The latter hearing related to a negotiated 
seven-state version of the bill. 

The compromise between the Upper and Lower Basins re- 
tained most of the key provisions contained in the bills Introduced 
early in 1965 with the following changes: 

1. Relief of both basins from the Mexican Treaty 

burden when works to import 2.5 million acre-feet 
annually are in operation. 



E-21 



2. A plan for coordinating the operation of Lake 
Powell and Lake Mead so that both reservoirs share 
the benefits of wet years and neither of them 
bears alone the burden of drawdowns during droughts. 

3. Provisions for reimbursing the Upper Basin's fund 
for payments that must be made out of that fund to 
keep the Hoover power contractors whole under 
their contracts if water is withheld from power 
generation at Hoover to build up Lake Powell. 

4. Authorization for the Secretary of the Interior 

to construct five new projects located principally 
in Colorado. 

5. A substantially revised Title II, directing the 
Secretary to investigate shortages in the entire 
Colorado River Basin, and to formulate and report 
to Congress a regional plan for their alleviation 
through importations of water or otherwise. 

The subcommittee made further amendments before reporting 
the bill, which was subsequently reported by the full committee 
late in the season. The Committee version of Title II added an 
authorization for a seven-man National Water Commission under 
whose general direction the Secretary would make his study and 
report. He would first make a reconnaissance report and, if this 
was favorable as to availability of a water surplus in the areas 
of origin and as to the benefit-cost ratio of the importation works 
and the probability of repayment of their cost, he would be 



E-22 



authorized to proceed with a feasibility report on these importa- 
tion works without further direction from Congress. Authorization 
of actual construction would await action from Congress on his 
feasibility report. The Committee also deleted Title VII which 
would have created "The Colorado-Pacific Regional Water Commission". 

The bill did not reach the floor of the House, but 
favorable committee action was significant progress on such a 
complicated bill. Much of this progress can be traced to resolu- 
tion of long-standing hydrologic differences. In the summer of 
1965, hydrologists from Arizona, California, and Nevada agreed 
that it was time to emphasize before congressional committees 
that future water supplies cannot be forecast with precision. 
These engineers presented joint testimony on Colorado River water 
availability before the House Subcommittee on Irrigation and 
Reclamation. This testimony provided means of weighing future 
probabilities without trying to pinpoint the so-called "safe yield", 
For example, it was shown that there are nine chances in ten that 
the 69-year average virgin flow of the Colorado River at the key 
gage near Lee Ferry could be anywhere between 13.3 and 16.5 
million acre-feet, which is a fairly broad range for such a 
long-time average. An interpretation of the study also indicates 
that the historic average for the dry period 1930-1964 has about 
one chance in four of being repeated. 

The joint statement acknowledged that estimates can be 
made only of future possibilities within reasonable limits, based 
upon what has happened in the past. Risks are inherent in all 
such projections. 



E-23 



The supply of the river will he insufficient to meet 
future demands, estimated to reach about 18 million acre-feet per 
annum by year 2000, or to meet apportionments of use of water 
made by the Colorado River Compact to the Upper and Lower Basins, 
and the Mexican Treaty burden. It is simply a question as to 
how long it will take the demands to surpass the water available. 
Both basins are ultimately dependent upon substantial importations 
which should be made available by the last decade of the present 
century. 

The joint statement concluded, however, that there is 
a 50-50 chance that the supply in the main stream will equal or 
exceed the amount needed to provide: (l) 4.4 million acre-feet a 
year for California; (2) water for decreed rights and existing 
mainstream projects in Arizona and Nevada and the southern Nevada 
water supply project; (3) water for increasing demands of the 
Upper Basin; and (4) a full supply of 1.2 million acre-feet per 
annum for the proposed Central Arizona Project until about the 
turn of the century, gradually reducing thereafter. 

This type of information helps put hydrology in proper 
perspective. Hydrologists from the states of the Upper Division 
have also acknowledged that the probability studies have con- 
siderable merit, and that repetition of historic runoff sequence 
would be highly improbable. Figure E-l shows the results of the 
Lower Basin probability study as compared to recent estimates of 
safe yield. 



E-24 



Although much work remains to be done on regional 
planning, the progress during the recent years of the 1956-65 
decade toward an overall solution to western water problems is 
encouraging. All present evidence indicates that progress during 
the next decade will be equally encouraging. 



E-25 




1922 
COLORADO 

RIVER 
COMPACT 



WATER SUPPLY ESTIMATES AND HISTORIC EVENTS 
1922-65 
COLORADO RIVER BASIN 



APPENDIX F 
WATER PROJECT STATISTICAL DATA 



F-i 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

INTRODUCTION F-l 

TABLES OF PROJECT DATA 

North Coastal Area F-5 

San Francisco Bay Area F-6 

Central Coastal Area F-8 

South Coastal Area F-9 

Sacramento Basin F-12 

Delta-Central Sierra Area F-17 

San Joaquin Basin F-18 

Tulare Basin F-21 

North Lahontan Area F-23 

South Lahontan Area F-24 

Colorado Desert Area F-25 

INDEX TO RESERVOIRS F-27 



F-iii 



INTRODUCTION 

This appendix presents physical and cost data on 
the more significant features of major water resource develop- 
ments in California. The information is shown in tabular form 
by hydrologic study areas in accordance with the sequence of 
presentation used in Bulletin No. 160-66. These eleven study 
areas are outlined on Figure 4, page 4l of the bulletin, and 
on Figure A-l of Appendix A, "Water Requirements" bound in 
this volume. 

Information on single-purpose beach erosion, navi- 
gation, and flood control developments and on distribution and 
water treatment facilities is not included in this appendix. 
The reservoir projects described are limited to those having 
a gross storage capacity of 10,000 acre-feet or more, although 
certain reservoirs of lesser capacity are listed when they are 
integrally operated with a project system. An alphabetical 
listing and table page number index for the major reservoirs 
immediately follows the tables. 

When a water project or project system is located in 
more than one hydrologic study area, the data shown in the 
tables for a particular area covers only the features located 
therein. The major project systems and the page numbers of 
tables containing information about them are as follows: 



F-l 



Project 
Central Valley Project 
Colorado River Aqueduct 
Hetch-Hetchy Aqueduct 
Los Angeles Aqueduct 
Mokelumne Aqueduct 
Solano Project 
State Water Project 



Table Page Number 

F-5, 6, 12, 17, 18, 21 

F-9, 25 

F-6, 18 

F-9 

F-6, 17 

F-6, 12, 17 

F-6, 9, 12, 17, 18, 21, 2k 



Explanations of the table column headings which are 
not self-explanatory, and the general footnote designations, 
are as follows: 

Project Purposes - Seven symbols are used to designate 
primary project purposes as follows: 

C - Conservation F - Flood Control 

I - Irrigation R - Recreation 

M - Municipal and Industrial P - Hydroelectric 
Water Supply Power 

D - Debris Control 

Capital Costs - Information on capital costs is either 
the estimated cost at the time the feasibility or preconstruction 
report was prepared, or the actual cost of construction as re- 
ported by the constructing agency. The costs of reservoirs, 
where listed separately, are generally the costs of the dam and 
appurtenant works only and do not include the associated costs 
of relocation, rights-of-way, clearing and grubbing, or interest 
during construction. The costs shown for powerplants are those 



F-2 



of the powerhouse structure and generating equipment. Except 
as specifically indicated, they do not include costs of 
switchyard or transmission facilities. 

Some projects, particularly those to generate power, 
have "been enlarged since initial construction. For those 
projects, the costs shown are commensurate with the completion 
dates indicated. A listing of hydroelectric power developments 
and powerplant additions during the 1956-65 decade is presented 
in Tables D-4 and D-5, respectively, of Appendix D. Table D-6 
lists hydroelectric plants completed during 1966 and those presently 
under construction or scheduled for construction "by 1970. 

Reservoir Capacities - Gross capacity refers to 
reservoir storage volume below the level of the maximum con- 
trollable pool elevation. Active capacity is the storage volume 
between the elevation of the maximum controllable pool and the 
elevation of the minimum controllable outlets. Flood space 
reservation is the maximum flood detention storage assigned to 
the flood control function of the project, and excludes sur- 
charge storage which may also be available for flood control 
purposes. 

Footnotes - A footnote is used on the tables where 
clarification is needed to qualify or explain the indicated 
information. 

The footnote "s", under the date of completion, 
signifies the project is under construction and is scheduled 
for completion during the calendar year shown. An asterisk, 
"*" , indicates incomplete or unavailable information. Two 
additional footnotes, "a" and "b", carry the same meaning 
throughout the tables: 

F-3 



Footnote "a" indicates that the cost of a dam only 
is given. This is used when a reservoir and another 
feature (s) are listed together, but where the cost 
data of the other feature (s) have not "been obtained. 

Footnote "b" refers to the cost of a powerplant. The 
cost includes those of land and right-of-way, 
structures and improvements, reservoirs, dams and 
waterways, equipment road, and railroad and bridge 
costs. This footnote indicates that the cost of the 
powerhouse structure and equipment is inseparable 
from the total cost. 

In addition to footnotes "a" and "b", certain hydro- 
logic study area tables have special footnotes commencing 
alphabetically with "c". The corresponding explanations are 
given on the last sheets of the respective tables. 

Where blanks occur, the items are judged to be in- 
applicable to the indicated project or feature. 



F-4 



5? 

°- 5 



HMX 000 '000' I 

ni againoaa ao 

031VS3N3O AOH3N3 

IVONNV 30Va3AV 

MVM NI 

AllDVdVD 

Q311V1SNI 



«£ RSI 



> G 



S31IW NI H10N31 

SdD NI 

AlDVdVD 

3XV1NI 



NoiiVAa3S3a 
3Dvds aooid 



000 IS NI 
1SOD IVlldVD 



J t- tA rl 



31VQ NOI133dWOO 



5CS vOvSvS »-t 



55 



sssodand O3ro!id 



5ft 



& fi" 



■a^ 



as 



i! 




P-5 



z 5 


hm* ono'ooo'i 
ni aaainoaa ao 






















< a. 


031V>J3N3O AOd3N3 






















2 o 


"IVDNNV 30VH3AV 






















MW Nl 
AllDVdVD 








t- 


(; 












3 


a3nvisNi 








d 


° 






















c- 














•J on 
Z m 


S31IW Nl H10N31 


8 


i 


s 


2 


VO 








g 


t- 


< i= 
























>- 3 
























> U 


SdD Nl 






















Z < 

O "" 


AlDVdVD 
3>IV1NI 


£ 


1 


■#. 


§ 


*© 








1 


™ 


£ 


NOIlVAd3S3d 






















g 


3DVdS aoou 








on 














< u. 

<< 




























vo ir, 




irv 






Jn 


m*> 


Hj^vo 




a; o 


3AIOV 




$*s© 




$ 




3 


oj^ 


d4 


ffi'-^S^ 


3 


o - 
>z 




























^ ^^?k 




^ 






.*« 


™ 


a>^ju>^ 


r- 


S 


SSOdO 




SRS® 




£ 




s 


<\! °* 


ONCV1 


S25S21 


3 






OCO O CVJ O 




g 




8 


££ 


S^ 




S8 


000 'IS Nl 




















ISCO IVlldVD 




OOUN CU 




R 






(M 


CJ 


Ijcv. ^^^ 


CVJ 




S 


-* l/>-* p 


K 


©8 




R 


R£ 


OVO 


o O jQ^^W 


R« 


aiva NonaidwoD 




OJOJOJCO 0) 


s 


^2 


A 


™ 


H H 


H H 


rt ^ H^Hrf 


^ ^ 




o „, 
























Z i- 








5 
























.-t 
















s 5 








> 
















=1 i 














































< 










& 




























































< 


z 
< 






















z 


i 






















X 
















































5 


3 

o 














































u 
















































O 




























ti 


















°- 




. 






.p 










4^ 


g 


























o 










3 












c 




z £ 


6 


* 


8 












3 


ft 


Z) 


> — 


3 


>> 






5 








^ 


f 


























< 


> 
z < 

o "- 





! 


! 


I 


§ 








01 

I 


i 


o 


u 




























-P 




p. 








M 




< 




5 


X 


s. 


CO 










E 


8 


5 










































O O 










h to 














^ ^ 






o 














M 






>> 




1 




at • ^ 




H 

aJ 

> 




„ 


fg 


Is 


36^ S^ 


1 








a) a> m 














B^ P.-> 














& 




I 


S6 


Is 


i 


s3SOd»nd iDarood 






s 


5 










X 










H 


s 






s 


X 


w 


E 






o o o o 


U 


M 






. , ,; 


WH 


" 


o 














- 


■p 






















































































+* 










aj u 










h 


>> to 










I z 


£ 




*3 




H O 


g 


V o 












I 
















£ O 


+j 


g 






^i „ 


s) C 
>■ O 


g 


3 i! 
























x^< 


>> a 






< ,r> 












V 












id u 




El 


g 


K 


J* 


>! O 


« 




■3 


■gfrS 


I! 


31 


3 P 




•H 7^ 

























p 


o -P 












£ 




























O £ 














a" 














|S 




a 






















a) c 








3 






















& Ef. 








p 




O 






u £ 




<d > 












>> 










St 


< 


s 






2° 


> 




5 


ll 


£ 


I 


g 


a 


■"St! 


£ 


S J. 


s 


« 


1 


Is 


■P 


o 








»J 






5 




x: r-t » 






S 






5§ 










o- Z 


g 


tO H 


_£, 


g 


CO 




^ 


fa 


I 


3 » 




c $ 


■p 


^ 


« s 


S 


>» 


< 


■£ 


6 H 


3 


£ 


1 


S 


■p 


1 


g 




1 


& 


5 


f 


s 


£ 


Jj 


o 






































5 








X 




w 






° 


° 







F-6 



£g 



z 5 


HM* OOO'OOO'I 

ni asainosa so 










H 


< o- 


CJ31V))3N39 AOH3N3 












21 o 


IVDNNV 30VM3AV 












MW Nl 










•3 


AiOVdVO 










2 


asnviSNi 










o 


z 111 


S31IW Nl H10N31 


tt 






ONVOVOO 




< *- 














> - 














> u 
z < 

o "- 


SJ3 Nl 








^ 




AlOVdVD 


VD 






S ""^iS 




u 


3XV1NI 












£ 


NOIlVAH3S3d 






s 






g 


3DVdS aoou 










< u. 


























V o 


3AI1DV 




H 









QC O 








t~ 






o - 
>z 
















"J 




^ 






1 


ssoao 


^ a 


s 


i 






OOO'IS Nl 


OvO 


£ 


§ 


§ § 


§ 


iSOD "IVlldVD 


™ H " 




& 


CO -H 






JH H 


s 


R 


R5S5 


o 


aiva NouaidwoD 


H rH H 




a 


H «-l rH rH 


H 




o ^ 














Z £ 














s: z 














2 "*. 














£ ^ 


























< 


\n 












< 


Z 

< 










s 


z 

X 












1 


=E 


5 










h 




o 










2 


u 












■g 
















O 




























°- 










£ 




o 


z £ 


a 






1!ss 














< g.'g *g 




























OJ < g, g, 




< 


> G 
z < 

o "- 


i 






o d < < 




o 


u 


lfi 






■P a) O <0 

c +j a > 




< 










OOO 




s 
































J 
























o 

> 


1 

a ^ 8 
Sid s= 


p 

£ § 


II 






sasodand iD3rodd 


2 E 




faT 








o o 


£ 


o 




a. 












s 






































Q > 


m 






r-. p 


1 


Lj U 












X Z 


a 




10 


O Q 


y 














£ O 


5 




4) 


-d o 


+> 


< ,r, 






a 


83 


S 














s 


s. 


1 


b 




>> at 

11 


* 


™ o 


1 




u 


K 


& 


8" 




2o 


3 


a 


s 


° 


3 


8 


15 


s 


o- Z 

< 


I 

3 


1 


§ 




1 


e3 


r 


£ 



*H < 

0. >) 
p.'M 
3 3 



Q C O U 

O -^ t« 

C -H C aJ 

1> 6 a 

.-* h 3 li 
a] a *- i- 

3 6 aJ Ih 

a] l Cdu 
■P -D -h S 3 
WO) -o 

o c-p -a <u 

O -H O C p 

j3 a) 3 cr 
a( e -o o < 
(hOD o o u 
+j vo o u bo a) 
C a\ P4 w 

rH tO t- O 

U E O O K 



' hi. 

a.o i 



CO 



? S I 

o a> u - 

x: towv- t, o 

alHO O 

O M aJ o > +■> 

O C *>0 (h m 

O a) m -.<u o 

- >»rH « o 
m ;_, U <J\ 4) 

ChOUtM U rH 

CO * ri 

co oiurnoo 

-60- -rH J-*0--rH +j 
+j O 4-> 

caiHCCC 



rH C U)H OH 

o o a v o o 
c a, a c -h c 



F-7 



i -1 

O J: 



HMX ooo'ooo'i 
ni aaainosa ho 

C]3iVa3N30 AOH3N3 

IVHNNV 30Vtl3AV 

MW Nl 

MIDVdVD 

asnvisNi 



S31IW Nl H10N33 

SdD Nl 

AlDVdVD 

3XV1NI 

NoiiVAa3S3a 

3DVdS 00033 



000 1$ Nl 
LSOD IVlldVD 



31VQ NOI133dWOD 



sssodiind i33roiid 



fl I 5 



23 



19 



2o 
■>- z 



o 


Sm 






s si s 


a i 


SE K 




rfi ft 






O -d 


« 1 


3 


* 



6 3- 



F-8 



3 Z 

o °= 
°- 2 



HMM 000 '000 'I 

ni aaainoasi ao 

a31VS3N30 ACW3N3 

IVHNNV 30V83AV 

MW NI 

AlDVdVD 

asnvisNi 



» 3S. 



S31IW NI H10N31 

SdO NI 

AiDVdVD 

3XV1NI 

NOIlVA)l3S3» 
3DVdS QOOId 



OOO'IS NI 
1SCO "IVlldVD 






31VQ NOI131dWO0 



13$ I 



si I 






sssoddnd iD3ro»d 



1= < 

Is 



IS 



§S 5 



i: ... 



1 


a 







£ 4 


1 


Q V 


3 * 


1 


1 " 


3 1 


& 


I 


o J 


S 4* 


° 


J 


° i 



P-9 



52 



HMX 000 000 I 

ni aaHinoja ao 

a3iV»3N30 A983N3 

IVflNNV 3QVtl3AV 

MW Nl 

AiOVdVD 

03T1V1SNI 



S31IW Nl H10N31 

SdD Nl 

AIOVdVD 

3>IV1NI 

NOIlVA33S3a 

3DVds aoon 



000 'IS Nl 
ISCO IVlldVD 



31VQ NOI131dWOD 



J 



. A 



3 I 



SBsodand iDaroad 



XXX 



li 

o- Z 



1 1 

'X Hi 



3 £. 



> o 5 o 



fc 6 



I I' 



III It I I ! 



3 



& 8 



3 =!< 
8 



I 3 J) 



F-10 



O 5= 



HM* 000 '000 'I 

ni asainosa ao 

a31\ftl3N30 AO»3N3 

IVONNV 3QVM3AV 

MW NI 

AllDVdVD 

Q3TIV1SNI 



S31IW NI H10N31 



z < 

O "- 



SJD NI 

AlDVdVD 

3>V1NI 



NOIlVA»3S3a 
3DVdS aoou 



000'IS NI 
1SCO "IVlldVD 



a&Fi 



31VQ NOI133dWOO 



P ho o\o oi 



g g g 



gg 



66 

si 



•H -h a) 

fe S fc 

P P 41 



d -P -P -H 



33 



go 



sssodand iD3ro*id 



a u 



E I' 




«3 ts I 



H <H H 

«S o 

3 q 



;S > 



F-ll 



HMX 000 '000 'I 

ni craainoaa ao 

a31V)l3N30 AOH3N3 

"IVHNNV 30Va3AV 

MW NI 

AilDVdVD 

03T1V1SNI 

S31IW NI H10N31 

r .JJ NI 

AlOVdVD 
3XV1NI 



NOUVA!)3S3!l 

3DVdS aooij 



f: 8 






SSSOdifOd 133rO!)d 



-tn p= U\ ro - 

cu t~ oj do d 

go 



000 1$ NI 
1SOD IVlldVD 



SO Si 






31V0 NOI131dWOD 



3SS S>3RS 






6o 



a> I 



ado 

i a § 



z S fl & 



85' 



M t 

i i 






&S 






it 



&s. 



I- < 

*5 



, ; , s 



£ 

% £ 



F-12 



hmx ono'ooo'i 
ni aaainoaa no 

a31V»3N39 AOS3N3 

IVHNNV 3QV))3AV 

MW NI 

AlOVdVD 

0311V1SNI 

S33IW NI H10N33 



S3D NI 

AlOVdVD 

3W1NI 

NOIlVAa3S3d 

3DvdS aoou 



-13 -ialMj 



OOO'IS NI 
1SOD "IVlldVD 



3& 



1 rjVO O O O C\J H I 

)-tf\§ OCOU) OCO - 

\ 0?VOCO VOCOCO OT r 



■> OJ aD Pa 



31VQ NOI13~ldWOD 



) t— \£) l/\ t— *^0 V 



3 ik i 
g S s a 1 

nil i 



8 S3 

die 



ss 



AS 



f.f; 



S3SOd»nd iD3ro«d 



"ill 

r° 



*3 1 S 






F-13 



52 

O S: 



HM* 000 '000 'I 

ni aminos!) ho 

a31VS3N30 AOd3N3 

"IVPINNV 3QV)i3AV 

MW NI 

AlDVdVD 

0311V1SNI 

S31IW NI HXON31 



SJD NI 

AlOVdVD 

3>IV1NI 

NOIlVAa3S3a 
33VdS aoou 



000' IS NI 
1SCO "IVlldVD 



f3 w 8l'" 21 SI 



SSI8 



&PS 



d»- SI 



I H CO l 



3iva NoiisndwoD 



•S^H 



I32S 



ae 



^§2 




4j e 



3 &s 



sasodand O3foad 



i $ 






ill 



P-14 



5? 



HMX 000 '000 'I 

ni aaainoaa so 

CHJ.VN3N30 ACW3N3 

IVPINNV 3QV>i3AV 

MW NI 

AllOVdVD 

asnvisNi 



ass ssn 



S33IW NI H10N31 

SJD NI 

AlQVdVD 

3W1NI 

NOIlVAa3S3!l 

3DVds aooij 



000'IS NI 
1SOD 1VlldV3 






31VQ NOI131dWOD 



!dSJSSK3^ 



sse 



■h o o 5 a o 

id o > u5 M o 



w :* 



S 5 g 



S3SOdand ojroad 



I z 

£ S 



O U H 




1,1 




'-,1 




£ 


3 


.g « 


d 


d 


^1 > 
























& S» 


as ° 


m 


U 


H 


U 


it 
















v to £ 


ft 


Ji 


m 


|j 


Tl 




W 


































5 £ 




































3 




£ 


& 





5 s § i 

a £ 5 * 

° .« s s 

a £ | a 

fc 5 ^ S 

I i I 



P-15 



eg 

OM 



WS O 

MM Eh 

« M & 

^K 3 











z5 


HAM 000 '000 '[ 

ni aaainoaa no 






< o. 


031VH3N3O AOH3N3 






S5 o 
J? 

o- 2 


"IVflNNV 30VH3AV 






MW Nl 






AlOVdVD 






z> 


asnvisNi 






2 £ 


S31IW Nl H10N31 


3 




< i= 








>• 3 








> u 


SJO Nl 


o 




o "- 


AiDVdVD 


t- 




u 


3>V1NI 


C*J 




£ 


NOI1VAH3S3H 




o 




3DVds aoou 












^ < 









U o 


3AI1DV 




M 










o- 
fS- 














1 


SSOHO 




H 


000' IS Nl 


3 


8 


1SOD IVlldVD 


ro 


H 




-d- 


CM 


31V0 NOI131dWOD 


% 


H 




O ^ 








Z £ 








K Z 








3 s: 














< 


^i 






< 


z 
< 






z 


s! 






I 
















3 


5 

o 














u 
















O 
















°- 








o 


< i= 


1 




D 


ij - 1 


s 




< 


> u 
z < 


g 




o 


O "- 


1 

3 




< 








s 








vo 








O 




■P 




> 




i 








i 


sjsodand iD3roi)d 




5 




3 
















si 


Q 




X z 


?g 


e 


<* ^> 








s 


1 


i 

I 


o 5 


> 
































3S 


s 


8 


I 




o- Z 
< 


1 


1 


1 


3 






s 






-P 






















O 




0) 










^PH' 






































5 




■J 




b] &, 
















































„; 


b 


| 


>,0J rH 


ja 


m 


■n 




rrt 


M 




■P 


-Q 


a p 


ft 1 


fc tf 




& 


ii 


a 






K 


IS 




o 






■p 








u 






a> 


^f 














oiHH 








+> 








U)-P 










o 






























«■ 




















■H 


o 


















s 








Si 





g 


m 


° 


$ 




> 

















T 








a 


•P 


3 


Mm 


° 


',; 


3 




lj 


'l' J 


u 
















i.' 












































> 






































+J 


ol 








• ■ 




































M 


HtXO 




• c 


° 




O 


•O 


d> 


<H 


60.C-H 








a 



F-16 



HM>I 000 '000 'I 

ni aaainoaa xo 

C]3iVa3N39 AOH3N3 

IVPINNV 3QVa3AV 

MW NI 

AlOVdVD 

aanviSNi 

S31IW NI H10N33 



SdO NI 

AllDVdVD 

3W1NI 

NOIlVAa3S3d 

3Dvds aooid 



000 IS NI 
1SCO "IVlldVD 



?|gp , £3 °S §1 



I W H _ 



31VQ NOI133dWOD 



sasodand iD3road 



L6 3« 



•a s s 



1 a 



Pi 



SB 
1-3, 



& fi 



» 1: 



F-17 



HM>I 000 '000 'I 

ni a3*)ino3s do 

a3iV*3N30 A9S3N3 
IVflNNV 3QVd3AV 



MW NI 
AllDVdVD 

asnvisNi 



S31IW NI H1QN31 



3 £ 



SJD NI 

AlOVdVD 

3XV1NI 



NOIlVAa3S3d 
3DVdS QOOId 



3£S 



000'IS NI 
1SCO IVlldVD 



31VQ NOU31dWO0 



, a 
ill 






b^ 



£1 



•es u 

fssa 



Is 
It 



,5 sa 

I .p H a> 

iSpoi 



5 






sssoddnd iD3rodd 



1 z 

2 S 

H- < 

!! 

OS 



>l O -H 



» <S 



£ g 

%H I 

O aj a> h 

•-a -H K (E 

3 o v U 

.C 3 I* 3 

la 






$$ t 



n 



p-18 



5 Z 



HMM 000 '000 'I 

ni aaainoaa ao 

a31V»3N3Q AOSI3N3 

IVflNNV 3QVM3AV 

MW NI 

AllDVdVD 

asnvisNi 



*8 



> u 



S31IW NI H10N31 

S3D NI 

AllDVdVD 

3XV1NI 



NOIlVA»3S3» 

3DVdS aoou 



000 IS NI 

isco nviidVD 



3iVQ NOI133dWOD 






llll 



i 1 &Sl al •g I 



51 



ill; 



s s 



* SSI 



!3g 



sssodand iD3rodd 



s§ 



5 5' 



33 
Sfc 



\l s 



P-19 



KH 



a <u ecu 




O ffl O -H O <S 



P rH cd 
HO), 
0) O 



e en c 



I 30H CO 
H fl) C1ID 

C rH s* c 

CnCH bD-H -h 

■H d<IC3 
C P -H O- £ 

CJf »a«s 
S O o C S S-f o 

o x: 3 -h 3 £ 

£«B &H co 
CO CD CD CU rH 

O 3 > , 



OMDO OHSHO^O 



LArH tH p O CVJ C\J CU 

CO CO E C O rH -CO- I S W 









h 


ocri 


Ch 


H 


TJ -O 




CU 






T3 rH T3 


a 


CU 


CU 


0) 


500 




CU CU 











<*h 13 • *-*-> cn 


3 


3 


3 CC rH 


o 


3 | 3 




rH 


H 


iH 










^ 


o 


u 


CJ 




CU 


s 


o -d o 


o 


C 


C 


C iH P p 


C Ct, 


tH 


-H 


•H 


3 


id 


a 


■H 1 tH 


rH 


-P -P 


-P 




(U 


a) p vo p 


C« 


CO 






c 


C 


Q. 


CO rH CO 


P 


O 


o 


O 


crt 




oj 


o o\ O 


o 


uuura 


'.'. 


° 


UriUfH 


o 


•o 


CU <M 






SD.C-H 


,, 



F-20 



HM> 000 '000 'I 

ni aaainoaa ao 

a31Vi)3N30 AOH3N3 

1VHNNV 39Va3AV 

MW NI 

AllDVdVD 

0313V1SNI 

S31IW NI H10N31 



&Pfl 



SdD NI 

AlOVdVD 

3XV1NI 

NOIJ.VAH3S3d 
3DVdS QOOId 



000'IS NI 
1SCO IVlldVD 



i\j\i>'<1> '. 



31VQ NOI133dWOD 



»sa 



sss 



e sg 



i 1 



ssa 



£ 8 



i3sod»nd osroad 



I d 



2q 
o- Z 



-■ £ « e 



!"E 



& S 



„ Eg £• 3 



E§ & > 
Is ^ « 

£ 6 a 



F-21 



CM 


z f 


HMX 000 '000 '1 

ni againoa!) do 






o 


o- 5 


a3iV»3N30 A083N3 
1V0NNV 39VM3AV 






t 


MW Nl 






a : 


AlOVdVD 






c 


2 


cmiviSNi 








z £ 


S31IW Nl H10N3T 








< i= 




















> u 
z < 

o "- 


SdD Nl 








AiDVdVD 








u 


3XV1NI 








£ 


NOIlVAMSSd 


t- 






- 


3DVdS aooid 


■* 






< < 















m 




U o 


3AI1DV 


8 


a 
























o - 
>z 


















5 


ssoao 


| 


3 




" 




A 








M 






000' IS Nl 




a 




iSOD 1VlldV3 


i 








* 


CO 




31V0 NOI133dWCO 


S 


3 






u^ 










z •- 






;," 




£Z 






9 




55 

^ 5; 






g 










| 








r 


< 








C 
.J 
O 


< 

z 


Z 
< 






n: 


X 








p 










£ 


5 


o 






g 


u 


"■ 






s 





































< 


O 


u 






1 


< 

o 

< 
5 


< P 

> 3 

> 
Z < 

o "- 










>/> 










O 




.p 






> 


3 
1 






sasodand osroad 


3 








u 


B. 








>> 




















2^ 
I z 




I 8 












£ O 


| 


ft) ^ 




i- < 
















!l 


"|I 


»a 




O 'z 








w < 










w ° 


c. 3 
















^° 


> 


i 


% 







o 




s 


b 


£ 




£ z 












< 


1 


' 


1 


1 



p W (IOH 

n -^ o -h 

n-3 OO^ 



<U 1) 3 u 
3 3 a 11 3 

o CI 3 CI 

CC1IOC 

.3 -h m x: -3 
a u 

w M u * Ul 

o o > o o 



F-22 



UfAy 000 '000 '1 

ni aaainoaa no 

C]31V}I3N30 AOd3N3 

IVCINNV 39Vd3AV 

MW NI 

AlDVdVD 

asnvisNi 



> — 

> u 
z < 



S31IW NI H10N31 

SO NI 

AlDVdVD 

3XV1NI 



NOIlVA!)3S3a 
3DVdS 0OO13 



000 IS NI 

isoo nviidvD 



31VQ NOI131dWO0 



2 5 



u l| 






53sodand iD3ro»d 



2o 

o- Z 



S3 fi 

r I 



2b 



& a 



as I 






o a 

o 

i ■■ a 



S3 



F-23 



hmx ono'ooo'i 
ni aaainoai) xo 

C13J.V83N39 AOH3N3 

1VHNNV 3QVJI3AV 

MW NI 

AllDVdVD 

cmivisNi 



> D 



S31IW NI H10N3T 

SJD NI 

AlDVdVD 

3XVJ.NI 



NOI1VAHS3)) 
33VdS Q0033 



000' IS NI 
iSOD "IVlldVO 



«3; 



U 3E; E= 



^ a 



31VQ NOI133dWOD 



ft 
I- 



■bfifefei 



H 



si 



■H 

s3 



j?3 

* > 

3-3 



S3SOdand inroad 



19 



a. z 



a., 



l K £ SSS 



f I! 



§1 



6*2 : 




!» 3s 



P-24 



?z 



HM>I 000 '000 'I 

ni asainosa ao 

031Va3N3O A083N3 

IVONNV 3QVa3AV 

«W NI 

AlOVdVD 

qstivisni 



SS£S 



S31IW N! H19N31 

SJO NI 

AllDVdVD 

3>IV1NI 

NOIlVA»3S3a 

3DVds aoonj 



ooo'is NI 

1SOD "IVlldVD 



3iva NOI131dWCO 



TvSvO vS^£)^ 






! £ 6 ft S 



SJSOdand iD3rod 



is 



S i; 



;^« 



O 3 

J o 

'. , vO 

o a . 

H 

OKU 

+J ^ O O 



«J bO t 



P-25 



INDEX TO RESERVOIRS 
LISTED IN APPENDIX F 



Anderson, 6 
Antelope Lake, 12 



Barrett, 9 
Beardsley, 18 
Big Bear Lake 

(Bear Valley Dam), 11 
Big Sage, 15 
Black Butte, 16 
Boca, 23 

Bouquet Canyon, 9 
Bowman , 14 
Bridgeport, 23 
Briones, 6 
Bucks Lake, 15 
Bullards Bar, 13 
Butt Valley, 14 



Cachuma, 8 

Calaveras, 6 

Calero, 6 

Camanche , 17 

Camp Far West, 14 

Casitas, 9 

Castaic, 9 

Cedar Springs Lake, 24 

Chet Harritt, 10 

Clair Engle Lake 

(Trinity Dam), 5 
Clear Lake 

(Cache Creek), 13 
Clear Lake 

(Klamath River), 5 
Cogswell, 11 
Copco No. 1, 5 
Copper Basin, 25 
Courtright, 23 
Coyote, 6 
Crane Valley, 19 
Crystal Springs, 6 
Cuyamaca, 11 



Dallas Warner, 19 
Del Valle, 6 
Donnells,l8 
Donner Lake, 23 
Don Pedro, 5 



East Park, 12 
El Cap i tan, 10 
Encino, 9 

Farming ton, 17 
Florence Lake, 19 
Folsom, 12 



roj.som, i.d. 
Fordyce, 14 
French Lake, 14 
Frenchman Lake, 12 
French Meadows, 12 



Gem Lake, 24 
Gerle Creek. 13 
Gibraltar, 8 
Grant Lake, 25 



Haiwee, 24 
Hansen, 10 
Harry L. Englebright 

(Narrows Dam), 14 
Havasu Lake 

(Parker Dam), 25 
Hell Hole, 12 
Henshaw, 10 
Hernandez, 8 
Hetch-Hetchy, 18 
Hog Flat, 23 
Huntington Lake, 19 



Ice House, 13 
Independence, 23 
Iron Canyon, 15 
Iron Gate, 5 
Isabella, 21 



F-27 



Jackson Creek, 17 
Jackson Meadows, 14 
James H. Turner, 6 



Kent (Peters Dam), 7 
Keswick, 12 



Lake Arrowhead, 2k 
Lake Berryessa 

(Monticello Dam), 12 
Lake Chabot, 6 
Lake Crowley 

(Long Valley Dam), 24 
Lake Curry, 6 
Lake Davis 

(Grizzly Valley Dam), 12 
Lake Dwinnell 

(Shasta River Dam), 5 
Lake Edison 

(Vermilion Valley Dam), l8 
Lake Eleanor, 18 
Lake Hemet, 10 
Lake Hennessey 

(Conn Creek Dam), 7 
Lake Hodges, 10 
Lake Leavitt, 23 
Lake Lloyd 

(Cherry Valley Dam), l8 
Lake Love land, 9 
Lake Mathews, 9 
Lake Mendocino 

(Coyote Dam), 7 
Lake Pillsbury 

(Scott Dam), 5 
Lake Tahoe, 23 
Lexington, 6 
Lewis ton, 5 

Little Grass Valley, 14 
Little Panoche Creek Detention Dam, 18 
Loon Lake, 13 

Los Banos Detention Dam, 18 
Lower Bear River, 17 
Lower San Fernando, 9 
Lower San Leandro, 6 
Lyons, 19 



Mammoth Pool, 19 
McCloud, 15 
McCoy Flat, 23 
Mc Swain, 19 
Medley Lake, 13 
Melones, 19 
Merle Collins, Ik 
Millerton Lake 

(Friant Dam), 18 
Morena, 9 
Morris, 9 
Mountain Meadows, Ik 



Nacimiento, 8 
New Exchequer, 19 
New Hogan, 17 
Nicasio, 7 
Nimbus, 12 
North Fork, 13 



Oroville, 13 
Owens, 19 



Pardee, 17 
Perris, 9 
Pine Flat, 22 
Pit No. 3, 15 
Pit No. 6, 15 
Pit No. 7, 15 
Prado, 11 
Prosser Creek, 23 
Puddingstone, 11 
Pyramid, 9 



Railroad Canyon, 10 
Rainbow Diversion Dam, 12 
Ralston Afterbay, 12 
Red Bluff Diversion Dam, 12 
Redinger Lake 

(Big Creek No. 7 Dam), 19 
Relief, 19 
Rollins, 14 
Ruth, 5 



F-28 



Sabrina 

(Hillside Dam), 24 
Saddlebag. 24 
Salinas, o 
Salt Springs, 17 
Salt Springs Valley, 17 
San Andreas, 6 
San Antonio, 8 
San Gabriel No. 1, 11 
San Luis, 18 
San Luis Forebay, 18 
San Pablo, 6 
Santa Felicia, 10 
Santa Fe, 11 
Santiago, 10 
San Vicente, 10 
Savage, 9 
Scott s Flat, 14 
Senator Wash, 25 
Sepulveda, 10 
Shasta, 12 
Shaver Lake, 19 
Silver Lake, 13 
Silver Valley 

(Alpine Dam) 19 
Slab Creek, 1§ 
Sly Creek, 14 
Sly Park, 12 
Sutherland, 10 
Spicers Meadows, 19 
Stone Canyon, 9 
Stony Gorge, 12 
Strawberry, 19 
Stumpy Meadows, 13 
Success, 21 
Sweetwater, 9 



Union, 19 

Union Valley, 13 

Upper San Leandro, 6 

Utica, 19 

Uvas, 6 



Vail, 10 
Villa Park, 10 



West Valley, 15 
Whale Rock, 8 
Whiskey town, 12 
Whittier Narrows, 11 
Wishon, 21 
Wood Ranch, 10 
Woodward, 19 



Terminus, 21 

Thermalito Afterbay, 13 

Thermalito Diversion Dam, 13 

Thermalito Forebay, 13 

Tinemaha, 24 

Topaz Lake, 23 

Tule Lake, 15 

Tulloch, 19 

Twin Lake, 13 

Twitchell, 8 



F-29 



13 7 49 



THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
STAMPED BELOW 

B .°^ KS REQUE STED BY ANOTHER BORROWER 
ARE SUBJECT TO RECALL AFTER ONE WEEK 
RENEWED BOOKS ARE SUBJECT TO 
IMMEDIATE RECALL 



SIP 30 |980 



'JA/\I 



' 1981 ^ 



jKW R iW® 

WAR 8 1988 
MAR 1 1 mgj'i 

PhYS SCI LiBRAmf 



.007 
PSL 



him 1 8 2006 I 
DEC 1 1 2005 I 

LIBRARY, UNJVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS ' 

B y.— s=r,>s 458 s 



N? 601013 






California. Departing 


nt 


C2 


of Hater Resources. 




A 2 


lletin. 




no. 160:66 'k 
app^. 


PHYSICAL 






SCIENCES 






LIBRARY 






f[lp^ 






LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 

DAVIS 



3 1175 00487 1003 



601013_ 
California. Dept. 
of Water Resources. 
Bulletin. 



Call Number: 

TC824 

C2 

A2 

no. 160:66