text:
STATE OF ARIZONA _ ........_.__"_," ,,~ '.__ h
! if!. TE~_~~ A~! rr"~_~~ T~~_ L."_ p O~!~ X.
The purpose of this poT icy statement, in addition to the obvious purpose
of endeavoring to preserve and enhance the quality of Colorado River
water, is to formulate and adopt a water quality control policy document
for Interstate Streams in Arizona as required under the following
State and Federal Acts:
1. Federal Water pollution Control Act, as amended.
2. Arizona Revised Statutes, Chapter 14.
While these statutes are essentially designed towards the same endeavor,
terms and definitions used therein may differ somewhat. Specifically,
the _~ ater ~ l! y.__ cr:.. Lter ia .. and i!!!. p. lement~. t ion__.~ nd ~! lfQrcement..- Q. l a' 1~ ca 11 ed
for in the Federal Act are presented in this pol icy document as_} l. ater~
Cont ro 11 ed, WateL. Q!:@ l. L! Y._ Q.!?. l~ cti~ es,! 1easur. es_.!~~<:'~!~'!'~._~~ ter.:_ g,~~ lL~ y..
Q.~ lec~ lve~.! and LJReJ~ me' 1_~~. tlo'lQLQltle~! lx~~~ The support I ng data required
by the Federal Act is supplied in Description of Area andfln~.. l!'! 9_~ J_
- BObeJneecftiTcVia" lesW.-- a- t- e- r..... U--- s.- e- s---. t-- o--.- b-- e-.-- P..- ro- t- ec- t. e- d, and . R-- a- t. i- o- n-- a. 1-- e- f- o. r_'. W.- a- te. r._--. Qua_ f._ f- t- y..
Conferees from Arizona met with conferees from the other six Colorado
River Basin States. They discussed common problems associated with the
quality and quantity of water in the Colorado River in view of present
and future use, and Jointly prepared Guidelines for Formulating Water
Qual ity Standards for the Interstate Watersor-- the C'olo · radoRiverSy · s · tem.
Acopy · · of- theTa- te- st- d- raft- ort- hese-- gui de flnes- appears- Tn the- Append i xa~
Exhibit 20.
~~ tlOCUMENT IS THE PROPEf\ TY HUM BE A ; ~ -- 1_ l{ 8. · · · 1" ~ Of' THE ...... .. J ' l...
Ilr DEPARTM £ NT OF
1UBRARYA~ f) ARCHIVES R~ C! IV£ DAPR 2 1970
Ii: - AfH% ONA -
Waters Controlled by this Pol icy • • .. .. e .. I
DesMcariinptiSotenmooffAtrheae CanodloFraidnodinRgisver,.. W• ate• rshe• d •.. .•. 2
Tributaries .. Arizona • • .. • • • • • • 3
TTrriibbuuttaarriieess .... UNetavhada.. •• •.. •.. •• •• •.. •• •.. .•. 65
Tributaries .. Ca 1ifo rn ia .. .. • • • • .. .. 6
History of Area • • .. .. • • .. • .. • .. 6
EDciovneomrsyioannsd. R. e. so• urce.. s o.. f A.. rea• •• .... •• •.. •.. .•. 117
BenWefaitceiraQl uWalaitteyr CUsoenssitdoerbaetioPnros. tec• ted•. .•. •.. •" •.. 1185
Water Qual i ty Obj ect ivas • • • • *' .. • " .. 21
Measures to Achieve Water Qual ity Object ives 24
RImatpiloenmael netaftoiornWoafteOr bQjueacltiitvyesO. bj• ect. i. ves.. •• .•. . II. I •• 3319
1- 1 This Water Qual ity Control Pol icy appl ies to the Interstate waters in the main
stem of the Colorado River in Arizona from the Utah- Arizona border to the Southerly
International Boundary with the Republ ic of Mexico, and to all those streams contributing
water to the main stem of the Colorado River from Arizona. The main stem
and tributary features are shown on the map below. The Gila River System upstream
from its confluence with the Colorado River will be covered by a separate pol icy.
This Water Qual ity Control Pol icy includes the Virgin River which passes through
the northwest tip of Arizona on its way from Utah to Nevada to Lake Mead.
Dam Site
Charleston loam
Dam Site
- 1-
Existing Dams
Proposed Dams ,..,
2- 0 DESCRIPTION OF AREA AND FINDINGS ='".__._ w · _ · · "~'__'_ · · _'_
2- 1 The Main Stem of the Colorado River: The gross watershed of the Colorado
River- encompasses portionS- of~ he states- of'Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico,
Arizona, Nevada, and California, as shown on Plate 1. The upper portions of the
watershed are drained by the Green, Colorado, and San Juan Rivers. These main
tributaries in turn drain into lake Powell, which is located behind Glen Canyon
Dam hear the Utah- Arizona boundary. Flows of these major tributaries into Lal<;;
Powell provide approximately 90 percent of the total waters available to the
lower main stem of the Colorado River. The average annual undepleted flow of
the Colorado River is approximately 15 million acre- feet.
Enroute to lake Powell, river waters in the Upper Basin ( that portion upstre: l'n
of Glen Canyon Dam) are diverted, used, and returned to the systeme The ma.: 0~
such diversions and returns are regulated by control structures which are operated
under the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamat\ on c
Ma! ly_ of__!- he Burea~_~_~_~': l_! ho~ J;~~ p!.~ l~ c~~__~! l. t '!~_~. Efl~!-~~~ l':!._ r:~~~_~!!..!~ .~~ __ ~.,?~ T1:'
~ t r~~! c:~ L __~! I_~_~~_':'_' i __~~!..~~ l_':'~__ EE? l~_~~_~ __ ar~_.!'<?~_: t~ ~__ f~! lY~_~_~~!~_ e~_ d.
Waters released from Glen Canyon Dam flow in the main stem to lake Mead which
is located behind Hoover Dam. Lake Mead provides most of the storage and ; 0. qulation
in the lower Colorado River Basin. Hydroelectric power is generated at
both Glen Canyon and Hoover Dams. lake Mead will serve as the supply reservoi~
for the Southern Nevada Project. Return flow from the Southern Nevada Project
will reach Lake Mead through Las Vegas Wash g
Water released from Hoover Dam flows into Lake
is located just north of the Nevada- California
for re- regulation of releases from Hoover Dam.
at Davis Dam.
Mohave behind Davis Dam which
botlndary. Lake Mohave is used
Hydroelectric power is generated
Water released from Davis Dam crosses the Nevada- Arizona- California boundary
and flows through the broad Mohave Valley for 33 miles before reaching the
upper end of Lake Havasu. Lake Havasu, which is a widened portion of the
Colorado River located behind Parker Dam, is about 45 miles in length. The
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California diverts water from Lake
Havasu for transport to the coastal regions of Southern California. The Central
Arizona Project plans to divert water from Lake Havasu for transport to Central
Arizona. Hydroelectric power is generated at Parker Dam.
Proceeding downstream, Headgate Rock Dam, located near Parker, Arizona, is used
to divert water for irrigating the lands of the Colorado River Indian Reservation
in Arizona. There is essentially no storage behind this dam, and no hydroelectric
power is generated. Some returns from drainage of the reservation lands reach
the Colorado River north of Palo Verde Diversion Dam, but the principal drain
empties into the river south of this dam.
Palo Verde Diversion Dam, which also has essentially no storage, is used to
divert water just north of Blythe, California, for irrigation in the Palo Verde
Valley of California. While there are some minor drainage returns to the
Colorado River from Palo Verde Valley along the adjacent reach, the predominate
farm drainage returns from Palo Verde Valley are via Palo Verde Lagoon- Outfall
- 2-
Drain at the most southerly end of the Valley.
Cibola Valley, on the Arizona side, is located near the southern tip of Palo
Verde Valley. River water is pumped into Cibola Valley for irrigation.
Imperial Reservoir is located behind Imperial Dam, approximately 15 miles north
of Yuma, Arizona. Imperial Dam is the major diversion structure for irrigation
projects in the Imperial and Coachella Valleys and Yuma areas. Releases made
to the mainstream below Imperial Dam are essentially for the purpose of satisfying
treaty obligations with the Republ ic of Mexico. There is only minor river
water storage behind Imperial Dam. No hydroelectric power is generated.
' I Senator Wash Dam and Reservoir are located on the Cal ifornia side of the Colorado
River immediately upstream from Imperial Dam. The reservoir provides offstream
regulatory storage and has a maximum capacity of 13,400 acre- feet. To provide
regulation, water is either pumped from the Colorado River into the reservoir or
released back to the river. Water released from the reservoir generates hydroelectric
power. The Bureau of Reclamation estimates that approximately 170,000
acre- feet of water can be saved annually by short- term storage of releases from
upstream dams in excess of downstream requests for water deliveries.
Laguna Dam, which is located about six stream miles below Imperial Dam, serves
as somewhat of a foundation support for Imperial Dam. There is only minor water
storage behind Laguna Dam. The area between Imperial and Laguna Dam serves as
a depository of silt removed by the desilting works at Imperial Dam. The importance
of this desilting operation is covered in Section 3- 5.
The routing of water diverted from Imperial Dam and measured surface return
flows to the Colorado River between Imperial Dam and the Republ ic of Mexico
Boundary is difficult to describe verbally, and is better explained schematically
in Plate 2.
Waters reaching Morelos Dam, just south of the Northerly International Boundary
with the Republic of Mexico, are diverted into the Mexicali Valley for domestic,
irrigation and other beneficial uses.
THE OCEAN and the management afforded by the present system of storage reservoirs
permits delivery of the highest quality water now economically possible considering
that the supply is fully utilized. Water will be wasted to the ocean only
after all of the upstream reservoirs are filled to storage capacity and all
beneficial uses have been satisfied. This condition is not anticipated in the
foreseeable future.
2- 2 Tributaries to the Colorado River from Arizona; There are numerous tributar
fes-- to-- the- Coforad- oRTver-- from- A- Flzona--- in-- fhe- loo river mil es between Page
( Glen Canyon Dam) and Yuma, Arizona. A brief description of the significant
ones follows J and available specific data on quantity and qual ity of water contributed
appears in Exhibit 1 in the Appendix where applicable. The Total
Dissolved Solids ( TDS) change given for each tributary is for present conditions.
As the flow from the Upper Basin decreases, the effect is expected to increase
by up to one- third from each tributary.
- 3-
_,' par: J~ JUve. r.,.- The Pai" ia River joins the Colorado River just downstream
of the Lees Ferry USGS gaging station. The river flows through remote
country from Southern Utah. The water has a high mineral content,
but is relatively free of other contamination. The TDS load at the
Colorado River is increased less than 2 mg/ l by flow from this tributary.
( See Appendix 1.)
Little Colorado River - The Little Colorado River joins the Colorado
iffver'- about-' SS- ffiiles" below Lees Ferry. The river essentially starts
in eastern Arizona near Greer, although there are some minor intermittent
flows in creeks from New Mexico. The water has a medium to
high sal inity, depending on the flow rate. A major problem is the
contribution of salts from Blue Springs, about 13 miles upstream from
its mouth on the Navajo Indian Reservation. These springs contribute
about 547,400 tons of salt per year to the Colorado River. The TDS
load of the Colorado River is increased by about 28 mg/ l by this
tributary, with about 20 mg/ l attributable to the Blue Springs. The
problem is being investigated at the present time by the Bureau of
Reclamation. ( See Appendix 1.)
ju.. l.. 9- I:! L~ lliI § ., L~ r,~~~,- The Bright Angel Creek enters the Colorado River
from the north in Grand Canyon National Park. The flow is mostly
from springs near the North Rim of the Grand Canyon, and the quality
of the water is good. The TDS load of the Colorado River is decreased
about one ( 1) mg/ l by the dilution effect of this tributary. ( See
Append ix 1.)
d. Japea; s. ireek ~ Tapeats Creek is fed by springs on the north side of
the Colorado River in the northwest portion of Grand Canyon National
Park, a very remote and primitive area. The meager data indicate the
discharge is of low mineral ization, and the dilution would reduce the
TDS load of the main stem flow of the Colorado River by about 2 mg/ l.
( See Appendix 1 3 )
e. _ Kan~~ Creek.~, Kanab Creek has a drainage area of about 1,600 square
miles, of which about 1,000 square miles is in southern Utah. The
river crosses the border between Kanab, Utah and Fredonia, Arizona.
The water is fairly high in mineralization, but the total flow is
relatively small. The TDS load of the Colorado River is increased
less than one ( 1) mg/ l by this tributary. ( See Appendix 1.)
f. Havasu Creek - Havasu Creek drains the Coconino Plateau south of the
' Coforado-' R! ve'r and enters the river about 13 mi les downstream from
Kanab Creek. This is a remote area, and is inhabited by the Havasupai
Indians. The very meager water flow and quality data indicates good
quality water of low mineralization. The TDS load of the Colorado
River is decreased by about 0.5 mg/ l by dilution from this tributary.
( See Appendix 1.)
g. }( l. r~~ Jyer: The Vi rg i n River beg i ns in Utah, and flows into Ar i zona
near Littlefield, then into Nevada near Mesquite, and then into Lake
Mead. The Virgin River contributes about 350,000 tons of salts per
year to the Colorado River System, and the quality of the water is
.. 4-
~ Tributaries discussed in Section 2- 2
GROSS BASIIII AREA: 242,000 Sq, Mi.
AREA'IIO, OOOSc;. Mi
AREA: 132,000 Sq. Mi.
Gravity Main Canal
rz., 1
3.3. z. 32., 0 AF .. 1 c: x: t
° 1...
...::: t l
..- 1 1 _____ _' t _
Southerly International Boundary
.. 8 ..:.:. t.
Nort~ G~}~ V~ l~ y_ .. . J 1 I
South Gila Valley J I
1! al?- te~ aL R~ tu. rns_ _ _ _. J I
_ W~~ Ll:.! O~- M~ h!! W!:. Dra~ n 1° 2,1< 2.0fl
Gila River
79, °
AF ' t
All American Canal
§ ...
-- -> Measured surface return flows
-~>~ Diversions
1-- ID'i1'-,.......~ YUMA PROJECT
~ I co rz., VALLEY DIVISION
0@ 1 c: x:
: x: I CITY OF
L7g9~ 3Q. 0_¥_,_ ~ I 1
1 ..- 11'- 0
1 GlI: D- Northerl~ Interna~~ onal Bou_ n2a~ ry,---_ +- -;;:.. fc:.
Alamo Canal i' 1;::: 1
~-"""'''''''''-'''' Ig
. J _ C0r- I1)
extremely poor~ The TDS load of the Colorado River is increased 14
mg/ l as a result of this tributary, See Plate I and Appendix I for
location and details o It appears that one major source ( about onefourth)
of these salts is LaVerkin Springs ( Dixie Hot Springs) in
southern Utah upstream from St. George~ Other specific sources are
not known at this time.
h. Bill Will iams River - The Bill WIlliams River discharges into Lake
Havasu- Cake- just- above Parker Dam. The River is erratic in flow since
it drains a desert area with sparse rainfall. Flash floods are commonplace,
and these are controlled by Parker Dam, and will be further
controlled by the Alamo Dam now under construction about 35 miles from
the mouth of the river. There is some irrigated acreage in this project"
Data on water quality ( WPSS) near the Alamo Dam site between October
1963 and October 1964 indicates that the TDS of the Bill Williams water
is within the range of 535 to 698 mg/ l, or less than that of the
Colorado River arriving at Parker Dam. A source of pollution from the
mining industry on this tributary is discussed in the Implementation
i. _ Gila River ~ The Gila River joins the Colorado River just upstream of
Yuma, and below laguna Dam. The Gila River is now almost completely
controlled by upstream dams, and the water is completely utilized,
often many times. Floodwaters have never exceeded the present capacity
of the Gila River storage system upstream of its confluence with the
Salt River, and floodwaters have exceeded the capacity of the SaltVerde
System only twice In the last 25 years~ Painted Rock Dam, northwest
of Gila Bend, is the final flood control structure on the Gila
River, and has only been used once since completion in 1959. During
calendar year 1964, only 103 acre feet of water flowed past Dome, 12
miles upstream from the mouth of the Gila River near Yuma, and all of
this flow originated downstream of Painted Rock Dam.
j. __ Other Trlbu!. aJ:. i. es.__- There are many small streams that flow for a short
period of time after rainstorms, but the flow is so intef~ mittent that
very little data Is available on total flow and water qual itYo
Many small springs and spring- fed tributaries, mostly In the reach between
Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead, contribute small quantities of
water and dissolved salts 6 Since most of these tributaries are in
very remote uninhabited areas, very little data on them is available.
The data that is available Is shown in Exhibit 1.
There are some intermittent creeks flowing from Arizona into Utah above
Glen Canyon Dam, and ultimately these may reach the San Juan or Colorado
Rivers. Most of these streams are in remote areas of the Navajo Indian
_ 2- 3 Tributaries to the Colorado River from Utah: In addition to tributaries to
the Main Stem of tFie--- Colora- do RTveru- pstream- of- the Utah- Arizona border, there
are several streams that cross the Utah- Arizona border and flow through Arizona
before reaching the Colorado River. The significant ones are as follows:
a. Paria Rivec~ This river is covered in Section 2- 2a under Arizona
- 5-
b. "" Kana! L"~_ reek - This creek is covered in Section 2- 2e under Arizona
c. Virgin River - This river is covered in Section 2- 2g under Arizona
. t r i butar- i es. -
iver from Nevada There are a few tributaries :::"---'-'~-=-"";":::-:::"':-=~" · ;":::-=--=- 7 · -"::':":';::' · -::=-;'''::''':'-=-::--=-_':':':'''":''-::,~~-.::..:,.=.::.:.. · -~-:.";:"=;:.:- common r zona border. The significant
a. Virgin River - This river is covered in Section 2- 2g under Arizona
tributaries- sInce it flows through the northwest tip of Arizona.
b. Las Ve9a~" J'!._~ sl · L- Las Vegas Wash drains the Las Vegas Valley and
flows into Lake Mead just above Hoover Dam. Although the present
flow is not great ( about 15,000 to 20,000 acre feet per year), the
salt burden is high, and the flow is expected to increase severalfold
upon completion of the Southern Nevada Project. The TDS load
of the Colorado River is increased about 4 mg/ l by this tributary
at the present time.
2- 5 Tributaries to the Colorado River from Cal ifornia: The area within
ca- ffforniawhTChdrainsnatural1Y to"- the- CoJor- ado Rive" r is a narrow strip
of land varying in width from about 10 to 40 miles. This strip extends from
the Nevada- California border to the California- Mexico boundaryo
The area is essentially semi- desert, and stream flows are intermittent. Although
rainfall is sparse in this area, the intensity of rainfall may be great
when it occurs, and flash floods have occurred. Flow and quality data is almost
non~ existentD
~~~._. t! l"~~~!: y'"" g: L!~~ f_~ l ~ r"~~ R iY~ r_ J! asJ.! l De'{~ l<? p~~ nt~ The history of the develop.
ment of the Colorado River Basin is important to the consideration of water
qua 1ity.
a. General History - Irrigation development of the Colorado River Basin
started"' with- the beginning of settlement about 1860. The Upper
Basin ( above Lees Ferry) irrigated about 800,000 acres by 1905,
and about 1,400,000 acres by 1920. Development slowed down after
1920 because of both physical and economic limitations in the
availabil ity of water. In the Lower Basin, irrigation began in
the Palo Verde Valley in 1879, and development of the Yuma area
and Imperial and Coachella Valleys followed. Irrigation on the
Colorado River Indian Reservation was attempted in 1870, but in~
adequate flood control almost stopped this development until 1942.
Early development of river control centered around the agricultural
economy of the area. The river flow was very erratic and undependable.
Tremendous floods occurred in the lower basin around the
Yuma area when both the Colorado and Gila River systems reached
high flow stages. The Colorado River carried huge silt loads, and
led to the statement that the Colorado River was " too thick to drink
and too thin to plow'. The salt burden was low at high flow, but
very high when the flow was low.
- 6-
The construction of dams on the Colorado River and its tributaries,
especially the Gila, Salt and Verde Rivers, brought the River under
control, reduced the silt load, evened out the salt burden, and
made agricultural operations in the lower Basin stable.
This development of the Colorado River has had considerable political
problems, and further development, including quality contrOl,
will have some more political and legal problems.
~ at~ r_ compa.~ ts_ and_ lr. ea~ l~~_:, The development of the Colorado River
has necessitated a number of compacts and treaties to protect the
rights of individuals and states to the use of water. The following
are certainly important when considering water quality criteria
that could affect water use under existing rights.
( J) ~ olorado J~. i ve. L § . ompac!_- The water of the Co lorado River
was divided between the Upper and Lower Basins by the
Colorado River Compact of 1922, with the division point
at Lees Ferry. The compact recognized the potential obI
igation of the United States to the Republic of Mexico.
( 2)! 1. exicarLJrea! y_:, The treaJty with Mexico, signed in 1944,
provides for annual delivery by the United States to
Mexico of 1,5000,000 acre- feet of Colorado River water,
with certain exceptions due to river flow conditions.
( 3 )~~ r.,_~_ ol o,=~ qQ,,~ J'yer_,! 3a~ I n_ Come.~£~__- This Compact of
1948 apportioned the waters of the Upper Basin states
( including 50,000 acre- feet to Arizona annually) to
allow for orderly and proper development of the Upper
( 4)~ r izon~." y'. s. ,., J,~!. fOrnL § L~,~ L!.. J n.._,~ h~_~ E. prem_~_~ our. t_~ The
Lower Basin states never agreed to a division of the
waters of the Lower Colorado River Basin, and the division
was provided by Supreme Court decree in 1964. This
decision cleared the way for further development of the
Lower Basin.
( 5) Water Quality - None of the agreements or compacts have
"- specTficaTl'y'- mentioned water qual ity. The Treaty with
Mexico provides that Mexico will take from any and all
sources.~. whatevertheir origin, the waters to which she
is entitled. Water qual ity is recognized as a factor to
be considered in recent legislation authorizing the construction
of projects in the Basin.
2- 7 Diversions of Water Along the Arizona Reach: Major United States projects
dive'rt anClUsew'ater-" f'romthe- Colora- do" Fflverafong the Arizona reach. A description
of these diversions, by states, follows, and data is summarized in Exhibit
2 in the Appendix.
n ft,, · nll. lllD.... A.. n.!! JJ \~ V'I r: S
..' ( of~ R I Z 0 N Po - 11 [ IbUlrndOllnlJ~. -
- 7-
( J ) ~ J.! Y...... Q. L!, ag~ __.. Page rece ives its mun ic i pa I wate r supp I y
from Lake Powell. Sewage is disposed in sewage lagoons
with minor effluent return to the Colorado River.
( 2) ColQradQ.... l~. iver.._ lndiall.. B~~ er: yati. o. n..: This project has
99,375 acres in Arizona with assigned water rights as
set forth in the Arizona vs. California Supreme Court
Decree, and about one- third is presently being irrigated
by diversions at Headgate Rock Dam. About 6~ 1o of the
water diverted is returned to the river as measured
surface return flows. In addition, there are unmeasured
surface and sub- surface returns to the river.
( 3) yuma _ frol~£~.. t._ Y..~!.~ Y_ J2.. Lv i~ on_...: About 52,000 acres in
this project are served by diversion at Imperial Dam
via the All American Canal to the Yuma Main Canal by
a siphon under the Colorado River. A portion of the
water diverted passes through measured surface drains
and wasteways back to the Colorado River south of the
Northerly International Boundary or to Mexico over the
Southerly International Boundary near San Luis, Sonora.
Additional drainage facilities are needed in portions
of the valley, particularly in the area adjacent to
the mesa.
( 5) y_~ ma~~~ LiarL. e. roiect:" Water is diverted at Imperial Dam
via the Gila Gravity Main Canal to irrigate 3,406 acres
in this project, which includes certain Warren Act Lands.
There is no measured return flow.
( a) North Gila Valley Irrigation District
( b) Yuma Mesa Irrigation and Drainage District
( c) Yuma Irrigation District ( South Gila Valley)
( d) Wellton- Mohawk Irrigation and Drainage District
Surface drainage from the Gila Projects is returned to the
Colorado River above the Northerly International Boundary
except that the Wellton- Mohawk drainage facilities include
a bypass channel which extends past Morelos Dam. This bypass
channel was put into operation on November 16, 1965,
and the Mexican Government has the option of deciding
whether the drainage waters shall be discharged above
or below Morelos Dam. About 30% of the water diverted
is returned to the river as measured surface drainage
or control water.
diverted at Imperial Dam via the
to service an authorized project
This project consists of the fol-
Gila Project - Water is
GiTa · · Gravfty · Ma in Cana I
area of 115,000 acres.
low i ng un its:
( 4)
- 8-
( 6)
( 7)
( 8)
( 10)
Cl. tr-. QL, Yuma .':" The City of Yuma presently receives most
of its water through the Yuma Main Canal. The city1s
contract with the Secretary of the InterIor provides
for delivery of the water from the river. Sewage from
Yuma is now discharged untreated to the river north of
the Northerly International Boundary, but plans are
progressing for a sewage treatment plant.
CiboL~ J!_~.! l~' t__:, Water is pumped from the Colorado River
for irrigation of the Cibola Valley.
Ce! l.! ral_. Arl.~ 9na" p. r: 21ect When authorized and built, this
project will divert water from Lake Havasu to provide
much needed supplemental water for domestic, industrial
and agricultural purposes in Central Arizona. There will
be no return flows from this project. The economic impact
and importance of this project is discussed in Section 2- 8.
£ ort, J~ ohaY~ Lrl.~ nan_ Re~ er: yatlon_- This project has 14,916
acres in Arizona with assigned water rights as set forth
in the Arizona vs. California Supreme Court Decree.
Miscellaneous Diversions - These include domestic, agricuI
turaland- fndustrfal'waters, and cons i st of direct
diversions or by groundwater pumping in the vicinity of
the Colorado River. Water is used by cities, recreational
centers, small farms, power plants, etc.
b. Neva2~,,- f. r,~ J~~~~_~ The Southern Nevada Proj ect is author i zed to divert
from Lake Mead, 300,000 acre- feet of water for use in the Las Vegas
area. The water will be used for domestic, agricultural and industrial
purposes. The Bureau of Reclamation anticipates a return flow
of approximately 50,000 acre- feet of water to Lake Mead annually.
( 1)
( 2)
( 3)
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California - The
Metroporl1: an" 1Tater- oTstrT" ct" aq- ueduci- p- rov i< res- capa'c ity
for the annual diversion of 1,212,000 acre- feet of water
for domestic, industrial and agricultural use on the
coastal plain of southern California. There is essentially
no return flow.
Palo Verde Irrigation District - About 900,000 acre- feet
' o{" waterlS- dTvertecr- annu'a'lly'- at Palo Verde Divers ion
Dam near Blythe for agricultural purposes. Approximately
60% is returned to the Colorado River either as measured
surface drainage or excess diverted water, mostly in a
main drain at the lower end of the project.
Impe!.". i a, L! i.!:_!"~~!,!~. Q_!~ i:.. i..£~~ d _ Coache 11 ~ Val Iey.~~ u/"!.! y
y_ ater Distric!:__,.- Approximately 3,500,000 acre- feet of
water is diverted annually at Imperial Dam via the All
- 9-
American Canal for various uses within the Districts.
There is no return flow ( other than seepage from the
All American Canal and flow regulation water) to the
Colorado River. Agricultural drainage water, canal
seepage, and any excess water diverted flows to the
Salton Sea in California.
( 4) 1.!:!!!'~_ fr.. Qj~~!.. L_ B.~?-~ x~ atJg! LQ. i. Yl~ j. o" L __ About 96,000 acrefeet
of water is diverted annually at Imperial Dam via
the All American Canal for agricultural use in the Bard
Valley. A portion is returned as drainage and flow
regulation water to the Colorado River between Yuma and
the Northerly International Boundary.
~- 8_~ co!} omY_ 2.! l~.. Na~!:! r_~ LB~ so~ t£~~_~_ L~ r_ L~ Q. na. l The economy of the ent ire State
of Arizona is intimately associated with the development of the Colorado River.
Arizona is semi- arid in character with a low average annual rainfall and I imited
natural water supplies. Since 1947, the population of the state has
more than doubled, with more than 70% of the population residing in Maricopa
and Pima Counties. These two counties along with Pinal County comprise the
core area of the Central Arizona Project. This area is now supplied with
water by surface water systems on the Salt, Verde and Gila Rivers and by
pumping from the groundwater basins. The agricultural, domestic and industrial
users of this area are using up all of the surface water available and are
pumping approximately 3,000,000 acre- feet of water per year more than the
natural groundwater replenishment. This annual overdraft is clearly evidenced
by the accelerated decline of groundwater levels and by land subsidence in
some areas.
The central Arizona area desperately needs the additional water to be del ivered
by the Central Arizona Project Aqueduct from Lake Havasu, but the supply available
is still far short of the present overdraft, and the needs of the area
are still growing. The quality of the presently available water is not always
good with respect to its salt content and this qual ity is further degraded by
multiple reuse since almost all beneficial uses of water add salts of some
variety to the water.
The remaining areas of the state face similar problems of short supply and/ or
quality of water, and it is impossible to separate these factors completely
in any proposed program of supply or regulations on quality. The total problem
can only be solved by a major water augmentation program for the Lower Colorado
River Basin.
! he p~ QPL~~ f_~ rL~ Qr:!~__ ha~~ J?~~!' L § _~ r. tY.. l! UL_~~- l~ EiQve_-.! h~ __ g!-, a 1L~~ L of-! b~.. r_~ a te r
~ nd ~ x t enj_..! tJ~_. suPEly__ fE.~ ~ 31~ Y- y"~ a r_~.. L_ ! Qn.£ LP~ i 0 r~__~_ 1~~~ r~_ J2!~ 9..!:~~.... f 0 r_.. 22.. Ll~_:
~ l_ Qfl_~ Q! ltrol was_ JnItiE... t~ g..! The quantity of water available has been extended
and the quality of the water has been enhanced by the following practices and
a. Farming practices have been steadily improved so that less water
is applied to the land per unit of crop yield. A report on this
phase of water conservation and quality enhancement is appended
as Exhibit 11.
- 10-
b. Delivery systems for both surface and groundwater have been
improved through re- design, lining and conversion to pipelines
to reduce seepage, evaporation, salt pick- up, consumptive use
by non- crop plants, and delivery waste. Statistics on past and
future programs are presented in Exhibit 12.
c. Extensive watershed planning and control programs have been initiated
to increase the yield and improve the quality of water delivered by
the surface water systems. The Arizona Water Resources Committee,
representing wildlands, banking, ranching, water authorities,
timber, irrigation, power, mining, game and recreation and municipalities,
has an annual symposium ( 10th in 1966) to present and
discuss experimental results and plan larger scale experiments.
A summary of watershed improvement accompl ishments and future programs
is appended as Exhibit 13.
d. Means of evaporation control or reduction of evaporation on reservoirs
and streams have been investigated since evaporation of water
from the surface of reservoirs and streams not only reduces the
supply but also increases the salt content of the water remaining.
A summary of activities in this field is presented in Exhibit 14.
e. Extensive phreatophyte investigation and control programs have been
carried on to eliminate or reduce waste by certain types of vegetation
growing in or near streams. Evapotranspiration by these
plants concentrate salts in the soils and contribute to the sal inity
problems of the basin, so reduction of such growth would enhance
water quality. A summary of the phreatophyte control program is
presented in Exhibit 15.
f. Programs to supply water of the best available qual ity for domestic
needs in exchange for treated sewage effluents for needs with
Jesser quality requirements are being worked out and tested. Other
water exchanges have been worked out between areas of need and surplus,
and more are needed. Examples are presented in Exhibit 16.
g. One Arizona city, Buckeye, has been a pioneer in providing desalinized
water for domestic use. An expensive electrodialysis process
was put in operation in 1962 to remove excessive salts from the
only water available to the city, making Buckeye the first town in
the U. S. A. to have its entire water supply treated by a demineralization
plant. This was a local community program, and no Federal or
State funds were involved in this project. A report on this project
is presented in the Appendix as Exhibit 17.
It should be pointed out that all of the currently available methods
of desalinization separates the influent water into two streams, one
relatively pure, and one very salty. Disposal of the salty brine
is a very great problem for an area isolated from the oceans where
most of the desalinization programs are promoted and tested.
h. The Arizona Water and Pollution Control Association meets annually
( the 39th annual meeting was held in 1966) to hear and discuss
- 11-
papers presented by both local and out- of- state people involved
in water supply and disposal problems. Educational programs are
sponsored by the Association along with other programs designed
to upgrade the quality of Arizona water. The Association is
affiliated with the Water Pollution Control Federation and the
American Water Works Association. A report of the Association
is included in the Appendix as Exhibit 18.
i. The Soil Conservation Districts of Arizona, both individually and
through their Association, have been actively engaged in projects
aimed at soil and water conservation and water quality improvement.
A summary report of the Association is presented as Exhibit 19 in
the Append ix.
j. River channel ization projects in the lower Colorado River below
Hoover Dam have been in progress for several years by the Bureau
of Reclamation to reduce consumptive losses, erosion and quality
degradation. This work is generally opposed by fish and wildlife
interests alleging it destroys natural habitat areas. Stabilized
river flow and storage impoundments made possible by dam construction
have, however, enhanced some fish and wildlife areas.
The following natural resources of Arizona, although presently utilized effectively
through good management practices, shall be protected by Arizona's water
quality control policy, and the tabulation is not intended to designate the
order of importance:
a•... A. 9! JE~ L~.~ re._- Arizona1s principal crops ( alfalfa, citrus~ cotton,
grains, and vegetables) are grown on 1,160,000 acres scattered
around the state, with some additional acreage for minor crops.
Almost all of this acreage is dependent on irrigation, and over
300,000 acres in addition to that stated above are out of production
due to water shortage. Growing conditions, and particularly
climatic conditions, are well adapted to crop production
under irrigation on a year- round basis, and many high value crops
such as cotton, winter vegetables and citrus fruits are produced
in addition to staple crops and feeds. The gross value of Arizona
crops was $ 344,400,000 in 1965. The continued production of these
crops is dependent upon our total water resources in Arizona, considering
both quantity and quality. The quantity of flow must not
be unnecessarily reduced by unrealistic quality considerations.
Statistics on various phases of agriculture are shown in Exhibit
3 in the Appendix.
b. _ M. rban Dey~ lopmen~.- Urban development of Arizona has been growing
rapidly, and this growth has demanded increased recognition of the
need for a dependable supply of good quality water. Although the
growth has been highest in the Phoenix and Tucson areas, there has
also been considerable growth in cities adjacent to the Colorado
River. An inventory of cities along the Colorado River with pertinent
water supply and disposal data is shown on Exhibit 4 in the
Appendix. The growth of Urban area has accompanied increased
activity in tourism ( due to climate, recreational faci) ities and
- 12-
natural attractions), manufacturing and service industries for
all state activities including but not limited to agriculture,
construction and mining. Hanufacturing statistics are shown in
Exhibit 5.
c•. Grazing and... !: l" yesto~.£ eed!.! l9 ...:- This industry is extensive in
Arizona, including the area along the Colorado River. The gross
value of livestock and products was $ 237,900,000 in 1965. Livestock
production requires water and also produces waste which must
be controlJed~ Statistics are included in the Agricultural Exhibit
3 in the Appendix~
d. Mining Industry - There are only limited minIng operations along the
- Colorado - River-;- but mining is a major factor in the economy of Arizona
and this industry requires huge quantities of water. Reuse of water
in all phases of mining has been practiced for many years, and pollution
of streams has not been a major problem. The minor problems are
being corrected, and data is given in the Implementation Section.
The gross value of mineral production was $ 580,170,000 in 1965. The
principal metals were copper, gold, silver, lead and zinc, but substantial
quantities of sand, gravel, molybdenum, stone, uranium,
lime, pumice and other miscellaneous minerals were produced. Copper
produced about 86% of the total value. Statistics are shown in
Exhibit 6 in the Appendix.
e. __ Eis! Lan~ L~ ildlif~- Although much of Arizona is arid or semi- arid,
the State is blessed with fish and wildlife resources. Protection
of this important natural resource is vital in the development of
the Basin's water resources. Over 3,400,000 man- days of fishing
and hunting were enjoyed by Arizona sportsmen during 1965. Additional
man- days of hunting and fishing were enjoyed on the Colorado
River by license holders of adjacent states. The Colorado River
provides excellent feeding and resting areas for migratory waterfowl,
particularly in those portions of the river where oxbows and
sandbars. exist. Additional value is created by shoreline vegetation
which provides habitat for numerous species of mammals and birds.
Both the State and Federal Government have responsibilities under
existing law to preserve and develop the fish and wildlife resources
of the Colorado River, and cooperation among the states is vital and
necessary. The Federal Government by virtue of existing treaties
with Great Britain and Mexico, is responsible for management of the
nation's migratory bird resource. This responsibility is implemented
along the Colorado River by the Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife
of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Both National and State
Wildlife Refuges have been established to preserve water fowl wintering
The natural habitat has been constantly changing since the area was
settled by man. A significant portion of the habitat no longer exists
due to river control and land development, and the wildlife has
- 13-
decreased accordingly in species and numbers. Channelization and
controlled flows have eliminated many of the productive backwaters)
bypasses, and oxbows that serve as spawning and nursery areas for
warm water fishes, and have reduced angling potential for these
In contrast, the vast reservoir storage system created by the construction
work of the Bureau of Reclamation has virtually eliminated
flood flows, reduced turbidity, and lowered summer water temperatures
so that extensive reaches of the Colorado River are now more suitable
for trout. Fish are supplied by a National Trout Hatchery at Willow
Beach and by the three State Game and Fish Departments involved in
the Arizona reach of the Colorado River.
f. Recreational Use: In addition to the natural recreational resources
in Arizona;-- iheC- ontrolled river flows resulting from the operation
of dams and related water projects have created stable recreational
resources in the Colorado River. For the most part, this recreational
potential still remains to be developed. Stable water impoundments
behind the dams attract fisherman, boaters, water skiers, campers
and persons interested in being near the attractive water during the
pleasant fall, winter, and spring seasons, Recreation is a year- round
activity, however.
Public recreation is permitted on substantial portions of the accessible
land along the Colorado River from the Utah- Arizona border to the
Mexican border. There are numerous publ ic forests, parks, marinas
and other points of interest not only to residents of the adjacent
areas, but also to national and international visitors. The major
facilities are listed in Exhibit 7 in the Appendix.
It is difficult to determine the overall recreational use of the
Colorado River because of the variety of developments spread out
over the 745 mile reach of the river in Arizona. The recreationists
who come on peak weekends for special events in some sections jam
commercial and public facil ities and overflow onto every available
piece of land along the river. Somewhat uncontrolled use has occurred
on other reaches of the river and adjacent lands. Individuals
and commercial interests have moved onto the Federal lands, and have
built structures varying from shacks to well- established motels,
trailer parks, fishing camps, and resort developments.
Recreational use of the river has created some serious pollution problems
because of the lack of adequate sanitation facilities~ Adequate
facilities will have to be provided, and the recreationists themselves
are going to have to cooperate in making the river areas safe and
esthetically enjoyable.
Recreational use of the Colorado River area will expand along with
the population growth in the contributing metropolitan areas and as
the physical features are developed a The major recreation objective
will be reached if the quantity and quality of water are maintained,
- 14-
and the esthetic values of the area are preserved. Control measures
are discussed in Implementation Section.
Forest Products Industry: The four mill ion acres of commercial forest
- land, out of the" totaTc)¥""" 21 mill ion forested acres in the state, are
largely situated in the northern, higher altitude areas. Managed
for multiple use the commercial forest area provides not only timber,
but has important values for water production, recreation, livestock,
forage, and wildlife. Arizona1s forest lands playa big role in
providing water to the consumer. Much of the surface water consumed
annually originates within the state as run- off from the relatively
high water- yielding forest.
The forest industry in Arizona annually harvests about 66 million
cubic feet of sawtimber and produces in excess of 300 million board
feet of lumber. The pulp and paper segment annually uses 100,000
cords of pulpwood and chips from sawmill residual equivalent to an
additional 150,000 cords. It produces about 150,000 tons of newsprint
and kraft linerboard annually. The paper industry requires a
significant quantity of good quality water.
" 2- 9 Water Quali~ Qnsiderations;.. THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY FACTORS OF COLORADO
PARAMETERS. Typical main stem flows, major diversions and return flows are
shown along with pertinent salinity data on Plate 3 for reference. The Colorado
Basin States Conferees, in drafting the Guidelines for Formulating Water Quality
Standards for the Interstate Waters of the Colorado River System*, recognized
.' that water quality standards could drastically restrict present and future uses
of the Colorado River water under existing compacts. The following data on the
quality of water in the Arizona Reach of the Colorado River is presented to
provide the basis for stream standards listed in Section 4 of this Water Quality
Control Policy for the Colorado River in Arizona:
a. Qual ity of Water ReachiniLAri.?; Qna;." Historically, the water reaching
-- Arizo" na-" lO--" the ColoradoRiver at Lees Ferry has been high in both
salt and silt burden. Other pollutants have been negligible. The
salinity has been steadily increasing due to both increased use in
the Upper Basin and to depletions by trans- mountain diversion of the
best quality water near the headwaters of the Colorado River. The
quality of the water at Lees Ferry has been monitored diligently by
the USGS, and excellent published records for the 1941- 1964 period
are available for comparison with other stations on the Colorado River.
The Total Dissolved Solids ( or TDS) in mill igrams per liter ( mg/ l)
is probably the best single parameter to judge the quality of the water.
Examination of the record indicates/ a wide variation in daily, weekly,
monthly and yearly figures for TDS, and any water quality standards
proposed will have to recognize this feature. In general, the TDS is
low at high water flows and high at low water flows. This variation
* See Exhibit 20 in the Appendix
- 15-
___ U~ a_ h _
Paria River, 15,090 AF
TDS 1173 Av
Bright Angel Creek, 20,460 AF, TDS 19
Change, Storage Zero
Little Colo. River I 7 800 AF
Main Stem 15 250 000 AF
Grand Canyon, TDS 531 Av.
Stem 8 30 000 AF TDS 72
Bill Williams River, 18,380 AF
Future Central Arizona Project
So. Nevada
-< Metropolitan Water Dist., 1,039,377
," Colo. R. Indian Res., 455,400 AF) a:
.-<.. r-=- P.:;;; al=.; o;;....,.:; V..:: e:=., r,=. de.:;:....:: I:;.: r;...:. r;..•.:.....; D::; l:;.: s · :;.: t:..;•:'... z.,-.::...; 94:::,; 8::.. l,~ 1;.;::; 0..::;, 0.....; A:.;,: F=---_'+- I >- c..:. R~ I.:.. R~ -? 77JOO AF _
... falCLV~ rde. Irt:. Dist. u ... 57. Q., 600,.! F__
, i
Gila River 0 AF
_ Calif.=. B:, etur..£ s. z.. 2J," 28LAL _
TDS- No change ta...... 3, Q.. oQ qalif.
Mexico Proj ects
~ Ari~. 1ietur~,... J2b~ 7~ F.. JMea~.:)_
T TDS No change to 5000
ain Stem 1 000 AF
diagram of the Colorado River main stem flow with major tributaries,
and return flows. The inflow- outflow figures do not balance because
zeable unmeasured surface and sub- surface return flows to the river.
is discussed under sources of salinityo Variations in TDS at Lees
Ferry are shown on Exhibit 8 in the Appendix.
Further development of the Upper Basin and increased use of the water
upstream is expected to further degrade the water as far as TDS is
concerned. In addition, further control of the flow of the river
upstream will cause variation of the quality of the water. As an
example, the effect of the closing of the gates at Glen Canyon Dam
is seen in the TDS record for Lees Ferry in Exhibit 8. A partial
explanation is shown in IDS variations in Lake Powell, Exhibit 9,
Future storage in upstream reservoirs will ultimately decrease the
flow in the Colorado River without appreciably changing the total
salt burden, so this will increase the TDS. The present predictions
are that the present TDS content will increase by 22 to 43% by 1990
( 7)( 15). Other authorities prognosticate a somewhat lesser increase
in TDS accompanied by a deterioration in sodium and chloride content
( 16). These estimates are not keyed to the year 1990 and hence a
direct comparison is difficult.
b. ._~~! lty.. E. f~ ate!:.. Rel~~ sed _!. rom~~~.._ Mead: The water record for water
released at Hoover Dam shows higher average TDS for water than that
at Lees Ferry, but with much less fluctuation in quality because of
the storage in Lake Mead. The TDS content appears to be gradually
The higher TDS can be attributed mainly to the increased TDS at Lees
Ferry and natural sources of sal inity between Lees Ferry and Lake
Mead since there is negligible use of the Colorado River water in
this reach. Some of these natural sources of salinity were discussed
in Sections 2- 2, 2- 3 and 2- 5, with further data in Exhibit 1 in the
Appendixo Control of these natural sources of salinity should be investigated
as a means of enhancing water quality, not only in this
reach, but in the Upper Basin. Plans are discussed in Implementation
Sect ion.
Evaporation from the surface in the main stream and reservoirs is a
contributing factor to the increased TDS. For example, the record
shows that 907,200 acre- feet evaporated from Lake Mead in Water Year
1963, leaving behind approximately 800,000 tons of salt. Some of
this salt is bel ieved to have been precipitated out ( 7), but much of
it undoubtedly contributes to downstream TDS. TDS comparisons at
various points in the river are shown on Exhibit 10 in the Appendix.
Future river salinity like future streamflow can be predicted only
from statistical records of past salinity and from knowledge of the
changes in the river caused by impoundment and diminution of flow due
to consumptive use. The most recent predictions on future salinity
vary somewhat, but all indicate that progressive deterioration will
occur. The Department of Interior study ( 7) and the Hill study ( 15)
represent the most probable conditions. Hill predicts that the TDS
- 16-
load by the year 1990 will increase to 735 mg/ I at Lees Ferry and
to 926 mg/ l at Lake Havasu, compared to the Department of Interior
figures of 663 mg/ I and 865 mg/ l at these same stations. These
figures represent increases of 22 to 43% by 1990, and assume that
current practices are not changed, a water augmentation program will
not be implemented, future Upper Basin developments and trans- mountain
diversions will be made, and that natural sources of salinity will
not be controlled.
c. ... Qu~ litY_~ LWat~ r __~~-.. f.~!: ker Dam-=.. There is little TDS change in the
quality of water between Hoover and Parker Dams. Increased population
in this area, and increased recreational use could degrade the present
quality, especially bacteriologically. Increased control of sanitary
waste disposal from boats and recreational areas will be necessary.
d.. _ Qua !_!!: L~ f ._~ ateL._~ L!! fl.~~. f- L~ J DS! TIl... The TDS of the water reach ing
Imperial Dam shows a steady increase. A substantial part of this
increase is due to agricultural drainage from the Colorado River
Indian Reservation, the Palo Verde Valley, and probably some from the
Cibola Valley. Reduced flow in the river due to consumptive use and
diversions out of the basin has substantially reduced the assimilative
and dilution capacity of the stream. A part of the increased TOS can
be traced to evaporation from the water surface and phreatophyte
growth along the river. The TDS record is shown on Exhibit 10 in the
Append ix.
There is apparently little bacteriological deterioration in this section
of the river, but new habitation along the river could become a
source of pollution Q
e•.._ Qua.!. l.~ y_ ot.~~ t~. r-_~_~_ t1Qr~ Jo~._ J) al! l"'; .._ The flow of the Colorado River has
been reduced to a minimum at this point, and except for occasional
storm flows, only enough flow is maintained to supply the Mexican
Treaty requirements. The TOS fluctuates somewhat because of change
of demand as compared with volumes of return flows. This problem is
of International concern, and some reI ief has been afforded by the
construction of the Wellton- Mohawk Drain Extension shown on Plate 2.
The final solution of this problem is of total Basin concern, and the
entire burden should not be placed on the local area or on one State
of the Basin.
The City of Yuma is pr¢ sently discharging untreated sewage to the
river above Morelos Dam, and measures are being taken by the State
Department of Hea 1th and the City of Yuma to e 1im i nate th i s poll ut ion
at the earliest possible date.
- 17-
3- 1 ~~ l:~ t; All of the surface waters of Arizona are subject to either the
appropriative rights doctrine or to water use contracts with the Secretary of
the Interior. There are no Riparian water rights in Arizona. Some of Arizona! s
decreed entitlement to main stem waters of the Colorado River is not now diverted
and is being used by other states until additional Arizona facilities are authorized
and built. The following beneficial water uses are required of waters in
the entire reach of the Colorado River in Arizona, and the tabulation is not intended
to designate order of importance or rights to such useo
3- 2 Agricultural:
( a) Waters diverted at Headgate Rock Dam are used on farmlands in the
Colorado River Indian Reservation.
( b) Waters diverted at Imperial Dam are used on farmlands in the Yuma
Valley, the Wellton- Mohawk Valley, the North and South Gila Valleys
and on the Yuma Mesa.
( c) Waters pumped from the Colorado River are used on farmlands in the
Ci bo Ia Vall ey.
( d) Waters of the Colorado River and its irrigation diversion systems
are used for stockwatering.
( e) Isolated diversions for agricultural use are made along the entire
Colorado River reach.
( f) Water to be diverted at Parker Dam through the proposed Central
Arizona project Aqueduct will be used on existing farmlands in
Central Arizona.
3- 3 Raw Domestic Water:
( a)
( b)
( c)
( d)
( e)
Water diverted at Imperial Dam is utilized for domestic purposes by
Yuma area communities and rural inhabitants as their only source.
Water diverted at Glen Canyon Dam is utilized for domestic purposes
by the City of Page.
Various cities, communities and Indian Reservations along the entire
reach of the Colorado River obtain their domestic water supply directly
from the river or from wells, some of which may be influenced
by Colorado River water.
Water to be diverted at Parker Dam through the proposed Central
Arizona Project Aqueduct will be used for domestic purposes in many
cities and communities of Central Arizona.
Isolated establishments along the river, ranging in size from major
trailer courts to individual cabins, obtain water from welts adjacent
to the Colorado River~ and from the river itself.
3- 4 Industrial: _~ M'_,.,..__,. ._--,._".•• _
( a) Water diverted at Imperial Dam is used by various industries in the
Yuma area Q
( b) Colorado River water is used for hydroelectric power generation.
( c) Colorado River water is used or will be used for steam- power generation.
- 18-
( d) Water to be diverted at Parker Dam through the proposed Central
Arizona Project Aqueduct will be used for various industrial purposes
in Central Arizona~
3- 5 Propagation of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources: :.----"..--------------...--.-.------.---.--~--------~--.- · - · -, "'_~ c · ---_ · _. · __.. _
( a) The entire Colorado River contains aquatic and wildlife resources e
Such resources include production of organisms, both plant and
animal, that contribute to the food chain supporting a fish population,
and populations of other animal life including water fowl and
shore bt rds"
The reach between Imperial and Laguna Dams is used primarily as a
silt depository for the desilting works at Imperial Dam and for
operational control o Measures for the protection of aquatic and
wildlife resources in this section will be practiced to the fullest
extent possible consistent with the normal operation of the facility
as a desiiting works~ Prior to the construction of the Imperial
Dam and desilting works, most of the silt load of the Colorado River
flowed through the canal system onto the irrigated fields, and silt
control cost about one million dollars annually. Although the amount
of silt decreased with the completion of Hoover Dam, channel degradation,
bank ~ rosion and storm runoff still contribute a heavy
silt load at Imperial Dam ( about 805,000 tons annually) .. The bulk
of this silt is removed continuously in six classifier type basins
on the California side and by a single basin with periodic sluicing
of silt on the Arizona side of the river.
This operation results in a varying but heavy silt deposition in the
area between the dams, and a rapidly varying water depth. The operation
is absOlutely essential in maIntaIning a low silt content water
delIvery into the canal systems of both Arizona and California.
( b) Water is used in the operation of the National Wildlife Service refuges,
the Havasu Lake and Imperial Wildlife Refuges. This water use
is covered by the Arizona vS o Cal ifornia Suprem~ Court Decree" Consideration
is being given to deducation of a portion of the Lower
Palo Verde- CIbola Valley region to waterfowl management purposes, to
provide enough buffer lands to protect the waterfowl and to provIde
for future related recreatIonal needs.
( c) Water is used at Mittry Lake, an Arizona State waterfowl area in the
downstream area from Imperial Dam. A State Wildlife Area is being
farmed for waterfowl habitat preservation and feed in the CIbola
-- R_ ecreat iona 1: .._.__.._----~._._-
( a) This includes fishing, boating, swimmIng, water skiing, huntIng, and
esthetic enjoyment. Applicable for the entIre reach of the Colorado
RIver in Arizona.
Future Uses of Surface Water: Future consumptive uses of surface water,
.. 19-
other than those specifically mentioned as allocated, are of necessity restricted
until a major water augmentation program is realized. It is probable
that some uses wi II have to be replaced by a higher priority use under due
process of law with full recognition of legal water rights.
3- 8 Classification of Waters According to Use: It is difficult to isolate
certain sections of the Colorado River for a special purpose because of the
extensive and varied use.
water for domestic purposes is of prime importance throughout the Arizona Reach
of the Colorado River. Although the application of conventional water treatment
including flocculation, coagulation, fi ltration and disinfection to Colorado
River water will generally not provide a water meeting the recommended drinking
water standards of the U. S. Public Health Service, such treatment does provide a
water meeting the mandatory requirements of the drinking water standards. Since
a better alternate source of supply is usually not readi ly avai lable, Colorado
River water is used as a source of raw domestic water.
In view of the fact that much of the salinity of the Colorado River water is due
to natural origin, and since it is difficult to control this source, it may be
necessary in the future to seek alternate supplies of raw domestic water or provide
desalinization facilities for the extreme southern portion of the Colorado
River Basin. Raw domestic water requires a very minor fraction of the water
reaching Imperial Dam, and expensive treatment of this small fraction of the flow
might offer the most practical and economic solution to the salinity problem,
even though entire basin subsidy might be required to protect the rights of
domestic users in this area. Other beneficial users of water in the area are
not affected by the salinity as are the domestic users.
Restrictions on use of portions of the Colorado River for any purpose should be
made only after avai lable alternates are proved impracticable.
3- 9__.~ ® a~ ce! flen!__~ LW~~~~_._ 9...~ l!! Y_ 5~. f. __~~~ __ go lora~~_--'~ lY~ L_~ ate ':~_ I n view 0 f the
present quality of Colorado River water and the prospect of further degradation
by upstream development, it is imperative that a major water augmentation program
be instituted for the Colorado River System. Since this program would
entai I interstate cooperation and Federal sponsorship, the efforts of other
appropriate State and Federal agencies are necessary to effectuate it.
( a) To provide the highest quality water as practical for all beneficial
( b) To protect the public health.
( c) To preclude pollution of the Colorado River and its tributaries.
4- 2 Bacteriological:
( a) The Colorado River shall remain bacteriologically safe for all beneficial
uses. Specifically, the arithmetic average of at least five
consecutive samples in a 30 day period shall not exceed 5000 coliforms
per 100 ml or 20 fecal streptococci per 100 mlo
4- 3 _ i~' i~ l_~~ L~~...~~! h~_ ti c_._ Q.~ j e~.!_~~~_~_~
( a) The water shall be free from floating debris, oil, grease, scum,
or other carried or floating materials from other than natural
sources. Natural sources of these materials will be controlled
to the most practical extent.
( b) The streams shall be free from bottom deposits or sludge attributable
to domestic or industrial waste or other controllable sources.
( c) The water shall be free from tastes or odors attributable to domestic
or industrial waste or other controllable sources.
( d) The water shall be free from materials attributable to domestic or
industrial waste or other controllable sources that cause detectable
off- flavor in the flesh of fish.
( e) The turbidity or color of the water will be maintained at the lowest
practical value possible.
( f) Temperature changes in the water will be held to the lowest practical
value commensurate with all beneficial uses of the stream.
4- 4 Chemical Characteristics: The following chemical characteristics shall
app Iy- t_~~ co 1oradO~:~ T'. Ie r- w~ fe ~.! .------.--------_.----------------.----..-,---- ---.-----.-.-..----
( a) . Co. ns!_!. tu~! 1ts contr ibu~-'_ ng_~~_ sa lJ.! L!_ ty_~!!.~... to l! lc!:~ a~~_!! l_ sodi.~ l!!.
p_ c:.!:..~ e"!. tage•.
Degradation of water quality will result from increased intensity
of beneficial usage of water within the Colorado River System.
Minimization of this degradation without unreasonably restricting
any beneficial use is mandatory. The setting of numerical standards
on Total Dissolved Solids ( TOS), chlorides, sulfates and sodium,
which in effect would be allocating the dilution capacity of the
stream, could be construed as re- allocating water rights and appropriations
under existing compacts and treaties. Therefore, until
this issue is resolved, no numerical values for these items will be
established, but all identifiable sources of salinity increase in
Colorado River water will be managed and controlled to the degree
reasonably practicable with available technology. This subject is
covered in the implementation section •
. · ... 2.1-
( d)
( b) ..! iea~ metal sand associated chemical s:_
The general objective Is the mInimization of toxicants in the river.
Wastes, from municipal, industrial, or other controllable sources,
containing heavy metals or associated chemicals shall not be discharged
into the Colorado River in amounts such that their cumulative
effects may interfere with any beneficial use. In all cases, the concentration
of these heavy metals and assocIated chemicals shall be
the minimum concentrationswhich are physIcally and economically feasible
to achieve, regardless of the dilution capacity of the stream
at the point of discharge.
Specific limits for arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, cyanide p lead,
selenium, slIver, copper and zinc will be placed at various points on
the Colorado River in keeping wIth the Colorado Basin Interstate
Guidelines ( Appendix 20) when the extent of the problem has been documented
and interstate agreement on each state's equitable loading
has been made. This task is expected to be complete In one to three
Biocide concentrations in Colorado River water shall be kept below
levels which are deleterious to human, animal, plant or aquatic 1ife,
or In amounts sufficient to interfere with any beneficial use of the
_~~~ oac~_~~! ty_.~._..
Radioactive materials attributable to municipal, Industrial or other
controllable sources shall be minimum concentrations which are physically
and economically feasible to achieve. The cumulative effects
of these materials will be recognized In discharge requirementso In
no case shall such materials exceed the limits established in the
1962 Pub) ic Health Service Drinking Water Standards or 1/ 10 of the
168- hr. values for other radioactive substances specified in National
Bureau of Standards Handbook 690
( e) ~~~ so.! y~~ O~' t~ e~.;.._....
The dissolved oxygen content in Colorado River water shall at all
tImes be maintained above 6 mg/ l*.
* In-- th~'- r~ ach- b-; tw~ en- r~ p; riaT-- Damand laguna- Dam- achr; v~ m~ ntof" the obT; ctTv~
for dissolved oxygen shall remain subject to river control operations of the
Bureau of Reclamation.
- 22-
The pH of Colorado River water shall remain within the 1imits of 6~ 5
and 8.6 at all times.
( 9) Other Chemical Characteristics:
The general objective is the minimization of miscellaneous chemicals
that may Interfere with any beneficial use of the water. These
include but are not limited to methylene blue anionic surfactants,
fluoride. boron, nitrate, phosphate, ammonia and phenols.
None of these substances now appear to be a major problem in Colorado
River water, and specific I imits will not be establ ished for stream
standards until interstate and possibly international agreement is
achieved on apportioned loadings of these chemicals and the present
condition is fully documented ..
jCl General: Although the water quality indicators under consideration are numerous,
they may effectively be grouped in the consideration of contributory sources
and of achievement measures o In the selection of measures to achieve a particular
quality objective, consideration must be given to the economic and social effects
which may result therefrom. In the discussions below, the indicators are grouped
into the categories contained under the Water Quality Objectives ( Section 4- 0).
i::. LBact~!.. LQ~ gical£_ The objective is that Colorado River waters shall remain
bacteriologically safe for all beneficial uses. This objective is oriented particularly
towards protection of persons engaged in water- contact sports, since
raw domestic water withdrawn from the Colorado River receives treatment before
livery to individual users. The contributory sources of pathogens are disposals
of sanitary wastes from communities, from private establishments, and from
Although the most effective measure against water carriage of pathogenic organisms
is the complete elimination of sewage discharges to the river, the necessity
for water conservation in the Southwest dictates that beneficial reuse of sewage
effluents should be encouraged. In addition, the increased recreational use of
the entire area could contribute human pathogens to offset the effect of the
elimination of properly treated effluents. This objective will be met by establishment
of effluent discharge requirements on sanitary wastes from private and
community sewage systems, organic processing plants, and recreational faci lities,
including boats. Secondary treatment of sewage is mandatory before discharge to
any river or dry wash, and tertiary treatment is required in certain cases. There
are no known combined sanitary sewers and storm drains in Arizona, and such facilities
wi 11 not be allowed. Specific problems, regulations, and time schedules
for compliance are given in the Implementation Section.
Decaying vegetable matter can cause some esthetic problems, and every effort
should be made to reduce the amount of nutrients causing excess vegetation in
the ri ver.
There are no known slaughter houses on the Colorado River that dispose of meat
trimmings, etc. that could increase the BOD loadings on the river.
Livestock feeding operations are conducted at several locations along the Colorado
River. In order to prevent pollution of Colorado River water by livestock,
the folloWing measures wi 11 be enforced:
a. Livestock, other than those which are grazing or pasturing, shall
not enter or inhabit waters in the Colorado River drainage system.
b. Livestock which are corralled in the proximate area of the Colorado
River and its tributaries shall be effectively excluded from
entry into the waters.
c. Adequate permanent type measures shall be taken to assure that sewage
from livestock other than from grazing or pasturing, shall not
enter the Colorado and its tributaries without approved treatment~
Industrial wastes, cooling water for power plants
rver control operations might reasonably be expected to
cause temperature rise in Colorado River waters. River control
is a necessary item to which temperature control must be subordinated.
Since the number of industrial and power plants along
the river are few p these should be considered on an individual
basis for necessary control by discharge requirements.
b. __ Floating Debri s, Oi I, Grease, Scum, etc: These indicators are
essent i aITyabserlt- Tn- theArTzona- reach- of the Co lor ado River
due to the scarcity of waste disposals to the river. Future
problems wi 11 be prevented by discharge requirements.
c. M. LL1Qad;. The si It load of the Colorado River has always been
a problem, but river control has been constantly reducing this
parameter. Tota 1 contro 1 of s i I t wi 11 never be achi eved due to
esthetic desires with regard to the " wi ld river" concept and to
general watershed conditions. Si It loadings due to man- made
facilities wi 11 be subject to abatement.
~~~~~~:_"~;~_~~~_~~~~~~~~.~~~_"_ Discharges from Upper Basin developments may in
tons of these chemicals in Colorado River waters enterIn
addition, further development in adjacent states could
e the same problem. Should such occur or threaten, corrective measures would
initially sought through cooperative efforts with the Basin States. Any tabuions
or omissions of limiting concentrations contained in Section 4 are not to
construed as the Counci lIS agreement to accept loading of these chemicals into
Colorado River from sources either inside or outside of Arizona.
( a) __ Sall!:! Lti- End"_~ odi_ um Percentage:. Measures to achI eve the desi red
objective of minimizing degradation of Colorado River water through
salinity increase are as follows:
1. Natural sources of salinity in the Arizona Reach of the
Colorado River: Some of the natural sources of salinity
have been enumerated in Sections 2- 2, 2- 3 and 2- 4" The
Bureau of Reclamation is currently studying the Blue
Springs source in the Little Colorado River to determine
the best possible means of control. A report and recommendations
should be available within one year.
Interstate cooperation wi 11 be necessary to evaluate and
reduce the salinity of waters reaching the Colorado River
from adjacent states as covered previously. The soils of
the Colorado River Basin closely resemble the geological
formations of their origin, namely igneous, sedimentary
and metamorphic. The silts removed by constant erosion
of the upper areas have been deposited in the Lower Basin
to form the great delta of the Colorado River. These
si Its contain large quantities of salts such as sodium,
calcium and magnesium combined with chlorides, carbonate,
bicarbonate and sulfates. Thus the soi Is of the Colorado
River Basin are the basic source of the salinity in the
water. Only limited areas have been leached sufficiently
to remove these soluble salts, and most lands of the Basin
must be leached befose they wi 11 become productive.
- 25-
,: <
) ,
Efforts to control the natural sources of salinity between
Lees Ferry and Lake Mead may meet with opposition from certain
conservation groups who have been attacking further
development of the Colorado River in this area. Everyeffort
must be made to reconcile the many differences of
opinion on river development.
Gypsum reefs are quite common in the Lake Mead area, and
there is no feasible method of isolating these areas. Fortunately,
they do not appear to contribute a large amount
of total salt as evidenced by U. S. B. R. reports on Lake Mead
and the Colorado River ( 7). The answer could be found in
deposition of silts and/ or precipitation of calcium carbonate
as a crust over the gypsum beds.
2._ fuI! Jc:: yJ,!-':![~ L~~,':!!: c::~~__ 2f__~ ali -!! l_~ i, 8n operational sa I t ba 1-
ance must be established in all agricultural operations. In
general, all of the salt entering an agricultural project
must be removed from the area if a sustained operation is to
be possible. Failure to resolve this problem has apparently
destroyed great civilizations in the past, including the
Hohokam Indian civilization in the Salt River Valley of Arizona
a few hundred years ago. Essentially, about two- thirds
of the water applied to crops is removed by transpiration
from the plants, use by the plants, and by evaporation from
the soil itself, concentrating all the salts originally
present in the remaining one- third of the water. This water
must be drained away to prevent salt damage to future crops.
Thus, agricultural drainage water wi 11 have about three times
the concentration of dissolved salts or TOS present in the
applied water. The higher the TOS content of available water,
the greater the concentration effect will be. The high TOS
initially present in Colorado River water makes the drainage
water in the Lower Basin quite saline.
The TDS concentration of drainage water resulting from the
leaching of new lands can be higher than the concentration
resulting from a salt balance operation. The effect, however,
diminishes rapidly.
The programs outlined in Section 2- 8 ( canal lining, pipe installation,
land levelling, phreatophyte removal, watershed
improvement etc.) are the currently acceptable methods of
water conservation which contribute to water quality enhancement.
These programs should be continued, and new, practical
processes for reducing the salinity of irrigation return
flows should be applied as they are developed.
Specific projects where improvement is necessary and applicable
are presented in the Implementation Section.
3. J-,} dustrl~__ so,:! rces_~ f.~ a1inL! Y~,. There are a few minor sources
of salinity in industrial operations along the Arizona reach
- 26-
of the Colorado River. Most of these can be held to a mInImum
by proper discharge requirements. Current problems are
discussed in the lmplementation Section.
4. _ Munt~ e~. souJ: f~~. f__.~. al i.!! JJ. Yl. Salts are added to water
used for domestic purposes. Domestic sewage generally has
a TOS increase of about 300 mg/ l over the supply water.
This increase can be attributed to a number of factors such
as but not limited to human waste, water softener operation,
washing clothes and dishes, garbage disposals, etc. The
most significant increa~ e is in sodium chloride.
Return flows from lawn and garden watering follows the pattern
set forth for agricultural drainage previously discussed.
Light industrial and commercial operations in cities usually
contribute salts to the municipal sewage or to the groundwater
eventually returning to the river. Although the individual
contribution may be small, the collective total
can become appreciable, and all sources should be evaluated
for effective control.
5•.. Itte t9..!~ L_~~ Li! lL~' i_£.!: Q.! ll.~.!._._ Jhe salts added by the natural
and beneficial use sources listed above combine with diminishing
flows due to consumptive use and diversions out of
the Colorado River Basin to create a serious salinity problem
for all of the users of Colorado River water downstream
of Lake Mead. The Bureau of Reclamation and Geological
Survey are cooperating in an electric analog study of the
diversions, use and returns for the area downstream of
Imperial Dam, but this study is far too limited in scope
and tends to convey the idea that the salinity problem is
the responsibi lity of this one area alone, whereas it is a
total Basin problem. This concept of a localized problem
as set forth in Minute 218 ( Exhibit 21) is totally unacceptable
to Arizona, and the temporary alleviation procedure
effective until November 16, 1970, must be replaced by a
more acceptable procedure which recognizes total Basin responsibi
lity. The Council wi 11 cooperate with the above
agencies in working out a satisfactory policy on salinity
contro 1.
A report on the study and suggestions on the problem solution
by the Bureau of Reclamation and the Geological Survey
is due on May 16~ 1970.
( aL_~ ea~ Me.!. al_~_. a~!~ ssoci~ te~ LC'lemJ.. f~..! s:_. The concentrations of these
chemicals in Colorado River water are historically very low. Wastes
containing these elements are widely scattered and can be controlled
by discharge requirements on the individual waste stream. Each discharge
requirement wi 11 be based on appropriate factors such as, but
not limited to the dilution capacity of the stream and beneficial uses
of the stream.
The setting of stream standards for any reach of the river at USPHS
drinking water limits could be interpreted by a discharger as meaning
that he could discharge these chemicals into the stream up to the
limit. In effect, then, standards could be unjustly used to descriminate
against downstream users because there is no dilution capacity
left. This problem of apportionment of di lution capacity of the
stream must be solved on an entire basin level before specific
limits can be placed on the main stem of the Colorado. This task is
expected to take one to three years.
Until specific limits are set, the policy of the Counci I through the
State Department of Health is to minimize any discharge of these chemicals
to the riverG Generally, industry is the source of disposals
containing these chemicals; and also generally~ these wastes are contained
in relatively small volumes of water which could be economically
disposable elsewhere~
Known or potential sources of these chemicals on the Colorado River
are listed in the Implementation Section with methods of control&
( c) Biocides: Biocides have been the subject of much discussion in the
' past-,- and probably will be discussed for many years. Prudent use of
biocides has enabled our agricultural industry to provide ample food
and fiber products for our high standard of living_ Esthetically, we
can have better gardens and a more healthful existence because of biocides.
Uncontrolled use of biocides is not beneficial, and should not
be allowed. Generally speaking, biocides are expensive, and overapplications
are seldom made. Discharges of wastes containing biocides
from manufacturing and tank cleaning operations must not be
More research and study of the cumulative effects of biocides on
humans and wildlife must be made, and appropriate safeguards applied
as standards for the Colorado River.
Types and effects of biocides are too numerous and varied for tabulation.
Further, the intricacies and variotions of technical analysis
for biocides presently defies the prescrlption of anyone or a few tests
for their detection or determination ( 4)~ Bio- assay tests can be used
to establish allowable limits for biocides.
Unreasonable application of biocides in ~ gricultural operations which
could result in biocide levels in Colorado River water which are deleterious
to human 1 animal, plant or aquatic life shall be s~ lbject to
abatement. Mere detection of a biocide in the water is not cause for
( d) Radioactivity: Radioactivity in Colorado River water is contained
- within- satIsfactory limits. There are no wastes containing radioactivity
being discharged into the Arizona reach. Future problems
wi 11 be controlled by discharge requirements.
- 28-
( e) Q. L~ solveQ.. Ox'{ g~!,!.!. The dissolved oxygen content in Colorado River
water is satisfactorily above the objective minimum of 6 mg/ l. The
maintenance of a satisfactory level of dissolved oxygen is obtained
as a corollary of the institution of the above listed measures to
ach ieve water qua 1i ty obj ect ives 0
( f) Ot! 1. § cfh~!!! lf~. L. fh~. r.~~ ter~ tic~~ The objectives I isted in Section 4- 4g
will normally be achieved by the measures 1isted above or by discharge
requirementso Boron reduction will be considered along with reduction
of salinity in agricultural return flows.
Phenols and organic chemical concentrations are not now a problem, and
there are no known discharges~ Any proposed discharges will be subject
to regulations commensurate with timely technology.
The major probl em
utants n ver s that the method
reduce the quantity of water available to downstream users, or may
~ n\ IO~' CO y affect the user downstream by a chemical or physical change in the
Factors such as the following should be considered in setting stream
" r: lnt1lards.
a. Hardness in domestic water is undesirable, and can be removed by
several processes e Ion exchange or precipitation methods can alter
the cation balance of the water to the extent that the change can
adversely change penetration rates of water in agricultural operations.
b. Disposal of sewage effluents outside of the river area can reduce the
total flow of the river and reduce the assimilative capacity of the
river downstream, denying the downstream user of his legal entitlement
to use of the water.
c. When waters containing considerable dissolved salts are being considered
for discharge to the river, total resource effects should
be determined, and the decision should not be made on the basis of
the concentration of the discharge alone o This concept is vital in
the conservation of total water supply in the streamo Unwarranted
depletions could deprive downstream users of valuable rights to water
d. In view of the fact that water disposed of on land in a basin could
return to the river underground in worse condition than when I~ isposed
of II, careful consideration of requirements for disposal on land must
be made. In effect, such disposal could be similar to reclamation of
new land for agricultural purposes as far as sal inity build up is concerned.
5: 6 Additional Measures to Enhance Water Quality:
-_._-_.-._--"._-------~_._.---- ..__.".-.-_._-_.._,._-"-.-------_._-._--_._'.,-----.-._----.
a. Water augmentation: The need of a major water augmentation program
- for theCoTorado- RTver System is immed iate.. Inst i tut ion of th I 5 important
program requires cooperative actions and representations
between local, state, interstate and federal agencies. The Council
... 29-
and the State Department of Health will do all that it can to expedite
the institution of such water augmentation program, to improve water
quality in the Colorado River.
b. _, lnves! Igatlol'!_~;. In view of the changing topography and increasing
intensity of multiple use of Colorado River waters, it is necessary
that periodic investigations be conducted in the river or on the
watershed to remain apprised of the most recent conditions which
may degrade water quality, and which may effect any particular
benef~ ial use of the river waters. The scope of such investigations~
wi 11 vary from cursory field inspections to technical studies
of water quality conditions. Where possible, the investigations
will be conducted under the direction of the Counci 1 by the State
Department of Health staff either alone or in cooperation with
other agencies. However, where $ pecialty is required, the ~ tete
Department of Health will either request or contract the necssary
Special emphasis wi 11 be placed on finding practical means of reduc-
~ ing the salinity of agricultural drainage water, since this beneficial
use requires that large quantities of water be returned to
the river in order to maintain a salt balanceD
c.. Coordination with Other Agencies: The Council and the State Department--
of Hea 1th-,- fnThe-- p- ursua- nce - o- f thei r water qua 1i ty cont ro 1
activities wi 11 at all times remain in advisement and consultation
with the several interested agencies, and will work cooperatively
with these agencies to produce the most effective water quality control
program along Arizona's reach of the Colorado River.
- 30-
Preservation and enhancement of water qual ity in Arizonals reach of
River is a primary function of the State Water Qual ity Control Council
Council's implementation plan is a comprehensive program of surveillance, conof
discharges to the Colorado River, enforcement, and special activities
ating to investigations, research, coordination with other agencies concerned
th water qual ity~ ontrol, and support of a water augmentation program for the
orado River. These activities will be elaborated on in the remainder of this
sect ion.
None of the provIsions of this Water Qual ity Control Pol icy, including specific
criteria, measures or methods of implementation shall be construed as an exemption
or a modification of the Rules and Regulations of the State Department of Health
governing waste treatment and/ or discharge requirements. The pol icy of the
Department will require the maximum practicable degree of treatment for all waste
sources under the jurisdiction of the Department and treatment methods shall comply
with the applicable rules and regulations.
6- 2 Surveillance: Surveillance is the continued observance of waters of the
State;- lncTudfng-' measurement of water quality indicators and evaluation of water
qual ity factors. It also includes the continuous review of monitoring data suppI
led by waste dischargers for compl iance with requirements prescribed by the
Council and the State Department of Health.
The surveillance program is designed to produce sufficient water qual ity data at
key stations for continued, effective appraisement of water qual ity conditions in
- the Colorado Rivero Advantage is taken of existing monitoring programs of other
agencies, with supplement as necessary. The Council will encourage the other
agencies to incorporate the supplement into their programs.
Sampl ing and analyses in the surveillance program shall be conducted in accordance
wIth the procedures contained in the latest edition of I/ Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater", or by other acceptable procedures.
At the present time the Geological Survey ( USGS) maintains water qual ity and stream
flow gaging stations at various points on both the main stem of the Colorado River
and major trrbutaries~ The Federal Water PollutIon Control Administration has
also established several water quality surveillance stations at key locations under
the Water Pollution Surveillance System ( WPSS)~ The Colorado River Basin Project
( CRBP) maintains a radium monitoring system, and plans additional sampl ing at exisiting
qual ity stations~ The WPSS and CRBP parameter coverage Is more comprehensive
than the USGS c Consol idation of these programs should be encouraged.
The existing or proposed surveillance network on the main stem and tributaries In
the Arizona reach consists of the following~
.. 31-
b. Disposals to the Colorado River - Monitoring data received on individual
disposals to the Colorado River will be reviewed and recorded 9
a. Local Agencies - Data submitted by local agencies, in addition to that
included in Table It will be reviewed and acted upon as may be appropriate.
P :: proposed
Si1 t, temp and/ or
gaging station
o ..
Page X
Lees Ferry X
Paria River 0
Little Colorado River 0 P
Grand Canyon X
Virgin River X P
Las Vegas Wash X P
Hoover Dam X X X
Davi s Dam X
Parker Dam X X p*
Imperial Dam X-{ c
Northerly Int" Bound. X* P
X = Chemical
Quality Station,
* Station is near this
Moni tori
c. Land Use Investigations" Periodic land use investigations will be
conducted along the entire Arizona Reach of the Colorado River to
determine any features of Arizona operations which may adversely af~
fect water qual ity.
proposed monitoring schedule for the Arizona Reach of the Colorado River is
for the various indicators at the basic stations in Table I. This
e is designed to take advantage of the data being compiled by the USGS,
and other agencies, and new stations mayor may not be necessary"
State Department of Health will initiate a program of sampling for bacterlogical
quality and other special conditions not covered by existing monitoring
nrnlnr;~ m~ o It is anticipated that the Department's monitoring schedule will not
rigid but rather will be aimed at identifying special conditions that may vary
th the season of the year and therefore require intensive monitoring rather than
y or monthly schedules. Other state agencies~ including the Game and Fish
rtment, will assist in the sampl ing aspects of this monitoring program.
d~ Records - Records of surveillance are to be maintained in the office
of the State Health Department, in a document titled IISurve i11ance
Record - Colorado Riverll
~ Waste Discharge Requirements: The State Board of Health of Arizona has the
authority- to prescrIb" ewaste- discharge requirements under ARS Section 36- 1855.
- 32-
Schedule will be worked
out for final documento
- 33-
TABLE I ( conte)
Schedule will be worked
out for final documento
- 34-
discharge requirements will be set in keeping with the stream standards set
the Council.
State Department of Health will propose additional rules and regulations for
ion by the State Board of Health. Such regulations have not been written at
is time due to a shortage of staff. Such regulations should be adopted within
ve months after these standards become effective~ The regulations may include,
be I imited to the following considerations:
I. Effluent standards as required to meet the stream standards and protect
the publ ic health.
2. Minimum sanitation facil ities for recreational areas such as marinas,
parks, and picnic areas.
3. Land use practices such as logging, highway construction, livestock
operations, solid waste disposal, etc.
4. Degradation due to consumptive and non- consumptive usage of water for
cool ing, ore leaching, conveyance, etc.
State Department of Health issues a permit for each discharge of waste to the
River. Disposal requirements in each permit are directed mainly towards
rol of pollution and nuisance, and maintenance of the water qualIty objectives.
Hnl~ p.~ rp. r, where appropriate, consideration will be given to possible enhancement of
I itYo Where considered necessary, the permit shall specIfy a monitoring
sCnledlJle, requiring that the discharger periodically obtain and report various
ical data concerning the disposals. A discharger may not modify an exisiting
disposal system or Increase the volume or strength of any wastes under an existing
permi to
A record, titled '\ laste Disposals- Colorado Riverll
, containing permit data for
waste disposals that may affect the Colorado River is to be maintained in the
office of the State Department of Health •
. § .: 4~ ene'=.~ L..~ nforcement!. Enforcement activities are directed mainly towards obtaining
compl iance with prescribed waste discharge requirementso Generally, enforcement
is initiated on staff level. Here attempt is made to obtain correction
by informal discussion of the problem. Where such informal procedures fail to
produce adequate correction~ the alleged violation will be considered by the State
Department of Health to determine whether the discharge is taking place contrary
to the prescribed requirementso
Upon finding affirmatively, the State Department of Health will cause a written
complaint to be served upon the alleged violator, specifying the regulation
violated, and shall order that corrective action be taken within a specified
reasonable time, affording opportunity for a fair hearing as prescribed by law.
Upon failure of the discharger to comply with the cease and desist order, the
State Department of Health will certify the facts to the Attorney General, whose
duty is to bring an action for an injunction against the alleged violator. Thereafter,
the State Department of Health will provide evidence as requested by the
Attorney General or the court.
- 35'"
Special Enforcement Actions: The following are specific areas that need exanation
regarding enforcement action in the immediate and foreseeable future:
a. The City of Yuma Is located near the Northerly International Boundary
with Mexico. It has a population of approximately 30,000~ Yuma does
not have a waste treatment facil ity at the present time. The City
has acquired title to the land on which a facility is to be built.
A consulting firm has been retained to prepare a feasibil ity report,
prepare construction drawings and inspect construction. The engineering
report is to be submitted by August 19670 It is anticipated
that a contract for construction of an adequate facll ity will be
awarded before July 1, 1968.
b. The City of Parker is located approximately fifteen miles downstream
from Parker Dam. Parker has a population of approximately 1600 people
and is unsewered~ The domestic wastes are currently disposed of by
individual septic tanks and there is little or no contribution of
wastes to the Colorado River. This community has retained a consulting
engineer to prepare plans and specifications for a waste collection
and treatment system. It is anticipated that this community will
be contributing treated effluent to the Colorado River within two
c. The area adjacent to the Colorado River between Lake Havasu City and
Davis Dam is currently undergoing extensive land development. Literally
thousands of lots have been subdivided and sold, or leased, to
the public in this area. The vast majority of these subdivisions are
to be served by individual septic tank systems. There is a lim/ ted
amount of building in the area at the present time since many buyers
of these lots are speculating on an increase in value or expect to
build a retirement home many years in the future. The number of summer
and/ or retirement homes is expected to increase at rather slow but
steady rate in the next few years e The potentially large number of
septic tank installations in this area are expected to present a pollution
and publ ic health problem in the future. A specific time
schedule for enforcement tn this area cannot be adopted at this time
since the problem is a potential one rather than a real problem. Construction
of community sewerage facil ities will be dependent on population
densities that will make such facil ities economically feasible.
There are currently two methods by which such areas may obtain community
sewerage systems when the need arises. The owners in a given
area may form an improvement district to finance the construction of
needed facil ities and turn over the facil ity to an existing authority
such as a city or util ity company upon its completion or they may form
a sanitary district which provides for construction and continuation
of operation.
d. There are several marinas and/ or parks located on Lake Mead and the
Colorado River. Sanitation facil ities in these areas have received
very little attention in the paste There have been reports that some
of these areas are contributing wastes to the Colorado River system
- 36-
due to lack of adequate facil ities. This Department intends to make
a comprehensive survey of these areas prior to July I, 1968. The
Department will then apply the provisions of the applicable regulations
to el iminate the problem prior to 1969.
e. There are many areas in Arizona that have sources of pollution but do
not fall under the direct jurisdiction of the Department" These include
areas under the control of the Department of Defense, the Bureau
of Reclamation, the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest Service, the
National Park Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, U. S G Public Health
Service, and the International Boundary and Water Commission. Some of
these areas have not always provided adequate facilities in the past
and a few such areas are still a problem" A particular areas of concern
is the stretch of the Colorado River' between Parker and Yuma. There
are numerous " squatters" on government land that use the Colorado River
as an ill icit source of water and as a receiving body for their untreated
or Inadequately treated wastes. Arizona is confident that
sources of pollution from areas under the control of the federal government
will be rigidly controlled to ensure compl lance with the requirements
of the Department of Health q
6-~. J.~~ § _~ to r:.' i_~ t..!'. 2. LL!!!.. i£! 1~. L ...~ 0l: J!" c ~~_ 2!!_.~!:!~_~ 21.~ I~ doJ! tY~!_.!'!_. l:\. r.!~<:>!. l~.~_ Po t ent i a I
Pollution sources are I isted and evaluated in Table II.
- 37-
following is a general outline on pollutional sources by sub- basins in the
tate of Arizona as of April 10, 1967. ( All locations noted are straightline
istances and river mile data is for the respective rivers.)
A. San Juan Sub~ basin
1. The City of Rock Point ( BIA Board School) located in Apache County, has
a base population of 350 during the school season. Wastes produced are
treated in a stabilization lagoon and released to Chinle Creek at the
rate of 30 1 000 gallons per day at a point approximately 20 miles south
of the Utah- Arizona border. The facility is owned and operated by the
Bureau of Indian Affairs. Deficiences at these facilities have not
been reported to date. Information available does lndicate that this
facility is adequate.
2. The City of Lukachukai ( BIA Boarding School) has a population of
approximately 900 during the school year~ Wastes produced at this
school are treated in a stabil ization lagoon. A daily flow of approximately
75,000 gallons per day is discharged to the Lukachukai Wash
at a point approximately 45 miles south of the Arizona- Utah border.
The facility is owned and operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Deficiences at these facilities have not been reported. to date.
Information available does indicate that this facility is adequate.
3. The City of Many Farms ( BIA Boarding School) has a population of
approximately 1600 during the school year and produces ap~ roximately
130,000 gallons per day waste Q The wastes are treated in a sewage
stabilization lagoon and discharged to the Chinle Wash at a point
approximately 48 miles south of Arizona- Utah border and 35 miles west
of the Arizona~ New Mexico border~ The facility is owned and operated
by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Deficiences at these facilities have
not been reported to date. Information available does indicate that
this facility is adequate.
4. The City of Chinle. The population of this community is at this time
unknown, however, records indicate that wastes are produced at the
rate of 300,000 gallons per day. These wastes are treated by a
stabilization lagoon and discharged into the Chinle Wash at a point
approximately 55 miles south of the Arizona- Utah border and 30 miles
west of the Arizona- New Mexico border. This facility is known to be
adequate at this time.
5. The City of Dinnehotso has a population of approximately 200 with a
daily waste volume of 20,000 gallons. These wastes are treated by a
se~ tic tank- oxidation lagoon system and discharged to Laguna Creek at
a point approximately 10 miles south of the Arizona- Utah border and
50 miles west of tha Arizona- New Mexico border. This facility is
known to be adequate at this time.
- 38-
TABLE II ( conlt)
above communities contribute approximately 555,000 gallons per day of
sewage effluent to the San Juan Sub- bas in_ It should be noted that during the
warmer parts of the year very little of this effluent reaches the San Juan
River. In suwmer months the receiving washes are essentially dry with the
effluent being lost to subsurface flow and evaporation.
B. Little Colorado River Sub- basin
1. The City of Houck, situated in Apache County has a population of 200
and produces waste at the rate of 7,000 gallons per day. The wastes
are treated in an extended aeration sewage treatment facility that is
adequate at this time and discharged to a dry wash which flows into
the Rio Puerto River ( river mile 75) and then into the Little Colorado
River at river mile 203.40.
2. The Cities of Springerville and Eager have a combined sewage dispasal
facility for a population of approximately 2,200 people. A stabilization
lagoon system treats approximately 112,000 gallons per day.
The effluent is partly used for irrigation and the remainder discharged
to Nutrioso Wash which is tributary to the Little Colorado River at
river mile 319.20. This facility may be inadequate due to increasing
population during summer month~.
3. The City of St. Johns, situated in Apache County has a population of
1350 people and treats its waste by a stabilization lagoon system
whereby it is discharged to irrigation, of which any excess is put into
the Little Colorado River at river mile location 282~ 20. There are no
projected needs for this community.
4. The City of Holbrook is situated in Navajo County and has a population
of 4,500 and treats its waste by stabilization lagoon system. The
effluent Is discharged to the Little Colorado River at river mile
201.30. The sewage disposal facility is inadequate at this time and
plans are presently being formulated for modification of the lagoon
5. Joseph City. This community has a population of 500 and is located in
Navajo County. Wastes are produced at the rate of 5,000 gallons per
day and are treated by a stabilization lagoon. The effluent is
discharged into the Little Colorado River at river mile location
186.30. This is a new facility and appears adequate at this time.
6. The City of Winslow has a population of 9,000 and is located in Navajo
County. This community provides primary and secondary treatment of
its sewage by the use of clarifiers, oxidation ponds, and sludge disposal
by anaerobic digesters. The average flow of approximately
525,000 gallons per day is discharged to the Little Colorado River at
river mile location 157~ 16. The community recently had a plant
failure and of this writing is not using the full capacity of the
clarifiers and digesters, thus imposing a larger load on the
oxidation ponds,.
- 38a-
TABLE II ( contt)
7. The City of Moenkopi located in Coconino County has a population of
around 500~ Wastes are treated by stabilization lagoon system and
are discharged at the rate of 50,000 gallons per day to the Moenkopi
Wash at river mile 52.50 which is tributary to the Colorado River.
These facilities are adequate at this time.
8e ' The City of Desert Butte located in Coconino County has a population of
about 700. Wastes are treated in a stabilization lagoon system at the
rate of 71,000 gallons per day and are discharged to a wash that
carries the effluent to the Little Colorado River at a point 2 miles
above the confluences of the Little Colorado River and the Colorado River
at river mile 651.50e The sewage disposal facility is adequate at
this time.
9. ( a) The City of Flagstaff is located in Coconino County and has a
population of approximately 30,000. The sewage disposal facii~
ities are at this writing being modified to handle future demands.
Presently the facility consists of clarifiers and a trickling
filter which treats close to 2.8 mgd. The plant is seriously
overloaded and every attempt is being made to hasten the completion
of the present modifications. The effluent is discharged
to the Rio de Flag Wash. This wash enters the San Francisco
Wash which is tributary to the Little Colorado River at river
mile Jllf o60, approximately 40 miles east of Flagstaff. Effluent
from this facility will rarely, if ever, reach the Little
Colorado River.
( b) Ponderosa Paper Products Company located within the Flagstaff city
limits discharges paper pulp wastes to Rio de Flag Wash and adds
to the pollutiona} load already carried by this wash.
10. Southwest Forest Mills operates a paper ~ roducts plant approximately
14 miles east of the community of Snowflake. Paper pulp wastes are
discharged to a drainage ditch which carries it approximately 6 miles
north to a shallow impoundment lake located on private property_ There
is no discharge from this facitity~ Possible effects on the ground
water of this area are unknown at present.
C. Lower Colorado River Main Stem Basin
1. ( a) Grand Canyon ( North Rim) located in Coconino County has a population
of approximately 800. Wastes are treated in a community
septic tank system and then chlorinated whereby approximately
40,000 gallons per day are discharged to a dry wash which
eventually reaches the Colorado River via Bright Angel Creek at
river mile location 623.00. No recent inspections have been made
of this facility, however, it is felt to be adequate.
( b) Grand Canyon ( South Rim), The National Park Service presently
maintains a facility that treats approximately 40s000 gallons per
day with the effluent used for flushing toilets, sprinkling lawns
and irrigation.
- 38b-
TABLE II ( con It)
( c) Grand Canyon Moqui Lodge ( South Rim) is open only part of the
year and operates two stabilization lagoons with design capacity
of 85,000 gallons per day. Effluent is discharged to a wash
draining away from the canyon~
2. Hoover Dam situated on the Colorado River has an equivalent population
of approximately 2,300 people ( tourist traffic, site seeing tours of
dam facility). A daily waste load of approximately 70,000 gallons per
day is treated by an activated sludge facility with digested sludge
hauled away b~ tank truck. The effluent is then discharged into the
Colorado River below the dam at river mile 356.00. The plant has been
in operation since 1958 and is, reportedly, providing adequate
3. Davis Dam, located in Mohave County, treats sewage produced by the
employees and tourist visits to the dam by a septic tank system. The
effluent of this facil ity is inserted directly into the Colorado River
below the dam at river mile 287.20. The effluent is unsuitable for
discharge into the Colorado and the means of treatment inadequate.
Plans are under study for abatement of this problem.
4. Davis Dam Community is located adjacent to the dam and provides residences
for employees at the dam. Wastes are treated by a septic tanklagoon
disposal facil ity. It is estimated that approximately 10,000
gallons per day pass thru this facility into a wash which discharges
into the Colorado River just below the dam at river mile 285.20 in
the colder months of the year. This facility is inadequate.
5. Bul1heed City is located in Mohave County on the Colorado River at
river mile 283.50, just south of Davis Dam. The following are waste
sources in this community:
( a) Claude Bil1 l s Broasted Chicken Restaurant wastes are treated in
an extended aeration package plant at the rate of 2,500 gallons
per day and discharged into the Colorado River.
( b) Holiday Shores Subdivision is served by an extended aeration package
plant that has a design capacity of 40,000 gallons pe~ day.
This facil ity is less than a year old and is currently receiving
only a fraction of the design flow. The chlorinated effluent is
discharged to the Colorado River.
( c) River Queen Trailer Park produces 50,000 gallons of waste per day
which are treated by extended aeration and chlorination and then
discharged into the Colorado River.
( d) River Bend Subdivision located in Mohave County approximately 6
miles south of Bullhead City. Waste produced in this subdivision
is treated in an extended aeration plant of 40,000 gallons per day
capacity and then discharged, after chlorination, to the Colorado
River at river mile 280.70. This unit was recently installed and
has sufficient capacity to provide adequate service for a number
of years.
- 38c-
- 38d-
9. Catfish Paradise Trailer Park is located approximately 2 miles north
of Topock, Arizona, in Mohave County~ Approximately 15,000 gallons
per day of wastes are treated In an extended aeration sewage disposal
systemD The effluent is discharged to the Colorado River after
chlorination. The facil ity was functioning properly during the last
l2~ The Bagdad Copper Corporation Is located adjacent to the community of
Bc: gdad" Acid l€;; jching wastes from this operation have presented a
pcllution proble; n in the past" Construction of curtain wall dams in
washes leading from the mining regions and el iminatlcn of the ponds
receiving ferrous wastes has led to the abatement of the major portion
of this problema
TABLE II ( conti)
County on the Colorado River at
approximately 1,200 people
facil ity with the effluent
located in Mohave
This community of
extended aeration
for i rri gat ion.
Lake Havasu City is
river mile 219~ 00~
treats wastes by an
being used entirely
7. The community of Kingman has a population of 6,000 and is currently
served by two separate stabil izatton lagoon systems. The effluent of
pond serving the west side of the city enters a dry wash that is
tributary to Sacramento Wash 15 miles southwest of the city 1imitsc
The lagoon serving the eastern portion of the community has no
effluent at this time as it is Jost to percolation and evaporation.
These facil itles are inadequate and the city has retained a consulting
engineer to prepare a report as a prel imlnary step in obtaining an
adequate facil Ity~
8. Duval IS copper- molydenum mine and mill is located in the Cerbat
Mountains 14 miles due north of Kingman c The mining operation at
present is processing 5 million tons of ore annually with no measurable
wastes leaving the mining region.
10. The City of WIll lams is located in Coconino County and has a population
of approximately 5,000 0 The wastes are treated in a stabll ization
lagoon system. The effluent, estimated to be 40,000 gallons per
day, is discharged to Cataract Creek which enters Cataract Lake some
two miles downstream¢ The community is remote in the watershed in
relation to the Colorado River. It is also doubtful that the effluent
ever reaches the Colorado River. This facility Is inadequate and the
community has been urged to improve their waste disposal facil ity~
11. The community of Bagdad, located in Yavapai County, has a population
of 1,500 with a substantial portion of the community being sewered~
Dorrestic wastes are presently treated by an outmoded Imhoff Tank and
trickling filter systemo The effluent from the present facil ity
enters Bridle Creek which is tributary to the Santa Maria River at
river mlle 25 0 80 0 This faci] ity is inadequate and a consulting
engineer has been retained to prepare a report as a preliminary step
in obtaining an adequate facil Ityo
13. Buckskin Mountain State Park located on the Colorado River at river
mile 197.50 has recently installed a 15,000 gpd package aeration plant.
The effluent is chlorinated and used for irrigation with any excess
discharged to the river.
14. Arizona Ranch and Metals Corportaion is a new copper mInIng operation
located near the Bill Will iams River approximately five river miles
from the confluence with the Colorado River. The new operation has
presented a pollution problem from leaching wastes leaking through
holding pond dykes into Mineral Wash. This drainage travels by subsurface
flow and has been detected in the Bill Williams River. Proper
sealing of these holding lagoons may solve the problem.
15. ( a) The City of Yuma is located in Yuma County and has a population
of 30,000. There is presently no form of sewage treatment for
this community and the wastes are collected and discharged to
the Colorado River at the rate of 2.24 million gallons per day at
river mile 27.00. Preliminary plans are being formulated for the
construction of a sewage treatment plant in the near future.
( See Section 6- 5a)
( b) A cantaloupe produce company is located in the Yuma area adjacent
to the Colorado River. This plant operates seasonally and discharges
ground cantaloupe wastes into the Colorado River.
16. The community of Somerton, with a population of approximately 2,000, is
located in the lower southwest corner of Yuma County. The city is
partially sewered and treats collected wastes in a septic tank- oxidation
lagoon system. The effluent is discharged to an irrigation canal.
- 38e-
. L: · J._. Q~~ e!, al~_ Each beneficial water use requires certain indicators of water
quality as desirable or essential. Pertinent indicators are investigated for
adequate protection of each beneficial use. Water quality objectives are formulated
in consideration of these indicators, and effects upon the economy of
the area which may result from various levels of control. Where more than one
level of an indicator is under consideration in the protection of various beneficial
uses, preferential selection is given to that level which represents the
superior water quality.
1- 2 ~ l cu I ture. L The most important water qua Ii ty i ndi cators for protection of
irrigated agriculture are salinity, sodium relationships, boron and bicarbonate
effects. These indicators are as follows:
a. ~ liDjtYl- Excessive salinity in the root zone causes adverse effects
upon plant life, ranging from leaf- burn to death of the plant. Salinity
characteristics of water for agricultural applications are most
effectively indicated by measuring the
( 1) Total Dissolved Solids ( TDS), in mg/ l ..
( 2) Electrical Conductivity ( ECxI06), micromhos~
The records indicate some increase of salinity in Colorado River water
released towards Arizona, as well as continuing increase in total quantities
of salts returned to the main stem from farm drainage on both
sides of the river along the Arizona reach.
The use of Colorado River water for irrigation requires special management
for salinity control. Adequate drainage must be provided, and
crop selection must be limited to those crops which will tolerate the
existing salt content at the point of use.
TOS limits for stockwatering are far more liberal than are those for
irrigation. Therefore, salinity control is oriented towards irrigation
b. 12. Q. LumJ~ elationshi~ 1. The predominance of sodium salts in soi I is
detrimental to maintenance of proper ti Ith and structure for agricultural
purposes. High concentrations of sodium in agricultural supply
waters ( relative to calcium and magnesium) wi II cause cationic exchange
whereby sodium will replace calcium and magnesium in the soi I. The
water quality indicator which expresses the level of sodium, relative
to calcium and magnesium, is called IIpercent sodiumll , and is expressed
mathematically as
._ N- a-- x-_ 1.. 00 _-
Na+ Ca+ Mg+ K
where the basic constituents are expressed as mi lliequivalents per liter.
Percent sodium in Colorado River water ranges from approximately 28 at
Lees Ferry to approximately 51 at Imperial Dam. The recommended safe
- 39-
- 40-
RSC = ( C0 3 ... HC0 3) - ( Ca ... Mg)
The RSC levels of Colorado River water in Arizona are as follows ( 1962
water year, the last data available before the fi lling of Lake Powell)
.. B.?_ L!:- e!~ L_ .._
- 3.7 meqll
- 4. I meq/ l
- 3.8 meq/ l
§ tatlo~...__ ..
Lees Ferry
Hoover Dam
Imperial Dam
In view of the negative values, it appears that the bicarbonate level
of Colorado River water is well within the safe range for agricultural
These ionic constituents are expressed as mi lliequivalents per liter.
Waters containing 1 0 25 - 2.5 meq. per liter of RSC are of marginal
quality for irrigation purposes. Waters containing over 2.5 meq. per
liter of RSC are not suitable for irrigation purposes.
limit of this characteristic for continuous applications is 50. In
view of the low soi I permeability of many Lower Basin areas being
irrigated with this water, every effort should be made to control
sodium content in Colorado River waters, such that the present level
of this indicator will not be increased at Imperial Dam.
c. Boro&'!.. L The symptoms of boron injury, particularly in trees which are
less tolerant to this constituent, are leaf yellowing and burning,
premature leaf drop, and reduced yieldo Citrus trees are among the
crops most sensitive to boron. The critical concentration is accepted
as 0 0 4 to 0.5 mg/ l in irrigation waters. Citrus is one of the main
crops in both the Yuma area of Arizona and the Coachella Valley of
California. Both of these areas draw water from Imperial Dam. During
1961l-, the average boron content of Colorado River water at Imperial
Dam was 0.2 mg/ l and the maximum value was 0.4 mg/ l.
To protect the extensive citrus industries cited, the quality of
Colorado River Water at Imperial Dam, as represented by boron concentrations,
must be at least maintained, and this quality should be enhanced
if at all possible.
d. Bicarbonate Effects~ Bicarbonate in irrigation water adds to the sodium
-" hazardby- p- recTpitating out the calcium and magnesium salts, with the
resultant proportional increase in sodium content. This effect is
usually expressed in terms of the IIresidual sodium carbonate" ( RSC),
defined as
7- 3 Raw Domestic Water: The State Department of Health is the unit of State
Go · v- ernment wi th-- p- rTmary- respons ibi 1i ty for formu Iat i ng and enfo rc i ng qua Ii ty of
water delivered for domestic purposes. This responsibility also includes consideration
of the quality of raw water being diverted for domestic use~ The USPHS
Drinking Water Standards are applicable~ but liberal interpretation must be used
because of the high natural salinity of Arizona waters~
t is recognized that USPHS Standards apply to treated drinking water supplies.
~ n~~ e~ rer, since many of the indicators cannot be removed by conventional or reasonIe
treatment, the USPHS limits for most of the indicators are applicable to raw
tic water supplies. Bacteriological, physical, chemical and radioactivity
ndicators must be considered, as follows:
a. _ Bacter: l~!~ lcaLQua_!_! ty~_ Published records show that existing coliform
counts in certain reaches of the Colorado River are appreciable.
Coliform counts at NWQN Stations in the Upper Colorado River Basin
have been consistently higher than those at Page, Arizona. The reason
for this can probably be found in the long stretches of the river in
remote, inaccessible areas with no sewage discharges. There has not
been sufficient time to determine the effects of storage and increased
recreational use by the formation of Lake Powell.
Although the most effective assurance against water- carriage of pathogenic
organisms is the complete elimination of sewage discharges to
the river, conservation of water policies dictate that beneficial reuse
of sewage effluents should be encouraged after adequate treatment.
All water from the Colorado River System should receive treatment,
under State Department of Health Standards, before delivery to individual
domestic users.
b. Physical Characteristics: Turbidity, color and suspended matter, if
p" resenT- af-- thepornt- oT- aTversi on, wi II genera 11 y be carri ed to the
municipal treatment plants where removal is difficult and expensive.
Also, in place, the presence of these indicators detracts from esthetic
and recreational appeal, and it reduces the transmission of sunlight
needed for propagation of aquatic life.
Further investigations are needed before turbidity, color, and suspended
matter from natural conditions and from necessary river control operations
may become objects of water quality control. However, turbidity
and suspended matter that result from construction and dredging operations
in the main stem of the river wi 11 be considered for control,
except in the reach between Imperial Dam and Laguna Dam.
c. Chemical Characteristics: Sections 5.21 and 5.22 of the USPHS Drinking
' WaterSfan< Iards-- reacf- asfo I lows :
" 5.21 The following chemical substances should not be present in a
water supply in excess of the listed concentrations where, in the
judgment of the Reporting Agency and the Certifying Authority, other
more suitable supplies are or can be made available.
- 41-
~ ubs.!: ance__ Concentratioil
__~_ mgLL__.
Alkyl Benzene Sulfonte ( ABS) .. .. • .. • • .. 0 0 5
Arsenic ( AS) tI .. " .. .. .. • • ? 0 .. i> 0.01
Chloride ( cl) .. -. ~ • ¢ .. .. .. .. .. .. • 250",
Copper ( Cu). • .. " " • "
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.