t 4

2nS//3

/C 4 Q

SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PRO JECT *

GOVERNMENT

torage

s

l o

f rA 

5P - 

= m 

- O 

!P -

i o 

■ O 

= -0 

= rA 

|r A 

" <

H E A R IN G

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

IRRIGA TIO N AND RECLAMATION

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

INTER IOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

EIGH TY -NINTH CONG RESS

F IR S T SESS IO N

ON

S. 3 2

A BIL L TO A UTH O RIZ E T H E SE CR ET ARY OF T H E IN T ER IO R 

TO CO NS TR UC T, OPE RATE , AN U M AIN TA IN T H E SO UTH ER N 

NE VA DA W A TER PROJE CT, NE VA DA , AN D FO R O TH ER 

PU RPO SES

48 -5 19

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON : 1965
. * •

S’ 5 nl 

B

CO M MIT TE E ON IN T E R IO R AN D IN SU LAR A FFA IR S

HE NR Y M. JA CK SO N, W as hi ng to n, Ch airm an

CL IN TO N P. AN DE RS ON , New Mexico

AL AN BIB LE, Nev ad a

FR ANK CH UR CH , Id ah o

ERN EST GR UE NI NG , Alask a

FR ANK E. MOSS, U ta h

QU EN TI N N. BU RD ICK, N ort h D ak ota

CA RL HA YD EN , Ariz on a

GE OR GE MCGOVERN, So ut h D ak ota

GA YL ORD NE LS ON , W isc on sin

L EE MET CA LF , M on ta na

TH OM AS H. KU CH EL , C al if orn ia 

GOR DON AL LO TT , Co lorado 

LE N B. JO RD AN , Id ah o 

MILWAR D L. SIMPS ON , W yo ming 

PA UL J. FA NNIN , Arizo na

J erry T. Ver kle r, S ta ff Direc to r

Ste war t F ren ch, Chi ef Co un se l

Subcomm ittee on I rrig atio n and Recl amation

CL IN TO N P. AN DE RS ON , New Mexico, Cha irman

HEN RY M. JACK SO N, W as hi ng to n TH OM AS H. KU CH EL , C al if orn ia

FR ANK CH UR CH , Id ah o GOR DON AL LO TT , Co lorado

FR ANK E. MOSS, U ta h LE N B. JO RD AN , Id ah o

QUEN TI N N. BU RD ICK, N or th D ak ota

CA RL HA YD EN , Ariz on a

II
C O N T E N T S

Pag*

S. 32_______ 1

Departmental reports:

Bureau of the Budget_____________________________________ 4

Inter ior _________________________________________________ 2

STAT EM EN TS

Baring, Hon. Walter S., a U.S. Represe ntative in Congress from the State

of Nevad a_____________________________________________________ 16

Bible, Hon. Alan, a U.S. Senator from the Sta te of Nevad a------------------ 10

Cannon, Hon. Howard W., a U.S. Senator from the State of Nevad a____ 11

DeRicco, Elmo J., director, De partm ent of Conservation and Natural

Resources, Sta te of Nev ada ---------------------------------------------------------- 33

Head, Pa t, Colorado River Commission; accompanied by Ted Lawson__ 20

Holum, Hon. Kenneth, Assistan t Secretary of the Interior for Water and 

Power; accom panied by Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner, Bureau of 

Reclamation, and A. B. West, regional director, Bureau of Rec lam atio n. 17

Sawyer, Hon. Grant, Governor, Sta te of Ne vad a_____________________ 6

Stew art, Grant, president, Las Vegas Valley W ater District____________ 42

COMM UNICA TIO NS

Byrne, William B., mayor, City of Henderson, Nev .: Letter to the Senate

Subcommittee on Irrigation a nd Reclamatio n dated May 13, 1965____ 37

Corey, Jim, president, Boulder City Chamber of Commerce: Letter to 

Hon. Clinton P. Anderson, chairman, Irrigation and Reclamation Subcommittee, dated May 14, 1965__________________________________ 38

Cottrell, W. F., city manager, Boulder City, Nev.: Letter to Hon. Clinton 

P. Anderson, chairman, Irrigation and Reclamation Subcommittee, 

dated May 12, 1965____________________________________________ 36

Gragson, Oran K., mayor, city of Las Vegas: Letter to Hon. Clinton P. 

Anderson, chairman, Irrigation and Reclamation Subcommittee, dated 

May 10, 1965__________________________________________________ 36

Grier, Herbe rt E., president, Southern Nevada Ind ustrial Foundation,

Inc.: Le tte r to Hon. Clinton P. Anderson, chairman, Irrigation and 

Reclamation Subcommittee, dated May 12, 1965___________________ 39

Johnson, Elmer, president, Nevad a Power Co.: Letter to Hon. Clinton 

P. Anderson, chairman, Irrigation and Reclama tion Subcommittee, 

dated May 13, 1965____________________________________________ 41

Johnson, Robb C., president, Las Vegas Cham ber of Commerce: Letter 

to Hon. Clinton P. Anderson, chairman, Irrigation and Reclamatio n 

Subcommittee, dated May 12, 1965___ ___________________________ 38

Langford, Ronald J., president, Henderson, Nev., Cham ber of Commerce:

Letter to Hon. Clinton P. Anderson, chairman, Irrigation and Reclamation 

Subcommittee, dated May 13, 1965_______________________________ 39

Laub, W. M., president, Southwest Gas Corp.: Letter to Hon. Clinton 

P. Anderson, chairm an, Irriga tion and Reclamation Subcommittee, 

dated May 14, 1965____________________________________________ 41

Ryan, Jam es G., chairman, board of coun ty commissioners, county of 

Clark, Nev.: Letter to Hon. Clinton P. Anderson, chairm an, Irrig ation 

and Reclamation Subcommittee, dated May 12, 1965_______________ 37

Shamberger, Hugh A., associate director, Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada : Let ter to Hon. Clinton P. Anderson, chairman, Irrigation a nd Reclamatio n Subcomm ittee, dated May 11, 1965___________ 35

Taylor, William, mayor, North Las Vegas, Nev.: Telegram to Hon. Alan

Bible, U.S. Senate, dated May 7, 1965____________________________ 36

AD DITIO NA L INFO RM AT ION

Resolutions:

Basic Management, Inc_______________________________________ 40

Colorado River Commission___________________________________ 34

h i

SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

TH U R SD A Y , M AY 20 , 19 65

U.S. Senate,

Subcommittee on I rrigation and Reclamation,

Committee on I nterior and I nsular Affairs,

TFosAmptfon, D.C .

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:0 5 a.m., in room 

3110, New Senate Office Building, Senator H enry M. Jackson (cha irman of the full committee) presiding. Present: Senators Jackson, Bible, Burdick, Kuchel, and Allott. Also present: Je rry T. Verkler, staff director; Stewart French, chief counsel; Richard N. Little, minority counsel; and Roy Whitacre, professional staff member.

Senator J ackson. The subcommittee will come to order. The hearing this morning was scheduled at the request of our colleague, Sena­ tor Bible, to take testimony on S. 32, sponsored by Senator Bible and Senator Howard W. Cannon, to authorize the construction of the 

southern Nevada water project.

(The bill referred to follows:)

[S. 32, S9th Conpr., 1s t sess.]

A BILL To au thorize the Se cretary of the In te rior to constru ct, opera te, and maintain the southe rn Nevada wat er proje ct, Nevada, an d fo r othe r purpo ses

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States

of America in Congress assembled, Tha t the Secretary of the Inte rior is au thor­ ized to construct, operate, and maintain the southern Nevada water project, Nevada, in accordance with the Federal reclamation laws (Act of June 17, 1902; 32 Stat. 388, and Acts amendatory thereof or supplementary thereto), except as those laws are inconsistent with this Act, for the principal purpose of delivering water for municipal, industrial, and incidental irrigation use. The principal features of the southern Nevada water project shall consist of intake facilities, pumping plants, aqueduct and laterals, transmission lines, substations, and storage and regulatory facilities required to provide water from Lake Mead on the Colorado River for distribution to municipalities and in dustrial centers within 

Clark County, Nevada.

Sec. 2. (a) The Secretary shall make appropriate allocations of project costs to municipal and industrial water supply and, if appropriate, to consideration: 

Provided, That all operation and maintenance costs for the southern Nevada water project shall be allocated to municipal and industrial wate r supply. Con­ struction costs of said dam and reservoir allocated to conservation shall be 

nonreimbursable. (b) Allocations of project costs made to municipal and industrial wa ter supply shall be repayable to the United States under either the provisions of the Federal reclamation laws or under the provisions of W ater Supply Act of 1958 (title III of Public Law 85-500, 72 Stat. 319 and Acts amendatory thereof or supplementary 

thereto) : Provided, That, in either case, repayment of costs allocated to munici­ pal and industrial water supply shall include interest on the unamortized balance of such allocations at a rate equal to the average rate (which rate shall be certified by the Secretary of the Treasury) paid by the United States on its marketable long-term securities outstanding on the date of this Act and adjusted 

to the nearest one-eighth of 1 per centum. 1
2 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

(c) If conditions perm it irriga tion use of project water, the Secreta ry is 

authorized to allo cate to irrigation, und er the provisions of the Federal reclama ­

tion laws, an app rop riate portion of the project construction costs allocated to 

municipal and ind ustrial w ate r supply.

Sec. 3. (a) The Secretary is authorized to enter into the necessary contract, 

or contracts, with the Colorado River Commission of Nevada, acting for the 

Sta te of Nevada, for th e delivery of wa ter and for repayment of the reimbursable 

construction costs, notwithsta nding provisions of section 5 of the Boulder Canyon 

Act (43 Stat. 1037).

(b) Construction of the project shall not be commenced until a suitable contrac t has been executed by the Sec retary and the Colorado River Commission.

(c) Such con tract may be entered into without regard to the last sentence 

of section 9. subsection (c) , of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939, and may 

recognize the rela tive priorities of municipal, industrial, and irriga tio n uses.

(d) Upon execution of the con tract referred to in section 3( a) above, and 

upon completion of construction of the project, the Secretary shall tra nsfer to 

said Colorado River Commission of Nevada the care, operation, and maintenance of the intak e, pumping plants, aqueducts, reservoirs, and rela ted fea tures 

of the southern Nevada water project upon the term s and conditions set out in 

the said contract.

(e) When all of the costs allocable to reim bursable purposes incurred by the 

United States on constructing, operating , and maintaining the project, toge ther 

with appro priate intere st charges, have been retu rne d to the United States by 

the Colorado River Commission of Nevada, said commission shall have the permanent right to use the intake, pumping plants, aqueducts, reservoirs, and related 

fea tur es of the southern Nevada water supply project in accordance with said 

contract.

Sec. 4. Such amount of the costs of construction as are allocated to the fu rnishing of a wa ter supply to Nellis Air Force Base or other defense installation s 

shall be nonreim bursable.

Sec. 5. Expen ditu res for the southern Nevada wa ter project may be made 

without reg ard to the soil survey and land classification requ irem ents of the 

Interio r Departme nt Appropriation Act of 1934 ( 43 U.S.C. 390a).

Sec. 6. The use of all wa ter diverte d for this project from the Colorado River 

system shall be subject to and controlled by the Colorado Riv er compact, the 

Boulder Canyon Project Act (45 Stat. 1057; U.S.C. 617t), and the Mexican Water 

Treaty (Treaty Series 994) (59 Stat. 1219).

Sec. 7. There is hereby authoriz ed to be app ropriated out of any moneys in the 

Tre asu ry not otherwise appr opriate d, such sums as may be required to carry out 

the purposes of this Act.

Senator J ackson. The bill provides for the construction of the distribu tion facilities needed to enable the State of Nevada to use the 

300,000 acre-feet of water allocated to tha t State from the Colorado 

River by the Supreme Court.

The favorable reports of the Department of the Interior and the 

Bureau of the Budget will be included in the record at this point.

(The reports referred to follo w:)

U.S. Department of the I nterior,

Office ofthe Secretary,

Washington, D.C., May 1}, 1965.

Hon. Henry M. J ackson,

Chairman, Comm ittee on Interior and Insular Affairs,

U.S. Senate, W ashington, n.C.

Dear Senator J ackson : This responds to your request th at th e Departm ent of 

the Interio r report its views upon S. 32, a bill to authorize the Secretary of 

the Interio r to construct, operate, and maintain the southern Nevada water 

project, Nevada, and for other purposes.

We would have no objection to enac tment of the sub stitute bill accompanying 

this lette r.

S. 32 would authorize the southern Nevada wa ter supply project, essentially 

a single-purpose municipal and industr ial wa ter supply project by which waters 

stored in Lake Mead would be deliv ered for use at various locations in Clark 

County, Nev. Our report on th is project was transm itte d to your committee
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 3

in April 1964 as a pa rt of our Pacific Southwest wa ter plan proposal. The wa ter supply of the southern Nevada project ultimately res ts upon the avail ­ ability of sufficient wa ter in the mainstream of the Colorado River below Lees Fe rry to satisfy consumptive uses decreed in Arizona v. California et al.

(346 U.S. 573). For th at reason we have consistently conceived of the pro j­ ect as an element in a lar ger proposal for comprehensive, coordinated develop­ ment of the w ate r resources of the Pacific Southwest. However, since the pro j­ ect would not require financial assistance from the proposed Lower Colorado River Basin fund it is not manda tory th at it be authorized as a pa rt of a com­ plex of projects contributin g to and deriving financial assista nce from a lower basin fund. We, therefore, would not object to enac tment of legislation au thorizing th is project alone. In order th at S. 32 may be fully compatible with the pending bill (S. 1019) to authorize the Lower Colorado River Basin project—in cluding a southern Nevada unit—we have pre pared sub stitute tex t for the bill. This sub stitute is an amalgam of provisions of S. 32 and S. 1019, except for the intere st rate pro ­ posed to be applied to the repa yment of the costs allocate d to municipal and ind ust rial wa ter supply. Section 2(b ) of S. 32 provides th at intere st shall be at a rate equal to the average rate paid by the United Sta tes on its ma rke t­ able long-term securities outsta nding on the date of enac tment of the bill, ad ­ justed to the nea rest one-eighth of 1 percent. This would be 3% percent if the bill were enacted in fiscal year 1965. Our sub stitute bill would establish the rate of intere st at 4 p ercent. This change is to make the intere st rate charged on the unam ortized balance of the investment in municipal and ind ustrial wa ter supply facilities of the sou thern Nevada project comparable to the intere st rate charged und er cur ren t policy for loans for municipal wa ter distribu tion facili­ ties under the community facilities program of the Housing and Home Fina nce Agency. As mentioned ear lier, the southern Nevada project will divert wa ter from Lake Mead. Under the Boulder Canyon Project Act only a nominal charge is imposed for storage in Lake Mead for municipal water. Therefore, it is though t app ropriate th at inter est for the southern Nevada project be deter­ mined on the basis of the sta nd ards applicable to municipal wa ter distributio n facilities constructed und er the HHFA program (even though this project would not he eligible for construction under that program ) ra th er than under the form ula of S. 32, based upon th e W ater Supply Act of 1958. The Bureau of the Budget has advised th at there is no objection to the pre s­ entation of this rep ort from the stan dpo int of the admi nis tratio n’s program.

Sincerely yours, Stew art Udall. 

Secreta ry of the Interior.

Enclosure.

A BI LL To au thorize the Se cretary of the In te rior to co nstru ct, opera te, and m aintain the southe rn Nevad a w at er sup ply pro jec t, Nevada, and fo r ot he r pur poses

Be it enacted by the Sen ate and House of Representatives o f the United Sta tes

of America in Congress assembled. Th at the Secretary of the Int erior is authorized to construct, opera te, and maintain the southern Nevada water supply pro j­ ect, Nevada, in accordance with the Fed era l reclama tion laws (Act of June 17, 1902: 32 Stat. 3S8. and Acts ame ndatory thereof or supp lementary thereto) for the principa l purpose of delivering wa ter from Lake Mead for municipal and ind ust rial and incidental uses in south ern Nevada. The southern Nevada wa ter supply project sha ll consist of the following principal wo rks: inta ke facilitie s, pumping plan ts, aqueduct and laterals, transmission lines, substations, storage and regulatory fa cilities, drain age facilities, a nd appurtenant works.

Sec. 2. (a) Construction of the project shall not commence unt il a repa yment con tract has been entered into and its execution by the con tractor sha ll have been finally affirmed by a decree of a court of competent jurisdiction. The Secre­ tary may enter into a contr act with the Sta te of Nevada, acting through the Colorado River Commission of Nevada or other authorized State agency, 

providing among other things, t ha t— (i) the con tractor sha ll operate and maintain the project wo rks: (ii) the construction costs allocable to municipal and ind ustrial wa ter supply shall be repaid by the contractor, with inter est at the rate of 4 per centum per annum, in not more tha n fifty yea rs (except such construction costs as are allocable to the furnishin g of a w ate r supply to Nellis Air Force Base and other Federal defense installatio ns, which costs sha ll be nonreim ­

bursable) ; and
4 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

(iii) the contractor shall tak e delivery of water from Lake Mead at the 

inta ke works and shall sell and deliver such water at wholesale under contra cts to he approved by the Secretary, which shall include an obligation 

on the pa rt of each purcha ser to exercise such powers as it may possess to 

levy a nd collect taxes or assessments for purposes of meeting the charges for 

service thereunder.

(b) Such con tract may be entere d into without regard to the last sentence 

of section 9, subsection (c), of the Reclamation Pro ject Act of 1939.

(c) When all reimbursable costs, togethe r with app ropriate inter est charges, 

have been returned to the United Sta tes by the contracto r, the con tractor shall 

have the perm anent righ t to use the intak e, pumping plants, aqueducts, rese rvoirs, and rela ted features of the southern Nevada water supply project in accordance with said contract.

Sec. 3. Exp enditures for the southern Nevada water supply project may be 

made witho ut regard to the soil survey and land classification requirem ents of 

the In terio r Department App ropriation Act of 1954.

Sec. 4. The use of all water diverted for this project from the Colorado River 

system shall be subject to and controlled by the Colorado River compact, the 

Boulder Canyon Project. Act <45 Sta t. 1057: U.S.C. 617t), and the Mexican Water 

Treaty (Trea ty Series 994) (59 Stat. 1219).

Sec. 5. There are hereby authorized to be app ropriated such sums as may be 

requ ired to carr y out the purposes of t his Act.

Estima ted additional man-years of civilian employment and expenditures fo r the

first 5 years of proposed new or expanded programs, as required by Public

Law SOI, 8'fth Congress

1st ye ar 2d ye ar 3d year 4th year 5th yea r

Estim at ed ad di tio na l m an-ye ars of civilia n 

em ploy men t:

Adm in istra tiv e services:

Fi sc al_________ _____ 1

4

2

5

4

9

4

12

1

3 Cl erical....... .......... .........

Tot al a dm inistra tiv e s erv ice s___

Sub stan tiv e (pr ogram ):

En gi ne ers__________ __ . . . . .

5 7 13 16 4

18

21

24

22

20

51

23

54

5

12 En gine ering a ids a nd oth er s.......... .

Tot al , su bs ta nt iv e_____________ 39 46 71 77 17

Tot al es tim ate d ad ditio na l ma nye ars of civilian em pl oy m en t____

Estim at ed a dd iti on al ex penditu res :

Perso nal ser vic es_______ . . . .

44 53 84 93 21

$305,000 

395,000

$380,000 

2,620,000

$560,000 

19,440,000

$610,000 

22,390,000

$135,000 

1,900,500 All oth er_____ _____

Tota l es tim ated ad ditio na l expenditu re s. . . _____ . 700,000 3,000,000 20,000,000 23,000,000 2,035,500

E xecutive Office of th e Presid ent,

Bureau of th e Budget, 

Washington, D.C., M ay H , 1965.

Hon. Henry M. J ackson,

Chairman, Comm ittee on Interior and Insular Affairs,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Chairman : This is in reply to yo ur lette r of March 1,1965, requesting 

the views of the Bu reau of the Budget on S. 32, a bill “To a uthorize the Secreta ry 

of the Interio r to construct, operate, and maintain the southern Nevada wa ter 

project, Nevada, and for other purposes.”

The purp ose of the bill, as indicated in its title , is to autho rize the south ern 

Nevada wa ter supply project. This project is essentially a single-purpose municipal and ind ustrial wa ter supply development to furni sh wa ter from Lake Mead 

to the cities of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson. Boulder City, and Nellis 

Air Force Base. The project would cost about $81 million, of which $49 million 

would be the cost of an initial firs t stage.
SOU THERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 5

The Department of th e Inter ior, in a report it is submitting to your committee, recommends a substitute tex t for the bill tha t would require tha t a 4-percent rate of interest be used in the repayment of the costs allocated to municipal and in­ dustrial water supply. The Bureau of the Budget, for reasons expressed in our letter to the Secretary of th e I nter ior on this project, a copy of which is enclosed, considers it essential tha t a 4-percent interest rate be established for repayment of the reimbursable costs of the project. We therefore concur in the recommenda­ tion of the Department of t he Interior. Accordingly, the Bureau of the Budget would have no objection to enactment of S. 32, but only if amended to provide for inter est rate s as recommended by the 

Secretary of the Interi or.

Sincerely yours, Phillip S. Hughes,

Assistant Director for Legislative Reference.

Enclosure. Executive Office of the President,

Bureau of th e B udget, 

Washington, D.C., May 13,1965.

Hon. Stewart L. Udall,

Secretary of the Interior,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Secretary : This is in reply to your lett er of May 11, 1963, t rans mit­ ting your proposed report on the southern Nevada water supply project, Nevada, and requesting advice as to the relationship of the proposed project to the program of the President. The southern Nevada water supply project would provide municipal and in­ dustrial water to the cities of Las Vegas, N orth Las Vegas, Henderson, Boulder City, and Nellis Air Force Base. The project is e ssentially a single-purpose mu­ nicipal and indu strial wat er supply development to convey waters stored in Lake Mead fo r use by these communities in Clark County, Nev., through a system of pipelines and related facilities. The total project would cost approximately $81 million, of which $49 million would be the cost of the first stage to be developed initially. The benefit-cost ratio s for the total project and the first stage are es ti­ mated a t 1.6 and 1.5 to 1, respectively, over 100 years. Federa l assistance in the financing an d construction of single-purpose munici­ pal and indus trial water supplies for local communities falling under the sta tu­ tory population limita tions is ordinarily provided through the program of the Community Facilitie s Administration. We believe, however, tha t the southern Nevada water supply pro ject is a special case where construction should be under­ taken by the Bureau of Reclamation as proposed in your report in view of the unique role of the Depar tment of the Inte rior in the Colorado River Basin and the $283,000 already invested by the Bureau of Reclamation in planning the 

project. However, if the project is undertak en as a Federal reclamation project, we believe it is essential th at the interest rate used in repayment of the Federal investment be the same as th at which would apply if the Federal investment were financed by the Community Facilities Administration. The current rate for community facilities loans is 4 percent—somewhat higher than tha t which would apply if repayment were made under the Water Supply Act of 1958. For reasons noted below, the 4-percent ra te is fully justified. If the southern Nevada water supply project were constructed today—or had been originally included in a multiple-purpose project—the project beneficiaries would be required to pay inte rest on deferred storage and, in addition, to repay a share of the joint cost of the reservoir. This has been the basis for repayment in other cases where the Federa l Government has provided municipal and indus­ tria l supply pipelines, such as the Norman project in Oklahoma and t he Canadian 

River project in Texas. We also note local communities elsewhere in the Nation have generally fi­ nanced municipal and i ndustria l water supply developments of the kind proposed in the southern Nevada w ater supply projec t by the sale of bonds on the private market. It is our understanding that the inter est rate tha t would be charged a public body in Nevada for loans to finance municipal and indus trial water supply facilities would probably be 4 percent or possibly higher if the project were financed privately. It is most uncertain, in fact, tha t the priva te marke t would finance a 50-year loan for this project. We believe, therefore, tha t repayment of the water supply costs at a 4-percent rate represents an equitable arrangement 

4S- 519—63----- 2
6 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

from the point of view of local inte rests, as well as the Federal Government, one 

that is in keeping with the view of the Sta te of Nevada th at it is desirous of 

repa ying all costs of the southern Nevada water supply project with interest.

Accordingly, you are advised th at th ere would be no objection to the submission 

of the report to the Congress. However, no commitment can be made at this 

time as to when any estimate of app ropriation would be subm itted for construction of the project, if authorized by the Congress, since thi s would be covered by 

the Pre sident’s budgetary objectives as determined by the then prevailing fiscal 

situatio n.

Sincerely,

Elmer B. Staats, Deputy Director.

Se na tor J ackson. I un de rst an d th at the Go ver nor of Nevad a does 

hav e to catch a pla ne an d whi le norm all y we ca ll on the senio r S en ato r 

an d then th e j un ior Se na tor , I th ink, in the in ter est of tryi ng to accom ­

mo dat e the Governor, I will ask Gov. Gra nt S aw yer to make h is sta teme nt at this time an d then I will ask S en ato r Bible an d Se nator Ca nnon to make theirs.

Gover nor, we are delig hte d to have you and it is a privileg e to welcome you back to W ash ington , D.C., again.

STATEMENT OF HON. GRANT SAWYER, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE 

OF NEVADA

Go verno r Sawyer. Tha nk you very much, M r. C hairm an. It is nice 

to be here on this m atter.

I am G rant Sawyer , G overn or of Neva da, th e dries t St ate of ou r e ntire 5 0-S tate Natio n. I ap pe ar he re toda y to p lea d fo r the life of the 

dr iest section of that dry State.

W e are very pr ou d o f ou r S tate, its history, its gro wt h, an d its po ten ­

tia l. La s Vegas Valley, inclu ding th e cit y of Nor th La s Vega s, the 

city of Las Vegas, and the city of He nders on, alo ng wi th Bo uld er 

City, ha s become an econom ically stable m etr op olita n are a, led by men 

of vision and integ rity.

La s Vegas, which is sometim es thou gh t of as a br ight vac atio n center, has, in recent yea rs, ris en to gr ea t promin ence as one of the m ajo r 

con ven tion cities of the world. It s p roximity to Lake Mead enhances 

th is attrac tiveness to a gr ea t degree. La st year, th e Lake Mead Rec reati on al Ar ea h ad a v isi tatio n of a lmost 3^2 millio n people.

Ju st 15 y ears ago, the en tir e Cl ark County, which encompasses all 

of th e south ern tip o f N evada , h ad a po pulat ion o f only 48,300 people. 

To day, the population in La s Veg as Valley and Bo ulde r City alone 

is about 250,000 people, an d it con tinu es to be one of th e fas tes t gro wing areas in America.

O ur economic sta bility is ra pi dl y being placed in grav e danger due 

to the pre sentl y ina dequate wa ter supply. We have been very fo rtunate in hav ing a valuab le un de rgroun d reso urce av ailable to L as Vegas 

Valley to s upply the w ate r requir em ents u p to th e pres ent time. Ho wever. we are mini ng th at res ource to an alarm ing ex tent each y ear.

As will be brou gh t ou t du ring the he aring tod ay, ou r experts estima te ou r rec harge to La s Vegas Va lle y’s un de rgroun d bas in is only 

25,000-30,000 acre -feet. In the ye ar 1064 alone, we pump ed 78,00*0 

acre- fee t fro m this un de rgroun d basin, about three tim es the safe yield 

of t h at basin.
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 7

This mining of water is increasing every day. Our experts estimate tha t the water requirements in Las Vegas Valley in the year 

1970 will be in the neighborhood of 100,000 acre-feet.

With the present Basic Management, Inc., system importing about 

25,000 acre-feet into the area and prudent use of about 45,000 acre-feet 

from the underground basin, we can readily see that by the year 1970 

we may need as much as 90,000 acre-feet of import water.

I want to impress on you that a supply of imported water from Lake 

Mead is imperative by the year 1968 if we are not to suffer grave danger to our underground basin and/or to our economy.

Senators Bible, Cannon, Congressman Baring and I have been 

working on this project since 1959.

We have been allocated 300,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water. 

At the present time we are using only about 25,000 acre-feet of that 

allocation, principally because of the inadequacy of water transportation facilities. We must have a project to put tha t water to lieneffcial 

use in order to sustain our present economy and to provide for an 

expanding economy. Operation by 1968, of course, requires enabling 

legislation at the earliest possible moment.

I am certain the southern Nevada water supply project is the answer to our present and near future water-supply problems. The 

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has done an excellent job in developing 

this plan with the cooperation of the local people.

I am also happy to report that the cities and districts to be served 

from this project are willing and able to pay their fair share of the 

projects cost, at the appropriate interest rate, within a 50-year period.

The 1965 State legislature enacted into law the necessary revisions 

in the Colorado River Commission’s enabling legislation to remove 

any doubt about that agency's ability to contract with the United 

States for repayment of the cost of the project. This legislation also 

provided authority for the Commission to accept the operation and 

maintenance of the project.

You will receive statements, telegrams, and letters from each of 

those entities during the course of this hearing. The project has the 

wholehearted support of Clark County and its political entities.

In 1936, Nevada began particip ating in the benefits of the Colorado 

River throu gh contracts for delivery of power from Iloover Dam. 

Since that time, Nevada has paid to the United States over $26 million 

in power payments. This money, in part, has been placed in the 

Colorado River development fu nd for developments such as the one 

being recommended to you here today.

Nevada deserves favorable consideration of its project, especially 

when you consider tha t it is the first water project for the use of 

Colorado River water which Nevada has ever requested.

You will hear the testimony today on S. 32 to authorize our southern 

Nevada water supply project separately. I want the record to be clear 

tha t we also support the legislation now before Congress to authorize 

the Lower Colorado River Basin project. We, certainly of all people, 

realize fully that the water available to us from the Colorado River is 

not sufficient to meet our future water requirements. Imported water 

must be made available to us in the future and the State of Nevada is 

ready to work with the other State s of the West and with the appro-
8 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

priate Federal agencies to bring about a large-scale project which will 

satisfy the future water requirements of the entire Southwest.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you 

today in support of this very vitally needed project. Early, favorable 

consideration is essential in order th at the project may get under construction within the next year. If it does not, we are in grave and 

serious difficulty.

Mr. Chairman, I particularly appreciate tha t you let me appear as 

the first witness, and out of order. When we originally discussed this 

matter many years ago we felt tha t last year might be the last year 

tha t Congress could take action in order to meet our needs. So, even 

if action is taken this year, in this Congress, we still may be in some 

trouble.

Than k you very much.

Senator J ackson. I just want to say, Governor, Senator Bible, of 

course, is the senior Senator from your State and also a member of this 

committee and he has been most diligent in pushing this project as 

has his colleague and associate, Senator Cannon. The result is t hat 

the Bureau of the Budget and the various departm ents have their 

favorable reports in and tha t is why we are able to move as expeditiously as we are on this project.

I take it th at the water to be channeled in connection with this p roject will be for municipal or industrial purposes. There is no agricultural project, as such, contemplated, at least at this time ?

Governor S awyer. No, this is purely to meet the needs of the population growth and for domestic and industrial purposes.

Senator J ackson. I am not going to get into a discussion with you 

now on imported water. Th at is not involved in th is project.

Governor Sawyer. Senator, I might say my own theory on a dditional water in the future has always been desalinization.

Senator J ackson. You are making a very favorable impression, I 

assure you.

Governor, I want to compliment you on a very fine statement.

Senator Allott ?

Senator Allott. I just have two short questions, Governor. You 

have a very fine statement here.

Senator J ackson. Incidentally, I am going to interrupt as I do have 

a commitment out of town today and I had to change my schedule and 

I am going to ask my senior colleague on the committee, Senator Bible, 

to take over and chair the committee. While not a member of this 

subcommittee, for this project at least he will be the chairman.

Senator Allott. You gave a very fine statement, Governor, and 

those of us in the West, I think, can appreciate your remarks about the 

area being dry.

In the supplement to the “Report on the Nevada Water Supply 

project,” page 1, it shows that water would be provided to the potential 

El Dorado Valley development.

Is that a municipal or agricultural development?

Governor Sawyer. It will not be agricultural, Senator. It will be 

possibly a combination of recreation, industry, and bousing. There 

will be no agriculture involved.

Senator Allott. I did not know what form of development it was. 

Then one other thing. On page 2 of your statement you say tha t
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 9

Nevada has paid to the United States over $26 million in prior payments. This relates not to the State of Nevada, but to individuals and 

firms and corporations in the State of Nevada.

Governor Sawyer. That is correct.

Senator Allott. That is all I have.

Senator Bible (presiding). The Senator from North Dakota.

Senator Burdick. I, too, would like to commend the Governor for 

an excellent statement. The only question I have in mind is what has 

been your experience with the pumping of underground water?

First, how long have you been doing it and what has been your 

experience in showing the time of depletion ?

Governor Sawyer. Senator Burdick, we have had to use our ground 

water supply because there has been no other water available. However, we are very much concerned about continued use because we are 

depleting the ground water resources. We are using substantially 

more, as I pointed out in my statement, than the annual replenishment 

amounts to. We have not only an economic problem but a legal problem because our State law provides tha t we may not use more underground water than the annual replenishment and I think th at has been 

stretched a little.

At any rate, we are very much concerned about tha t and simply cannot continue to use it at the rate we are using it now.

Senator Burdick. In other words, at the present time you are taxing 

your underground reserves to the limit ?

Governor Sawyer. Yes.

Senator Burdick. And in some cases, you may have gone beyond 

them?

Governor Sawyer. We have gone beyond the limit, I am sure.

Senator Burdick. That is all.

Senator Bible. Thank you very much, Senator Burdick.

I want to join my colleagues on this committee in commending you 

for a very able and fine presentation. I think urgency is the underscored word o f the day and I also realize, Governor, th at you have an 

urgent appointment and a plane to catch so let me say that we are delighted to have you with us and I certainly understand you must leave.

Governor Sawyer. Thank you very much, Senator Bible, Senator 

Allott, and Senator Burdick.

Senator Bible. I have a statement tha t I will ask be incorporated 

in full in the record, as given. This statement simply points out the 

fabulous and fantastic growth, most particularly in Clark County, and 

it is amazing when the project was before this committee ju st a year 

ago that the statistics used then as to population figures are out of date 

even now and the growth, of course, has brought with it as growth 

always does, many, many problems and certainly those of us from the 

West, and this is almost entirely a western committee, recognize that 

water is the lifeblood of the desert. This is a project that will pay 

each phase out in full in 50 years. It is a three-phased project; the 

first phase is roughly $49 million and will consume approximately 

132,000 acre-feet of the allotment as nailed down by the Supreme Court 

case, Arizona v. State of California.
10 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

(T he statem ent re ferre d to fo llo ws:)

STATEMENT OF HON. ALAN BIBLE, A ILS. SENATOR FROM THE 

STATE OF NEVADA

Se na tor Bible. W ater is a ma gic wor d in ou r Nation’s Sou thw est. 

Th is committee, perha ps m ore t ha n any oth er, appre cia tes t he sig nificance of th at state ment. W at er m eans growt h, p rosperity , and prog ­

ress. W ith ou t it, the re is ine rtn ess, poverty, an d decay. These are 

abs olutes th at are most dram atically th ru st upon us whene ver wa ter 

gro ws sh ort . They ap ply t o m y St ate of Nevada, an d they a pp ly most 

com pellin gly rig ht now to this Sta te ’s most populous a nd robu st area — 

south ern N evada.

Th is is why I always use th e w ord vi tal when I speak o f th e so uth ern 

Nevad a wa ter supply proje ct autho riz ed un de r Senate bill 32. Th is 

is why there is such a solid un an im ity of su pp or t fo r th is l egislation 

and tn is proje ct in Nev ada. Th e need fo r th is p ro ject a nd the wa ter 

it will prov ide is enormous. The benefits are lim itless.

When we speak of southe rn Nevada in connection wi th thi s p roj ect, 

we spe ak most pa rti cu larly o f the Cl ark Co unty mu nic ipa l and ind ustr ia l co mplex—the siste r citie s of La s Veg as, N or th Las Vegas, H en de rson, an d Bo uld er City, toge ther with Nellis A ir Fo rce Bas e an d the 

E l Do rad o Valley as a whole. Th is is the faste st gr ow ing region in 

one of th e fas tes t grow ing Stat es. Th ere is no do ubt th at i t is ra pi dl y 

ou tstrip pi ng its un de rgroun d water resources—ou tstrip pi ng them to a 

po int th at is becom ing cr itical.

It is ind eed f ortuna te that th e imme dia te solution lies ne arby in the 

Colorado Ri ve r and the va st sto rag e of La ke Mead . Ne vada has 

tapp ed th is source fo r bu t a frac tio n of its 300,000 acre- foo t wa ter 

entitl em ent. Th is proje ct is me rely the vehicle wi th wh ich Nevad a 

will be able to realize th e fu ll benefits of t hat entitlem ent.

I t is equ ally fo rtu na te t h at th is p ro ject requ ires n o m ajor dam constr uc tio n or any dev elopm ent th at will affect bas inw ide inte rests.

I called sou the rn Ne vada th e mo st populou s an d robu st are a of 

Nevad a. To underscore t his sta tem ent, I s hould cite a few basic facts 

and figures.

W ith in Cl ark Co unty alone lives more th an ha lf the en tir e St ate’s 

popu lat ion . La test e stima tes set th e popu lat ion to tal in Cl ark Cou nty 

at a m inimu m of 243,000. Th ere is sound evide nce to p oi nt to a figure 

of m ore th an 272,000 as mo re rea listic. Thi s is th e area th at boasted 

lit tle more th an 16,000 popu lat ion 25 ye ars ag o an d less th an 50,000 just 

15 years ago.

Th is is phenom enal grow th. But au thor ita tiv e officials c onfidently 

pr ed ict an even g reater le ap in po pu lat ion—t o ne arly o ne-ha lf million 

by 1970 an d close to a full mi llio n by the ye ar 2000. To those who 

migh t be prone to call this optim istic, I would po int ou t the exp erts 

predicted a population of 230,000 in Clark C ounty b y 1970—and th at 

figure ha s alr eady been exceeded. Th is is an area of fantas tic popu ­

lat ion growt h, and this o nly em pha sizes the need f or m ore w ater.

It tak es a ro bust economy t o a ttra ct and sup po rt this k ind of gro wth . 

Th is is exact ly the ty pe of economy we hav e in south ern Nevad a. All 

spectru ms of the economy—business, employment, indu str y, finance, 

constru cti on, tourism—con tinue to reg ist er signific ant gains. Th is in ­

cludes water consum ptio n, w hic h was up 38 perc ent in the first 3 months 

of thi s year.
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 11

I should point out also th at heavy Federal investments are involved 

in this area s economy. There is the Lake Mead National Recreation Area—one of the Nation’s most popular outdoor recreation facilities— Nellis Air Force Base and the Atomic Energy Commission’s Nevada test site which recently takes in the nuclear rocket development station. These, too, have a vital interest in the availability of water and continued economic growth. It becomes increasingly clear that the region’s continued growth, even by moderate estimates, is dramatically dependent on adequate 

water. It is important to remember this significant project expenditure, esti­ mated at $49 million for the first stage, is completely reimbursable. The undertaking, comprised chiefly of pumping and pipeline facilities, 

will be repaid over 50 years with interest. And the people of Nevada stand ready to back this repayment. The Nevada Legislature in 1963 designated the Colorado River Commission of Nevada as the State agency to contract with the United States for this repayment and to 

operate and maintain the project when it is complete. Action on this legislation has been delayed in the past because of basinwide controversy and priorities. I have maintained, however, tha t this project need not await other developments nor become in­ volved in them. I was extremely gratified to see this think ing reflected in the recent Interior Department repo rt supporting the project authorization. The Department and the Bureau of the Budget have favored the project as an individual undertaking that can travel alone 

and unfettered. I was also gratified to see tha t potential benefits of this project reflected in the Interior Department’s feasibility report. The first stage is given a benefit-cost ratio of 1.5 to 1, and the ultimate phase is 

slightly better—1.6 to 1. I have discussed, in brief, the need and the benefit, the feasibility and the financing f or this project. I need only add tha t the need is now. For southern Nevada’s growth will surely stagnate if this fresh water supply is not available as soon as possible. We face a 

timetable that requires immediate authorization. The southern Nevada water supply project is not the final answer to the region’s needs. We must continue to look ahead for new sources and procedures to make still more water available. This is true throughout the Colorado River Basin. In looking, we must be limited only by our imagination and initiative. In southern Nevada, mean­ while, the immediate solution is the project now before the committee. I strongly urge your favorable consideration of this legislation and 

your continued support to make it a reality. I am delighted to recognize my colleague from Nevada, Senator 

Cannon.

STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD W. CANNON, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF NEVADA

Senator Cannon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

subcommittee. I want to express my appreciation for the opportunity to testify in behalf of legislation to authorize the Secretary of the In ­ terior to construct, operate, and maintain the southern Nevada w ater 

project as embodied in S. 32.
12 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

The senior Senator from Nevada and acting chairman of this subcommittee., Mr. Bible, and I introduced this legislation on January 6, 

1965, because of the vital and urgent need for municipal and industrial water in Clark Comity, Nev.

Last year, th is bill received favorable action by the Inte rior Committee, but, unfortunately, there was not enough time left in the session 

for the Congress to act upon it.

I urge this committee to again consider favorably the need for the 

authorization of the southern Nevada water project and thereafter 

to take affirmative and prompt action to authorize its initiation and 

fulfillment.

There is a critical water supply situation in southern Nevada and 

this project is needed to protect and conserve the dwindling ground 

water resources of Clark County and to provide a sure additional supply of municipal and industrial water required to serve a rapidly increasing population, while at the same time providing for the optimum development of the natural resources of this area of our State.

Since the early 1940’s, southern Nevada has experienced a fantastic 

growth in population—from an approximate 50,000 people in 1950 

to more than a qu arter of a million people today.

Projections of future growth indicate tha t between 400,000 and 

5‘25,00t) people will be in need of water in this area by 1970; and tha t 

by the year 2000, nearly 1 million people.

The area includes Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, Boulder 

Citv, Nellis Air Force Base, and the E l Dorado Valley. It is an area 

of favorable climate, large trac ts of undeveloped land, a strategic location in relation to the Lake Mead National Recreation Area, the 

Nevada atomic test site, and the installation of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

The biggest problem co nfronting the area is that of availability of 

water.

An assured water supply is needed to serve the expanding population and to assure a healthy economic base fo r future growth. Without water, the population and industrial growth will be stymied and 

the heavy investment of the Federal Government in the Nellis Air 

Force Base, the atomic energy test site, and the NASA project will be 

seriously hampered.

The principal source of water at present is the underground artesian 

basin, supplemented bv a small amount of water pumped from Lake 

Mead. Withdrawals from the ground have for many years exceeded 

the safe margin, with the result tha t there exists a critical depletion of 

the underground waters.

Nellis A ir Force Base relies entirely on wells for its water supply, 

and faces an especially critical situation. In the summer there is not 

adequate water for fire protection and water conservation practices are 

stric tly enforced.

All interested parties are unanimously in favor of the project. The 

Nevada State Legislature recently designated the Colorado Rover 

Commission of Nevada as the State agency to contract with the U.S. 

Government for the repayment of project costs and to operate and 

maintain the project afte r construction.

It also has the active support of the Nevada congressional delegation, Governor Sawyer, who testified earlier, the department of con-
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 13

servation and natural resources, the El Dorado Valley Advisory Board, 

the Clark County Commissioners, the Southern Nevada Industrial 

Foundation, and all the municipalities and city groups located in 

the area.

The building of this project has been delayed in past years pending 

the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Arizona v. California, to which Nevada was a party.

I see the distinguished Senator of California here. He is well aware 

of the matters involved in tha t particular case and we are very happ y 

tha t we were not, insofar as the State of Nevada is concerned, in dispute with either Arizona or California on their particular problem.

The decision confirmed the allocation to Nevada of 300,000 acre-feet 

of the waters of the Colorado River. It is these waters that this project 

would utilize through its distribution system.

The entire cost of the project will be repaid by municipal and industrial users of the water from the project over a period of 50 years, with 

interest, as you heard the Governor state.

Further , this project is a component of the Southwest Pacific water 

plan proposed by Secretary Udall. The southern Nevada water supply 

project does not need to be held up until action is complete on the 

entire regional plan.

Authorization a nd construction of this project will in no way inte rfere with the full plan for the arid Southwest States.

The best reason I can give for asking your early favorable consideration of the southern Nevada water supply project is th at the people 

and the industries th at have invested their lives and fortunes in southern Nevada need—and must have—water if they are to survive and 

realize their potential.

We have reached the point in our development in the area where the 

underground artesian basin can no longer support our people, our 

towns and cities, and our industrial and Government installations.

With water, progress can be orderly and of great benefit to the 

region and the Nation. Without water, insoluble problems will arise, 

with population and economic growth stifled, even as our ground 

water supplies are declining.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I simply say the project is needed; 

it is time; it is reasonable; it does not interfere with the larger plan 

for the Southwest; financially, it has independence and feasibility.

It is vital to the survival, development, and prosperity of the people 

of southern Nevada.

I ask your support in making the project a reality.

Now, some questions have been raised to the Governor that I would 

like to address myself to. I am very’ familiar with the area as t ha t 

happens to be the area that I come from in the State.

Senator Allott asked about whether or not there were agricultural 

uses. The use is not an agricultural use proposed for the water. The 

land immediately in tha t vicinity is not particularly suited for ag ricultural purposes. It is not one of our good agricultural areas of the 

State and the cost of putting the water on it for the type of land it 

is would not make it really feasible, agriculturally.

The El Dorado Valley project as you heard, does not involve agricultural use.

48 —51 9— -C5— — 3
14 SOUTHE RN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

Senator Burdick asked the question about the subsurface water 

tha t we have in the area. I can digress briefly for a little personal 

history. At the time 1 referred to here in 1950 I was city attorney 

in Las Vegas. Initially, the whole water system in southern Nevada 

there in the Las Vegas area was owned by the Union Pacific Railroad. 

They had this water system solely to provide water for their available 

trains when the train line went through there and they acquired all 

of the water from an undergroun d source, much of it through their 

artesian wells.

We had, at one time, if I remember correctly, either six or eight 

flowing artesian wells that were providing water to the Las Vegas 

area. Gradually, they had to drill additional wells and these then 

became pumping wells. They had to increase the number of wells, 

thus further depleting the underground supply.

On my own property in Las Vegas when I first moved onto it I had 

a well in my backyard and had enough pressure throu gh an artesian 

flow to supply the water pressure for my house, to water my orchard 

and my lawns and that sort of thing. Now I can get no water out 

of this well in an artesian flow. I am on the Las Vegas Valley Water 

District system at the present time, but my little w’ell at one time 

supplied that type of pressure and will not free flow today at all.

This will give you an indication of the situation when I was city 

attorney and we arranged to take over from the Union Pacific their 

water system they had some wells which we began pumping and 

drawing sand out of at that time because they had been practically 

depleted and we had to increase the depth of those wells; clean them 

out; go down to deeper depth and then finally, to bring in, in connection with the facilities at Henderson, the pipeline th at they had to 

Lake Mead to arrange for bringing in an additional supply of daily 

water which we are doing every day now to supplement the underground system. With out this source we could not exist even today 

and what we are trying to do now is to supplement it so we will have 

the opportunity for expansion and growth.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 1 appreciate this opportunity to appear 

before you.

Senator Bible. Thank you for an extremely and able presentation 

and your own first-hand knowledge of the water situation.

The Senator from C alifornia?

Senator Kuchel. I want to say to my friend and colleagues from 

our neighboring State of Nevada that when I introduced the bill 

dealing generally with the subject of the Colorado River development, 

I know my colleagues will both recall that I included in S. 1019 authorization for the project which my colleagues are now sponsoring in a 

separate piece of legislation. In many respects it may well be that 

it should oe a separate piece of legislation.

The only question I have—and perhaps this has already been 

answered, Senator—is the problem raised in the Department of In ­

terior's letter with respect to th e interest rate.

Do my colleagues accept the position that the Department has taken ?

Senator Cannon. I would not be prepared to answer that. I think 

that we are prepared to take the project under whatever conditions we 

can get it. While that interest rate is a little higher than we would 

like to pay, certainly we recognize that that is the going interest rate
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 15

for some of the federally supported projects and if we cannot get a 

lower interest rate we would have to accept it as we have to have this 

project irrespective of what we have to pay on the interest rate.

Senator Kuciiel. Well, thank you, very much.

Senator Cannon. But please do not hold me to that now. If we 

can get it for less, we would like to have it for less.

Senator Bible. I would join my colleague in tha t respect. We are 

going to improve our position, if we can. We would like to have it 

lower, and the Bureau of Reclamation and the Bureau of the Budget 

should testify on that.

Senator Kuchel. That is the only question which has been raised 

by the Department. Other than that, I take it there is an unqualified endorsement of 

the project.

Senator Bible. That is correct.

Senator Kuciiel. No furthe r questions. Thank you very much.

Senator Cannon. To the distinguished Senator from California, I 

must say we are very grateful this project does have the endorsement 

of the respective agencies and we are very happy to have their support 

for it.

Senator K uciiel. By the way, Senator, there should be in the record 

some resolutions from some of my constituents favoring this project.

Senator Cannon. We are certainly very happy to have any support 

from any or all of the Senator's constituency.

Senator Bible. I think in last year's hearing when this was a part 

and parcel of the overall Southwest water plan that there were resolutions t hat were made a pa rt of the record indicating particularly the 

approval of the Water Board of California, or the C alifornia Water 

Authority, or whatever their proper name is. But w’e do have Mr. 

Pat Head, who is secretary of the Colorado River Commission of 

Nevada, who is going to make a great many endorsements along this 

line.

The Senator from Colorado.

Senator Allott. I understand the Senator's position with respect 

to the interest rate. I presume, although the Bureau can testify to 

this, that 4 percent was probably used because it is the lowest interest 

rate tha t would be available under the community facility loan.

Senator Cannon. That is the position they take, sir.

Senator Allott. And I presume that is the basis upon which they 

make it, although I am sympathetic to your point of view’ that you 

take whatever low’er interest rate you may or could get.

I have no questions. I can only say tha t you are lucky that you 

still have water in your w’ells. I have a well at home tha t I do not 

even have any water left in.

Senator Cannon. I might say th at the project does have a benefitcost ratio tha t is very favorable so it is not a project tha t does not 

show’ a benefit by the adding process.

Senator Allott. Yes, it has a benefit-cost ratio of 1.5 in the first 

phase and 1.6 in the second phase.

Senator Cannon. That is correct.

Senator Bible. Thank you very much, Senator Cannon. If you 

would care to stay for the remainder of the proceedings I would be 

delighted to have you sit with the committee. I know you have other
16 SOUTHE RN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

commitments this morning and you just suit your convenience, but 

why not join us up here ?

Senator Cannon. I would like to stay for a little while and then 

I must leave.

Senator Bible. Then come up here and sit with us.

At this point, Mr. Reporter, I will place into the record a statement 

by our Congressman, W alter S. Baring. Unfortunately, Mr. Baring 

could not be here this morning. I know that he has an intense interest 

in complete support for this project. This is exactly what his statement underscores.

Without objection tha t will be placed into the record at this point.

(The statement referred to follows:)

State m ent by H on. W alt er S. B arin g, a U.S . R ep res en ta ti ve in Con gr es s

F rom t h e Sta te of N evada

Mr. C ha irm an , I am pl ea se d to appear be fo re yo u to day in su pport of th e 

so uth er n Nev ad a w ate r su pp ly pr oje ct , S. 32, which I hav e co in trod uc ed in th e 

H ou se of R ep re se nta tives w ith my ow n id en tica l bill H.R . 2020.

W he n Nev ad a be came a S ta te in 1864, ft c ov ered a so m ew hat sm al le r are a th an 

to day fo r it w as not u n ti l 1866 th a t th e S ta te of N ev ad a w as en la rg ed to it s 

pre se nt siz e. T his is of p art ic u la r in te re st , fo r in 1866, th e barr en dry des er tla nd whi ch w as th en ad de d to th e S ta te w as not p art ic u la rl y we lco me an d it 

took a coup le of se ss ions of th e le gis la tu re to come to ag re em en t on th is ne w 

la nd ad di tion . How ev er, th is ve ry la nd is w he re C la rk Cou nt y an d th e ci ty of 

L as Ve gas now lie, a bo om ing m et ro po lis an d a trem en do us ass et to Nev ad a an d 

th e Nation.

L as Ve gas w as fi rs t jus lt a w ate r stop on th e Un ion Pa cific R ai lr oad , fo r in th e 

m id st of th is de se rt, w ate r ha d been fo un d. Fro m th is w at er hole Las Ve gas, 

and in de ed all of C la rk Cou nt y develop ed . Ove r th e p a st tw o de ca de s th e 

gr ow th of La s Vegas . N or th L as Vegas , Hen de rson , B ou ld er C ity , an d all of C la rk 

Cou nt y has been trem en do us , to w he re th is co un ty is th e fa ste st grow ing co un ty 

in th e Nation.

The o ld w ate r ho le is a ctu ally an art esi an bel t to th e n ort h of Las Ve gas whi ch 

in t u rn i s su pp lemen ted by w ate r pu mpe d fr om La ke Me ad. B ut fo r m an y year s 

no w th e de man d fo r th e gro un d w ate r has fa r ex ce ed ed th e sa fe yield ca us in g 

se ri ous an d ju st if ia bl e co nc er n th a t th e unde rg ro und w ate r supp ly will ru n en ­

ti re ly dr y.

The fu tu re gr ow th pro je ct io n re ve al s th a t th e gr ow th in po pu lation in C la rk 

C ou nt y will co nt in ue to gai n mom en tum to w her e it is ex pe ct ed th a t by 1970 th e 

popula tion w ill fa r su rp ass 300.000, m ak in g it ev id en t th a t th e al re ad y sh ort 

w a te r su pp ly will become to ta ll y in ad eq uate to m ee t th e w ate r ne ed s of th e 

anti cip ate d i nc re as ed p op ul at io n.

F urt herm ore , of prim e im po rt an ce is th e fa c t th a t n o t on ly is an in cr ea se d 

w a te r su pp ly urg en tly ne ed ed to fu lfi ll th e w ate r ne ed s of th e pr es en t po pu latio n. an d th e ne ed s of th e anti cip ate d po pu la tion gro w th in th e ar ea , but th e 

ne ed s of th e Fed er al G ov er nm en t lo ca te d a t Nell is A ir For ce Ba se, th e atom ic 

en er gy te st site, an d NA SA wou ld be se riou sly ha m pe re d un le ss more w ate r ca n 

be bro ught in to th e a re a soon, an d th ere is li tt le do ub t th a t th e eco nomic gr ow th 

of so uth er n Nev ad a will be go ve rn ed by th e w ate r th a t is av ai la bl e. T his is 

se lf-e vi de nt.

Yo u m ay won de r w hy acti on has not be en ta ken to do so m ethi ng ab out th is 

se ri ous w ate r prob lem bef ore th is, but ac ti vit y on th is is su e had bee n de laye d 

aw ait in g th e U.S. Su pr em e C ou rt de cis ion in th e Color ad o R iv er w ate r comp act of 1922. Thi s de cision w as fin ally re tu rn ed on M ar ch 9, 1964, an d which 

dec is io n am on g oth er th in gs, al lo ca te d 300,000 ac re -fee t of w ate rs of th e Colo ­

ra do R iv er to th e S ta te of Nev ad a. The se a re th e w ate rs which wi ll be utili ze d 

in th is so ut he rn Ne va da w a te r su pp ly pro je ct un de r disc us sion toda y.

The in itia l stag e of th e so uth ern Nev ad a w at er su pp ly pro je ct wo uld pu mp 

132,0 00 ac re -fee t of w ate r annuall y (a bout 35 billi on gal lo ns ) from La ke Mead, 

but under th e pro je ct 's u lt im ate st ag e of de ve lopm en t th e di ve rs io ns wo uld be 

in cr ea se d to 312.000 ac re -f ee t an nu al ly . Th e net w ithdra w al of Colorad o River 

w ate r re su ltin g fro m th e fina lly co mpleted p ro je ct wou ld be 262,000 ac re-fee t, 

well w ithin the 300,000 a cre -f ee t allo we d.
SO UT HE RN NEVADA WA TER PR OJ EC T 17

Nev ad a’s in te re st in th is pro je ct is in di ca te d in th e Nev ad a S ta te L eg is la tu re s 

de si gn at io n of th e Col or ad o R iv er Co mmiss ion of Nev ad a as th e S ta te ag en cy 

to contr act w ith th e U.S . Gov ernm en t fo r th e re pay m en t of th e pro je ct co sts , 

and to op er at e and m ain ta in th e pro je ct whe n it is fina lly co mplete d, an d in 

th e ac tive su pport of N ev ad a's co ng re ss io na l de lega tio n, th e S ta te of Nev ad a, 

th ro ugh it s Gov erno r, and ev er y re sp on sibl e S ta te and lo ca l org an iz at io n.

The pr oj ec t is no t de pe nd en t on po wer re ve nu es fo r pa yb ac k, but wou ld be 

re pa id to th e Gov er nm en t w ith in te re st ov er a 50 -y ea r pe riod , no rm al ly us ed 

fo r th is ty pe pr og ra m .

I feel th e ne ed fo r th is pro je ct is well dem onst ra te d her e to da y, an d I urg e 

th e co mm itt ee to re p o rt th e bill fa vo ra bly to th e U.S. Sen ate.

T han k you.

Senator Bible. Our next, witness is the Honorable Kenneth Ilolum, 

Assistant Secretary of the Inte rior for Water and Power, to be accompanied by Floyd E. Dominy, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation and A. B. West, Regional Director, Bureau of Reclamation.

You gentlemen please come forward.

STATEMENT OF HON. KENNETH HOLUM, ASSISTANT SECRETARY

OF THE INTERIOR FOR WAT ER AND POW ER; ACCOMPANIED BY

FLOYD E. DOMINY, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION,

DEPARTMENT OF THE INT ERIOR ; AND A. B. WEST, REGIONAL

DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

Mr. Holum. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to appear before this committee to recommend the authorization of construction of a worthwhile and urgently needed project.

The southern Nevada water supply project is essentially a singlepurpose municipal and industrial water resource development located 

in Clark County, Nev. The project plan involves the construction 

of facilities to provide municipal and industrial water from Lake 

Mead to the cities of Las Vegas, N orth Las Vegas, Henderson, and 

Boulder City, to the Nellis Air Force Base, and to potential developments in the El Dorado Valley area near Boulder City.

Intake, pumping, conveyance, regulatory, and storage facilities will 

be provided in three incremental stages with the construction of the 

first stage to be initiated as soon as funds are available, and the second 

and third stages will be constructed as additional capacity is required.

The estimated costs of construction of Ihe project are $49,024,000 

for the first stage and $81,003,000 for the ultimate development.

The project has economic and engineering feasibility, and the benefit-cost ratios are 1.5 for the first stage and 1.6 for the ultimate project.

This project was among those included in our proposed Pacific 

Southwest water plan. It was one of the units recommended for 

immediate authorization. Although the project depends for its water 

supply upon the availability of water in the Colorado River, it will not 

require financial assistance from the Lower Colorado River Basin 

fund proposed in S. 1019. We therefore supp ort legislation which 

would provide for the separate authorization of the southern Nevada 

water supply project and which is fully compatible with the provisions of S. 1019.

Our substitute bill submitted with Secretary Udall's legislative 

report reflects minor editorial and form at changes. The name of the 

project is corrected to conform to our reports and unnecessary refer-
18 SOUTHE RN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

ences to amendatory legislation have l>een deleted. The language 

has been shortened and simplified.

We have omitted the provision to permit allocations of cost to irrigation. If there is any irrigation, it will be only incidental use of return 

flows. We have provided greater latitude for identification of the 

agency through which the State may act in contracting for repayment, made that authority provisional upon certain of the other provisions of the bill, and included a requirement t hat the wholesale contracts oblige the purchasers to exercise tax and assessment powers to 

meet the service charges.

Section 2(a) (ii) of our substitute bill requires that the construction 

costs allocable to municipal and industrial water be repaid with interest in not more than 50 years.

Under this section, the construction costs of each stage of the project 

shall be repaid in not more than 50 years beginning with the date 

of completion of that stage.

Our substitute bill would establish the rate of interest used for 

repayment purposes at 4 percent. The formula specified in the Water 

Supply Act of 1958 currently produces an interest rate of 3.137 p ercent. S. 32, as d rafte d, proposes to use th at formula.

The Community Facilities Administration of the Housing and 

Home Finance Agency provides long term loans to small communities 

to enable them to build essential community facilities, including municipal and industrial water facilities similar to those covered by 

S. 32.

The current rate of interest applicable to such loans is 4 percent. 

The population of the applicant community must be under 50,000, or 

150,000 in designated redevelopment areas, in order for it to be eligible 

for assistance under the ITHFA program.

This program, therefore, under existing authority is not applicable 

to the proposed southern Nevada water supply project, although the 

type of facility involved and purpose of the project are similar.

In all cases where single purpose municipal and industrial water 

supply facilities have been constructed under reclamation law the 

repayment charges imposed have included a component which will 

return an equitable portion of the water storage or water supply works 

involved.

In the case of the southern Nevada water supply project, however, 

only a 50-cent charge per acre-foot, or less th an two-tenths of a cent 

per thousand gallons, is anticipated to reflect withdrawal of water 

from Lake Mead. This charge is set by contract with the State of 

Nevada which was made pursuant to the provisions of the Boulder 

Canyon Act.

This low cost for the storage and hydraulic head provided by Lake 

Mead will permit the repayment of the reimbursable project costs of 

the conveyance system in 50 years at 4-percent interest while m aintain ing water charges which compare favorably to those for new’ similar water supplies being developed in the Southwest.

The cost of project water will vary from about 15 cents per thousand 

gallons when the initial deliveries are made to less than 10 cents per 

thousand gallons when the first stage is operated to capacity and to 

about 4 cents per thousand gallons when the ultimate capacity of the 

project is reached. These costs, of course, do not reflect the cost of 

treatment and distribution to retail customers.
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 19

Th e south ern Nevad a wa ter su pp ly proje ct is an em ine ntly de sir ­

able developm ent. I t will co ntrib ute to the fu tu re p ro sp erity a nd e xpan sion of o ne of the fas tes t g ro win g are as of t he N ati on, an d one in 

which the F ed era l Gover nment has a sig nificant inv est me nt in ins ta llation s. I t will direc tly benefit hal f of the po pu latio n of the St at e of 

Nevada. I t will also rep ay to the Tr ea su ry with substan tia l inter est 

the entire Fe de ral inv estme nt cost of th e pro jec t, wi th the exception 

of $237,000 o f some gen era l investi ga tio ns costs which were finan ced 

fro m the Co lorado Ri ve r de vel opme nt fun d.

I s tro ngly recommend the e nactm ent o f the subs titute bill pro vid ed 

by the Dep artm en t’s le gislative re po rt on S. 32 to au tho riz e th e con ­

str uctio n of the so uth ern Nevada w ater sup ply project.

I am sure , Mr. Ch airma n, th at Com mission er Dominy ha s a statement he would like to make at th is tim e and then he an d I will be 

ha pp y to an swer a ny questions.

Se na tor Bible. Th an k you very muc h, Mr. Se cre tar y, and I th in k 

you ind ica ted a littl e earlier you ha d some urg enc y in at te m pt in g to 

get away at a reason able t ime so I th in k th at the re a re a few question s 

th at I wou ld like to ask and possib ly the Se na tor fro m Ca lif or nia 

migh t like to ask you some questions.

I notice in ar rivi ng at th is interest ra te you tak e par ag ra ph 2 to 

commen t on th e very, very favo rable low charg e th at the St at e of 

Nevad a has in sec uring w ate r at 50 cent s per acre-foo t and sayin g t hat 

is less than tw o-ten ths of a cent pe r th ou sand ga llons and th en yo u co mment on th at wi th anoth er fol low ing pa ragr ap h.

Ac tua lly , th at is a charg e th at is set by co ntract betw een the IT.S. 

Gover nment an d the St ate of Ne vada un de r the provisions of the 

Bo ulder Canyon Ac t, is that no t corre ct ?

Mr. H olum. T hat is correct.

Se na tor Bible. I f we are en tit le d to th at and if we have a very 

fav orable contr act, why sho uld that i n a ny way have anv b earin g upon 

wh at the int ere st ra te should be on the bu ild ing of the distr ibution 

system ? I do n ot qu ite ge t th e connection. I th in k it is a ve ry fa vo rable rate and if we were f or tu na te enou gh to secure th at ma ny, many 

years ago, which we d id, I th in k we are to be comm ended fo r it ra th er 

th an p enalized fo r it.

Mr. H olum. Mr. Ch air man, th ere is no intention wi thin th e De ­

pa rtm en t or th e Adm inist ratio n to penaliz e the St ate of Nevada.. 

We reco gniz e t hi s is an ex isting a nd long sta nd ing co ntract, and I am 

sure the se are conside red va lid rea sons tod ay. However , un de r the 

W at er S up pl y Act o f 1958, on all projec ts th at have been constru cte d 

by th e Bu rea u of Reclama tion fo r th e pro vision of new mu nic ipa l 

an d indu str ial wa ter , the costs of sto rag e facilities requ ire d un de r 

pr op er all ocation pro ced ures hav e been, in par t, allocated to these 

mu nic ipa l and indu str ial water sup plies. Th ey are rep ay ab le wi th 

interest un de r the form ula rate.

Th is is a uniqu e sit uatio n, Mr. Ch airm an , in th at no pro vis ion was 

mad e at the tim e and no proc edu res a re availabl e now fo r m ak ing appr op riate allocations of cost, fo r th e sto rag e facil ities t o these mun ici ­

pal and in du strial water us ers u nd er th is project an d fo r th at reason 

th e Adm inist ratio n conside rs it rea son abl e th at a 4-p erc ent interest 

ra te sho uld be appli ed in this com ple tely uniqu e sit ua tio n.
20 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

Senator Bible. We have always—and you and I have discussed this 

many times and I have discussed it with Commissioner Dominy many 

times and with the Budget officials many times, and we pointed to 

the Canadian River project and we pointed to the Norman, Okla., 

project as possible precedents in permitting us to receive the same 

interest rate tha t they are receiving.

You have always responded, and I want you to make a record on 

this, that there is a difference. Would you point out what that difference is in the Canadian River project ? We always say the Canadian River interest is 3^% percent. Why should it not be 3 Vs percent 

here? That is also largely for domestic and commercial water use.

Mr. Holum. Mr. Chairman, I am not sure whether the Canadian 

interest rate is 3^8 percent or something different.

Senator Bible. Somewhere in tha t range, though.

Mr. ITolum. On the Canadian River project, however, the $31 million cost of the dam and facilities necessary to store and provide the 

water are largely charageable to the municipal and industrial water 

users.

In this case, the charge derived from storage amounts to 37 percent 

of the cost of the water to the water using agency.

Senator Bible. Would you spell tha t out a little furth er? You 

say the amount allocated to the building of the dam, the storage, is 

about 37 percent.

Mr. Holum. It is 37 percent of the cost of the project water to 

the consumer.

Senator Bible. What does tha t mean if you were to translate it into 

an interest factor—if you translate tha t to an interest factor, does 

that get you up to an interest rate in the Canadian River project of 3.8, 

3.7, or what?

Mr. Holum. I would have to do some calculation, Senator. I 

suspect if you start out wtili a 3% percent interest rate as we have 

at the present time what you would go above 4 percent in the interest 

rate if we did not charge interest on the storage facilities.

Senator Bible. Once you do charge interest on the storage facilities 

that obviously makes the interest rate go up.

Mr. II olum. That is correct.

Senator Bible. I am advised by staff that the rate certified for the 

Canadian River project, which we authorized many years ago, in 

1950. arriving a t a formula of 2.(5 percent, that was the rate of that 

particu lar project but you say that goes considerably higher if you 

wrote into it 37 percent of the cost for the storage tank.

Mr. Holum. You would increase the interest rate in tha t case.

Senator Bible. What is the situation for the Norman River, which 

is a much later authorized project? We have always used that as an 

example when we wanted to use it.

Mr. Holum. In the case of the Norman project, more than half 

of the total cost is in the dam and reservoir necessary to store and 

provide the water. The rest of the cost is in the conveyance system.

In this case, if all other reimbursement were to come from the conveyance system, whatever the prevailing interest rate, it would be more 

than doubled under the theory we are pursuing here at this time. It 

would go well over 4 percent in this case.
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 21

Se na tor Bible. W lia t you are saying is if the distr ibution system 

whi ch we are askin g fo r now had been constru cte d at the tim e the 

Ho over Dam was constru cte d you would have writ ten into the final 

cost a certa in perce nta ge for joint cost of bu ild ing the dam. Is th at 

correct ?

Mr. II olum. Tha t is absolutely c orre ct.

Se na tor Bible. I also un de rst an d you hav e gr ea t difficulty down in 

the Burea u in at te m pt in g to figure out exactly wha t th at joi nt cost 

wou ld be because of a com plicat ed s tru ctu re.

Mr. H olum. I t is alm ost impossible, Se na tor, to make calcu lation s 

like th at w ith any accurac y 'because of th e long an d invo lved histo ry 

of the Bould er Canyon Act and the many co ntracts th at have been 

deve loped since the act was passed. Th e facilities provide d by the 

Colorado Ri ve r sto rage pro jec t also becomes involved because the 

wa ter that is actu all y used and stored is supp lie d out of the fac ilitie s 

at G len Canyon. So it becomes alm ost impossible to make these ca lculation s with any deg ree of accuracy at all. Tha t is bas ically why, 

in th is unique situation, we are prop osing the 4-p erc ent inter est rat e 

in com pensatio n.

Se na tor Bible. You also say th at one of the reason s you arriv ed at 

a 4-p erc ent inter est rate is th at if we went to H H F A and asked fo r a 

loan fo r the co nstru cti on of distrib ution fac ilitie s the law requires 

th at the money ca rry 4-p erc ent inter est. Is th is tru e?

Mr. H olum. Yes, Se na tor Bible. When you ru n into a problem or 

sit ua tio n th at is com ple tely unique and dif fer ent fro m any you have 

exp erie nce d before, yo u s ta rt loo king f or pr ece dents an d the best ava ilable preced ent in the Fe de ra l stru ctur e in the wa ter field is the loan 

prog ram of II II F A . I th in k it is applicab le and sign ificant.

Se na tor Bible. I wa nted to lay some backgrou nd on th is b ecause I 

th in k the testim ony is clear. We wa nt th e pro jec t. Th ere is a gr ea t 

urg enc y. I t is a lit tle difficult to a rgue a bout pa ying the in terest th at 

the Gover nment i tse lf must pay to ge t t he money. I t is not out of th e 

ball pa rk at all.

Air. H olum. I un de rstand yo ur concern com pletely , Senator , and 

I w ant to emph asize a ga in th is is a com pletely un iqu e situ ati on because 

the s tor age faci liti es have lieen built so l ong ago th ere is no specific p ro ­

vision m ade f or the u rg en t need fo r this wa ter now fo r mu nic ipa l and 

indu strial purpo ses in Neva da.

Se na tor Bible. Be fore th e Se na tor from Color ado left he asked if I 

wou ld inq uire of yo u on one matter and th at was as to w hethe r o r no t 

there is an ything in the south ern Nevada w ater p rojec t th at is in any 

way inc ompatible wi th th e overall Sou thw est water pro ject.

Mr. H olum. No, sir, th ere is not. Th e proje ct t ha t we are c onsid ering th is mo rni ng has been , from the begin nin g, an integ ral par t of 

water resource dev elopment in the P acific South west as fa r as the De ­

partment. of In te rior is concerned. Th is leg islation we are d iscussing 

th is mo rning is com ple tely consistent wi th the proposals now before 

th e Con gress fo r me eti ng the urge nt and gr ea te r needs of the Pac ific 

Southwest.

Se na tor Bible. Tha nk you, Mr. S ecretary .

Th e S enato r from Califo rn ia.

Se na tor Kuch el. I ha ve no questions exce pt sim ply to ask is it n ot 

true th at the Dep ar tm en t reco mmends th is leg islati on to be hand led
22 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

separately rather than as a pa rt of any bill such as S. 1019 because this 

project will be repaid in full by those who reap the benefits and that 

the proposed river basin fun d would not be used in connection with its 

repayment ?

Mr. H olum. I prefer to say it this way, Senator Kuchel. As fa r as 

the Department of the Interior is concerned, we recognize the urgent 

need in Nevada for this project.

AV e would like to see it authorized either separately or as a part of 

an overall plan as expeditiously as possible, and either course of action 

is agreeable to us.

Senator Bible. Senator Cannon, did you have any questions?

Senator Cannon. I than k the distinguished chairman. I want to 

associate myself with him on this interest-rate problem. I do have one 

question. In the HH FA projects, do they have as favorable a ratio 

benefit wise, as other projects ?

Mr. Holum. I am not fam iliar with the projects financed by HHFA . 

I am sure that they would, in effect, have to have favorable benefit-cost 

ratios in order to demonstrate a secure basis for a loan.

Senator Cannon. Of course, this project could not qualify under an 

IIH FA program.

Air. II olum. Not under the present authorization.

Senator Cannon. And therefore, I think it would be better to use 

as a guide comparable interest rates on comparable projects rather 

than to say under some oth er program that the Federal Government 

has for which you cannot qualify here, tha t we are going to take it 

out of the air or out of a h at, an interest rate that those projects would 

have.

Mr. II olum. Senator, I would certainly agree with you if there 

were comparable projects to which we could make comparisons. There 

is no comparable project in the total Bureau of Reclamation program 

as it exists at the present time and I do not think Commissioner 

Dominy would see anything similar to it occurring any time in the 

immediate fu ture so there are no precedents to look to for comparable 

situations. The closest precedent is the IIHFA program.

Senator Cannon. I thank the chairman.

Senator Bible. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I understand 

you have other commitments and you may be excused.

Mr. Holum. Thank you very much, Senator.

Senator Bible. I now recognize the Commissioner of Reclamation, 

Mr. Dominy.

Mr. Dominy. Thank you, Air. Chairman. It is a pleasure to appear 

before you in support of a vitally needed water supply development. 

The southern Nevada water supply project would supply municipal 

and industrial water from Lake Afead to the cities of Las Vegas, North 

Las A egas, Henderson, and Boulder City, and to the Nellis Air Force 

Base.

It would also make municipal and industrial water available for 

the potential development of the El Dorado Valley area and provide 

some incidental flood control. The entire project lies within the State 

of Nevada. The area which would receive water from the project has 

been experiencing phenomenal population expansion in recent years 

and foreseeable demands for water greatly exceed the supplies available from existing ground water sources and throu gh the limited 

existing conveyance facilities for water from the Colorado River.
A

SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 23

The proposed plan of development is a single-purpose municipal 

and industrial water supply project consisting of facilities to pump 

water from Lake Mead and convey it throu gh an aqueduct system to 

key terminal points from which it would be taken by the various water 

agencies into their own distribution systems.

The plan proposes that the project be constructed actually in three 

stages with progressively larger capacities. Those features essential 

to later stages which could be more easily and more economically constructed initially would be included in the first stage. Fund s would 

not be requested for construction of the remaining second and thir d 

stage features until the additional capacity is needed.

The proposed project facilities include six pumping plants, rang ing 

in capacity from 30 to 300 cubic feet per second, for the first stage, 

and from 90 to 640 cubic feet per second for the ultimate project: associated forebay reservoirs; the River Mountains regulatory reservoir; 

about 35.5 miles of aqueduct and lateral pipelines, including a 4- 

mile tunnel; and accessory electrical equipment and transmission 

lines.

The 3,600 acre-foot River Mountains Reservoir would occupy a p ortion of a canyon about 4 miles northeast of Henderson. The reservoir would be formed by an earth- and rock-filled dam 160 feet high 

with a crest length of 590 feet and a dike 90 feet high with a crest 

length of 730 feet. The dam would have a concrete spillway, and 

the reservoir would have a concrete-lined combination inlet-outlet 

tunnel.

The first stage of development would provide up to 132,000 acrefeet of water annually, which is the estimated annual delivery requirement for the year 1990.

The ultimate development will provide for an annual delivery requirement of 312,000 acre-feet, which it is estimated will occur about 

the year 2020.

The estimated net depletion of water from Lake Mead, including 

all three stages of the project and existing systems, is about 262,000 

acre-feet annually. This is within Nevada's 300,000 acre-feet, per 

annum entitlement from the Colorado River which was confirmed in 

the U.S. Supreme Court, decree of March 9, 1964, establishing the 

basis for apportioning the waters of the Colorado River.

The estimated total construction cost of the first stage of the southern Nevada water supply project is $49,024,000, and the estimated 

cost of the ultimate project will be $81,003,000. Both cost estimates 

are based on April 1963 price levels.

The annual operation, maintenance, and replacement costs are expected to range from $550,000 in the first year of project operation to 

$1,457,000 per year at full development of the first stage and grow 

to a requirement of $3,381,000 per year when all three stages are 

operated to capacity.

The economic evaluation for a 100-year period of analysis indicates 

that, the estimated total benefits would exceed the average annual 

costs in the ratio of 1.5 to 1 for the first stage and 1.6 to 1 for the ultimate project.

All of the project investment costs are assigned to the municipal 

and industrial water supply function. Fo r the first stage of development these costs total $51,498,000, which includes $2,474,000 interest
24 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

during construction. Of this amount, $237,200 are investigation costs 

financed from the Colorado River development fund and are nonreimbursable.

I hasten to point out the reason they should be nonreimbursable is 

that they have been paid once in the form of power revenue receipts, 

which is the source of the Colorado River development fund. So if 

they were to he reimbursed here, it would be double payment and it 

would not be proper to load that onto the project.

The remainder would be repaid by the water users with interest. An 

interest rate of 4 percent is recommended. Using the 4 percent interest rate, water rates would vary from about 15 cents per thousand 

gallons in the initial years to io cents per thousand gallons in the 

later years of the initial stage. These rates are considered to be well 

within the repayment capacity of the water users.

In recent decades, (dark County, Nev., which encompasses the 

southern Nevada water supply project, has experienced tremendous 

population increases. The first substantial growth in the area occurred 

starting in 1931 with the employment connected with the construction of the Hoover Dam.

During the 1940's Nellis Air Force Base was established and industrial expansion took place. In 1940, the population of the country 

was just over 10,000, 15 percent of the population of the State of 

Nevada.

In 1950, the population had increased to over 48,000 and in 1960 

to 127,015 which was 45 percent of the State of Nevada’s population.

Continued rapid growth was anticipated at the time we prepared 

the basic feasibility report in August 1963. Subsequently census estimates greatly exceeded our projections, however, and our April 

1965 supplement presents an increased capacity for the first stage of 

development to reflect that situation.

The 1962 population of Clark County was 193,000 and the current 

projection estimates a population of 503,300 in 1990, which would require the full water supply capacity of the first stage, and we expect 

the population to go to 7*73,300 in the year 2020, at which time the 

capacity of the ultimate project would be required.

The past and projected future population expansion of the project 

area can be attributed to three major fa cto rs:

First, the tourism attractions of the area, based on climate, enlargement of recreational facilities at Lake Mead and Lake Mohave, and 

accelerated const ruction of luxury hotels and motels and other entertainment attractions in the Las Vegas area.

Second, the establishment and expansion of activities at Nellis Air 

Force Base and at the Nevada atomic test site.

Third, continued mining, processing, and manufacturing of various 

products, including titanium, rocket fuel, chlorine, and various highvalue chemicals.

Continued growth of all three facets of the economy can be logically 

anticipated, assuming th at an adequate and dependable water supply 

is available.

The current water supplies for the area are obtained both from 

ground water and from Lake Mead. The communities of Boulder 

City and Henderson and the industrial complex adjacent to Hend erson depend entirely upon Lake Mead water.
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 25

The Boulder City water supply is furnished under the provisions of the Boulder Canyon Project Act. The existing supply system, built by the Bureau of Reclamation, now requires .rehabilitation and augmentation, and tha t work is currently planned independent of the southern Nevada water supply project. The supply, however, will then be only barely adequate for short-range requirements. The southern Nevada water supply project will be needed for long-range community growth. Lake Mead water is supplied to Henderson and the adjacent industries by the facilities of Basic Management, Inc. This system is now being operated near full capacity during periods 

of peak demand. The principal source of water in the Las Vegas area is the under­ ground artesian basin, but is supplemented with Lake Mead water purchased from the Basic Management, Inc., system. Withdrawals from the Las Vegas ground water basin have for several years ex­ ceeded the safe yield despite restrictions on well use and development. Serious reductions in artesian pressures are being experienced over much of the area. The Nellis Air Force Base, which relies entirely on wells, is faced with an especially critical situation, and serious conservation measures are now in force on the base. There are no existing facilities which would provide water for the potential development of the El Dorado Valley outside of Boulder 

City. . . . Current water shortages are serious and becoming more acute with continued overtaxing of the Las Vegas Valley ground water reserves. The relief of the existing problems as well as all the anticipated ex­ pansion of population and industry throughout the area will be en­ tirely dependent upon the facilities of the southern Nevada water 

supply project. This project has been found to have full economic and engineering feasibility and is urgently needed. It has the wholehearted and active support of the State, the local communities and civic groups, and 

private individuals. I know of no project I have ever had the privilege of presenting to your committee tha t has the absence of any knockers or objectors. We have nothing but supporters in the State of Nevada and the com­ munities to be served are solidly behind this project. The State of Nevada has designated the Colorado River Commis­ sion of Nevada as the State agency to sponsor, operate, and maintain the project, and to contract with the United States for repayment of 

the costs. In addition, the State has enacted legislation to provide the commission with authority for these assignments. I recommend tha t this committee act favorably on the substitute bill for S. 32 which has been proposed by the Secretary.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Bible. Thank you very much, for a very, very fine state­ ment, Mr. Commissioner, and I share with you your commendation for the unanimity with which this project comes to us. In addition to the unanimity th at we have in the State of Nevada it is rath er remarkable, it seems to me, that with the constant strife over the water of the Colorado River for many, many years, that in this project we have both the State of Arizona and the State of California saying, “Hop to 

it and get this project done.”
26 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

We realize it does have urgency and I think that shows the validity 

and the importance of the project.

I have only one question and it may be something that will have to 

be supplied for the record. I ask this question of you as well as the 

Secretary and that is if you have any material available to show what 

the joint costs in these earlier projects would amount to, interestwise.

Now, I do not know whether that would be down in your shop or 

not. The only purpose of the question is this : going to the problem 

of the interest rate, if I understand it correctly, if this project were to 

be completed in its entirety now, if the dam were to be built and the 

generators were to be put in and the powerplants and th is project was 

to be put in right today, it would be put in with an interest rate under 

the Water Supply Act of 1958 and tha t it would have a factor in 

there related to the join t costs and the purpose of my inquiry is to find 

tha t if we have in the reclamation world and in projects under your 

command—and let me add here your very able command—projects 

that would be comparable to this.

Secretary Holum said this stands all alone, but if you want to relate 

it to the Norman project or the Canadian River project or any other 

projects tha t are contemporaneous how much do you allow for joint 

cost related to interest?

Do I make myself clear?

Mr. Dominy. Yes, I th ink you make your inquiry quite plain and I 

want to say that Secretary Holum’s point in saying there was no project exactly comparable to this referred to the fact tha t Hoover Dam, 

having been built a long time ago, the charge for the municipal water 

space and storage in Hoover was arrived at under an entirely different formula than that used a t Norman and Canadian River projects.

If Hoover were to be built today, there would be a much different 

allocation of cost to flood control, for example, under our present procedures. The whole process of allocating the multiple use of Hoover 

would be different. There would undoubtedly be an allocation to 

recreation and fish and wildlife.

Senator Bible. I am sure tha t is true. That has come along in 

the years.

Mr. Dominy. Here are 3 ^ million people using a lake, in a stretch 

of the river no one used at all prio r to the construction. So a sizable 

part of the lake, Lake Mead, and the cost of the Hoover Dam, could 

very properly be justified as a multiple-use for recreation and fish and 

wildlife enhancement. Hoover benefited those things all the way 

down the river below Hoover and under today’s procedures we would 

take that into account and, of course, there would have been an allocation to municipal and industrial uses for the Metropolitan Wate r Distric t of California and for central Arizona as it develops under today’s 

procedures. None of this is true. So, starting where we are with an 

existing structure built in the 1930’s we have an entirely different set 

of circumstances as to how we finance Hoover Dam and Lake Mead. 

But we will attempt to give you a statement tha t would reflect a municipal water charge for the Canadian River project, if tha t project 

were to be built with the storage facility costs shown in the interest 

payments.

Senator Bible. Well, tha t first, and No. 2, Norman, which is even 

more contemporaneous, what factor do you use there as related to 

interest?
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 27

Mr. Dominy. Well, there we use the rate derived from the formula subscribed by the 1950 act which authorized the Canadian River pro ject. It is 2.6 percent.

Senator Bible. I understand tha t particular interest factor, but you justify this higher interest rate on the southern Nevada water project by the fact tha t there was no cost melded into this. What, I am really asking is what are the joint costs in Norman and Canadian River related to an interest rate? I do not know whether 

you can come up with this or not.

Mr. Dominy. I am not jus t sure we can, either.

Senator Bible. I am sure it was not based on that analogy. It was 

based on the analogy of going to the III IF A.

Mr. Dominy. Exactly.

Senator Bible. But I am trying to find an analogy tha t gives us a 

more favorable interest rate.

Mr. Dominy. In all fairness, there is an item that comes to my attention that I was not aware of until a few moments ago, not being familiar with the II IIFA process. I have no administrative respon­ sibilities in that area, but I understand that their 4-percent interest includes a one-half percent for administration. Now, a part of the administration of these programs under our project development is covered in the cost of construction and is allocated to project functions.

Senator Bible. What you are saying, going the other way around, is th at maybe their interest rate is 3.5 percent and put one-half per­ cent on for administration and get a figure of 4 percent and if we get 3% or 3% under the Water Supply Act and put a certain percent for administration we would still get up in the 3.9 range. Is that what 

you are saying?

Mr. Dominy. If you are charging the 4 percent here, perhaps you would be justified in asking for a reconsideration of the allocation and there might be a lesser allocation on which the interest would be paid. I think this ought to be looked into. I was not aware there might be a difference here between our two project formulations and 

construction costs.

Senator Bible. Thank you very much, Mr. Commissioner. I have 

no furth er questions. I would like at this time to recognize our very distinguished regional director, Mr. West, who is doing a g reat job out in our region and I do not know whether he has anything to add or not. Mr. West ?

Mr. West. Thank you, Senator. I would just say we have come a long way since tha t day in October 1960 if I remember correctly when we got together in Las Vegas and developed the basis for the request tha t was to go to the Bureau of the Budget so it would reflect a small amount of money to begin the planning for this work. It has been a very happy experience out there with the fine cooperation of all the 

local people.

Senator Bible. You men are to be commended for it and I think the record should show that it was not until Jul y a year ago that we had a final decision from the Supreme Court to know exactly how much w ater we did have tied up and it is a good deal like buying a home. You are not going to buy a home until you know you have a clear title to it. Now we know we have a good title to this water and
2S SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

we can proceed. I think you have moved very ably and very effectively in this.

You have a table that, shows expenditures and perhaps we should 

develop this in the record a little. Assuming the ultimate enactment 

of this—the signing by the President of the U nited States, and I am 

very optimistic and very hopeful it can be done at an early date— 

then how long would it take from there to get into actual operation of 

the project? How much advance planning and design work do we 

have to do and when does it go to contract?

I have a table showing an expenditure of something like $700,000 

the first year, and $3 million the second, and $20 million the third, and 

$23 million in the fourth year.

Could you spell that out a little?

Mr. Dominy. Yes; we have projected a construction schedule t ha t 

the first year of construction would he about a $700,000 figure. This 

would be the advance planning for the detailed engineering of the 

various facilities involved. Then the actual construction contracts 

would follow in the second year and this would jump our construction 

program up into the $25 million range and then in the third year, about 

$21 million and almost $2 million in the fourth year to wind up the 

first stage construction. So you have about 4 years from the time the 

project is authorized, assuming funding followed promptly, before 

you would have this project constructed and available to make water 

deliveries.

Senator Bible. Well, I wanted that in the record, though I think 

probably it will appear in another place, and I think it should be developed a little further. Would you care to amplify any, Mr. West? 

Is tha t the kind of timetable you see as well, that it must be accelerated ? What if you should get more funds earlier? Could you crash 

program it more ?

Air. West. It is rath er difficult to compress a 4-year program into 

3 years. We do the best we can. We might shave off a half year, 

perhaps, under a crash program. We always are faced with this in 

all of our projects.

Senator Bible. I recognize that,

Mr. West. This same question is repeatedly asked and we certainly 

do the best we can and we have in some instances been able to telescope some of these operations, having them move simultaneously and 

thereby save some time.

Senator Bible. Telescoping and crashing, depending almost entirely on the funding ?

Mr. West. Right,

Mr. Dominy. And the practical limits of th at, whenever you try to 

expedite it, you inevitably increase cost and this schedule is based on an 

optimum projection of time required to carry out this kind of engineering and construction work without increasing and accelerating the 

cost.

Senator Bible. Now, just one further question that occurs to me. I 

believe that the Bureau of the Budget advised me that the interest rate 

under the Water Supply Act would be about 3.25 percent in July 1965. 

Do you know whether th at is righ t or not ?

Air. Dominy. It looks like that will be about the rate for 1965.
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 29

Senator Bible. So if this were constructed under the W ater Supply 

Act, it would not be a 3% percent but 3*4 percent.

Mr. Dominy. Yes, sir.

Senator Bible. Thank you very much, gentlemen. You have been 

most helpful th rough out all of this, in what seems to be a long struggle to get a very im portant p rojec t underway. It is well on the way and 

we could not have done it without your cooperation.

Mr. Dominy. I appreciate your words, Mr. Chairman. Let me say I have been greatly pleased with the regional director's performance.

Senator Bible. Our next witness is Mr. Pa t Head, representing the 

Colorado River Commission of Nevada who will be accompanied by 

Mr. Ted Lawson.

STA TEM ENT OF PA T HEA D, COLORADO RI VER COMMISSION OF 

NEVADA; ACCO MPANIED BY TED LAWSON

Mr. Head. Than k you, Mr. Chairman. I am Pa t Head, administrator of the Colorado River Commission of Nevada. I joined the commission in August of 1963 after 26^ years with the Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the In ­ terior. I spent my entire career with the Bureau of Reclamation in planning, having been planning engineer for the Bureau in California and northern Nevada for the latter years of my employment with that organization. In that capacity I have appeared previously before this committee in support of reclamation projects in California. It is, indeed, a pleasure for me to appear here before you today repre­ senting the State of Nevada throu gh its Colorado River Commission to present testimony in supp ort of the southern Nevada water supply 

project. Over the past 15 years southern Nevada has witnessed a fantastic population growth. The population of Clark County, in which Las Vegas Valley is located, was 48,300 in 1950. In 1960, the population was 127,000 and the population today is estimated at 250,000. Many estimate tha t our population in 1970 in Las Vegas Valley alone may approximate 350,000 people. Outside of a comparatively small amount of water imported into the area from Lake Mead through the facili­ ties bringing water into the Henderson area, the water supply to meet this expanding population has been obtained from our very valuable underground water basin lying beneath the Las Vegas Valley. In 1955, 42,500 acre-feet were pumped from this ground water basin. In 1960, 47,600 acre-feet were pumped, and in 1964, 78,700 acre-feet were pumped from the basin. It is estimated that by 1968 the water requirements for Las Vegas Valley will increase about 40 percent over the 1964 requirements and the water requirements by 1970 will lie about 160,000 acre-feet annually, an increase by about 65 percent over the 

1964 requirement. The various studies by the Geological Survey and the Desert Re­ search Institute establish tha t the amount of annual recharge to the ground water reservoir is on the order of 25,000 to 35,000 acre-feet. You can see from the figures I quoted above th at we are presently pumping three times the recharge to the ground water basin, or, put another way, we have exceeded by three times the average yield of tha t very valuable underground resurce. Continued withdrawal of
30 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

substantially more than the 25,000 to 30,000 acre-feet of underground 

water annually will result in serious overdraft of this underground 

resource.

In this overdeveloped basin certain areas with high transmissibility 

show little or no lowering of ground water levels while others will 

develop local cones of depression tha t will preclude the economic 

pumping from those cones. Such a situation has already developed 

in North Las Vegas and that, city is now reaching out into other ground 

water zones in the Las Vegas Valley for its water supply, at great cost. 

A lowering of 60 feet in water surface since 1956 has been observed 

in North Las Vegas. The effects of continued overdraft of this underground basin, in addition to the depletion effects, include critical interference between wells, decreasing yields and well flows, land subsidence with resulting damage to structures and prohibitive cost of 

development of the remaining ground water.

With regard to subsidence, the maximum subsidence between 1915 

and 1935 was estimated at 3 inches; between 1935 and 1950, 13 ^ 

inches; between 1950 and 1957, 9 inches; and between 1957 and 1963, 

35i/S> inches. Some fissures in the area of rapid ground water withdrawals are as much as one-quarter of a mile in length. These are disrupting sewers, water mains, homes, roads, and wells. It is readily 

apparen t from the above that our present economy will be placed in 

grave danger if we must continue to rely on our underground resource 

to supply most of the water requirements of Las Vegas Valley. Not 

only that, but there is no way of meeting the requirements of the expanding population other than immediate importation of water from 

Lake Mead. This imported water will have two important immediate 

functions.

First, it will allow decrease in the pumping from our underground 

basin, and then, second, it will provide the water requirements of oui 

expanding economy up to, I believe, around 1990 or maybe to the 

year 2000. In regard to the first function i t will furth er allow selective 

pumping in the area in order to make proper utilization of this underground basin.

In regard to the latter function it is appropriate at this time to make 

clear tha t the State of Nevada, the county, the cities, the Colorado 

River Commission, and all other agencies in southern Nevada lend 

wholehearted support to the more comprehensive project known as the 

Lower Colorado River Basin project as a project of this type is, in our 

opinion, the only means of meeting our growth after about the year 

1990. In addition to the needs in the Las Vegas Valley a large area 

adjacent to the Las Vegas Valley, known as the El Dorado Valley, has 

a tremendous potential for development to aid in providing jobs and 

homes for the expanding population of the Southwest. The southern 

Nevada water supply project, as planned, would aid in bringing about 

early development of tha t area as no local water is available to satisfy 

its needs. This potential further illustrates the need for more than 

a project to put to beneficial use the 300,000 acre-feet allocated to 

Nevada from the Colorado River.

The southern Nevada water supply project has been planned in an 

outstanding manner by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The facilities 

included in this plan have been described to you fully here at the 

hearing and I need to go no further in this regard. However, I do
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 31

wish to call to your a ttention the fact tha t the River Mountains Reservoir, included as part of the plan, should be one of the first facilities 

to be constructed in order th at it may be used to maximize the present 

conveyance facilities from Lake Mead, that is, the B MI system.

In addition to serving all of Las Vegas Valley, including the cities 

of Boulder City, Henderson, North Las Vegas, and the area served 

by the Las Vegas Valley Water District, Boulder City would receive 

service from the initial unit of the project. Also, Nellis Air Force 

Base, situated in the northeastern part of Las Vegas Valley, which 

presently receives its water from an underground supply, will be 

assured of a water supply eithe r by stabilization of the ground water 

resources or by surface import through the project. The United States 

would be expected to incur whatever costs are necessary to serve Nellis 

Air Force Base, either directly or indirectly, by stabilization of the 

ground water supply. The elimination of the fish and wildlife component from the River 

Mountains Reservoir has the wholehearted endorsement of the 

Colorado River Commission and the water using agencies. Provisions 

for fishing in this reservoir would have caused grave problems in 

policing the area to minimize the contamination of the domestic water 

supply. .

Las Vegas Valley is drained by Las Vegas Wash, which flows into 

Lake Mead. Prop er operation of the project will require proper 

safeguards to obviate any danger of contamination of Lake Mead 

from retu rn flows that will occur under project operation. The 

commission will accept the responsibility, along with its water using 

agencies, to provide the necessary means to insure against unnecessary contamination of Lake Mead from this wash. I cannot overemphasize the importance of tha t wonderful recreational resource, 

Lake Mead, to the economy of southern Nevada. We cannot afford 

to have tha t very valuable resource injured by pollution. We are 

at the present time becoming increasingly concerned over the deterioration in water quality as developments occur in the Colorado 

River Basin above Lake Mead. The State legislature has enacted into law the necessary revisions 

in the enabling legislation of the Colorado River Commission to as­ sure the legal ability of the commission to enter into the necessary 

repayment contracts with the United States for payment of the entire cost of the project with appropriate interest. The Colorado 

River Commission is ready to initiate contract negotiations immediately and will enter into the necessary repayment contracts to repay the total cost of the project, including the appropriate interest. 

Also, the commission is ready and able to accept the project for 

operation and maintenance, as called for in the legislation being 

considered here. The commission will contract with local water using agencies for water service, which contracts in total will equal 

the contractual obligations of the commission to the United States. 

These contracts will be prepared in a form satisfactory to the Secretary of the Interior. Therefore, as you see, Mr. Chairman, the 

United States will have complete assurance of full repayment of 

the works by the end of the 50-year period following initiation of 

service from the project. The commission accepts without question 

the policy of the Department of the Inte rior with regard to obtain-
32 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

ing suitable contracts with the water using agencies prio r to initia ­

tion of construction of the project.

Southern Nevada, throu gh the Colorado River Commission, has 

been receiving power from the Colorado River system since 1936. 

The first power received was from Hoover Dam and up to the end of 

this operating year we will have paid into the Federal treasury, part 

of which is placed in the account of the Colorado River Development 

Fund, a total of $14,500,000 for falling water and $11,600,000 for fixed 

charges to amortize our portion of the power facilities installed at 

Hoover Dam, making a total payment of $26,100,00 for power and 

energy from Hoover Dam. This project will make possible our area 

receiving some benefits for which the Colorado River Development 

Fund was established and accumulated under the Boulder Canyon 

Act.

We are also a large purchaser of power from the Parker-Davis 

power system of the Federal Government and we have just recently 

initiated service as a customer of the Upper Colorado River project.

The supplement, dated April 1965, to the repo rt on the southern 

Nevada w ater supply project, as prepared by th e Department of the 

Interior, was premised on the cu rren t interest rate for financing Federal reclamation projects of 3% percent. The Colorado River Commission expects to, and also desires to pay a fai r interest rate on the 

funds advanced by the United States in the construction of the project. 

I have been given to understand that consideration is being given to 

the use of an interest rate o f 4 percent in computing the repayment 

obligation of the commission.

If the commission must pay this rate, of course, it will. However, 

we feel that we should be treated in the same manner as all other 

municipal and industrial functions of other reclamation projects and 

tha t th e 3% percent interest rate should be used on this project.

In closing this testimony I would like to reiterate the extreme 

urgency of immediate final design and construction of the southern 

Nevada water supply project in order tha t water service may begin 

sometime during the summer of 1968. Therefore, I again urge immediate favorable consideration by your committee to this so vitally 

needed piece of legislation to authorize our southern Nevada water 

supply project.

Mr. Chairm an, I would like to submit for the record the following 

testimony, resolutions, telegrams, and letters from all of the political 

entities and others in the Las Vegas and El Dorado Valleys in support of S. 32.

First, I wish to present for the record a statement of Mr. Elmo J. 

DeRicco, director of the Department of Conservation and Natural 

Resources of the State of Nevada.

Second, I submit for the record a resolution by the Colorado River 

Commission of Nevada officially urging your early, favorable consideration of the legislation before you today.

Next, I submit for the record, a letter from Hugh Shamberger, whom 

I am sure you all know, and know well. Mr. Shamberger is president 

of the National Reclamation Association and was formerly director of 

the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources of the State of 

Nevada. Mr. Shamberger is now associate director of the Desert 

Research Institute.
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 33

Next, I submit for the record a lette r from Mr. Oran Gragson, mayor 

of the city of Las Vegas. Next, a telegram to Senator Bible from Mr. William Taylor, mayor 

of North Las Vegas. Next, a letter signed by the city manager, city of Boulder City, in 

supp ort of the project. Next, I wish to submit a letter from Mayor William Byrne of the 

city of Henderson. I submit for the record a letter signed by Mr. James Ryan, chairman of the Clark County Board of Commissioners, speaking for that 

body in support of the project.

I submit letters from the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce, the 

Henderson Chamber of Commerce, and the Boulder City Chamber of 

Commerce, all urging early construction of the southern Nevada water 

supply project. Next, I submit a letter from Mr. Herbert Grier, speaking in behalf 

of the Southern Nevada Industrial Foundation in support of the 

project. I wish to submit a resolution from Basic Management, Inc., who 

now own facilities for transp orting water from Lake Mead into the 

Henderson area. Tha t company fully endorses this project and lends 

whatever support it can to its early construction.

And finally, I wish to submit letters from the Nevada Power Co. 

and the Southwest Gas Corp., two private utility companies serving 

the power and gas requirements of southern Nevada, both urging 

early favorable consideration to the legislation before you.

Again, Mr. Chairman, I wish to th ank you and the committee for 

allowing me to appear before you today. We are grateful that you 

are taking time from your busy schedule to consider this legislation 

so impo rtant to Nevada.

Senator Bible. Let me say th at I am delighted to take tha t time. 

I consider th is the No. 1 project, at least, this current session of the 

Congress and I am not going to rest until it is enacted into law.

I would be very happy to hear anything that the very distinguished 

commissioner of the Colorado River Commission might like to add. 

He is a lifelong friend of mine, a very distinguished Nevadan, and I 

am also glad to see him back in the Nation’s Capitol.

Ted Lawson ?

Mr. Lawson. Jus t that we need it.

Senator Bible. Thank you.

The various resolutions, telegrams and letters will be placed in 

the record at this point.

(The communications referred to follo w:)

Statement of Ei.mo J. DeRicco, Director. Department of Conservation and

Natural Resources, Stateof Nevada

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Elmo J. DeRicco. I am director of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources of the State of Nevada. I have held this position since Janu ary 1 of this year. Prior to my appointment to director, I served as State engineer from 1962 to 1965. and as assistan t State engineer from 1957 to 1962, and as a field engineer and 

deputy State engineer from 1949 to 1957. I have been closely associated with the development of ground wate r supplies in the Las Vegas artesian basin for over a decade and, in addition, I have had the good fortune of being exposed to the knowledge of many years of experience 

of my predecessor, Hugh A. Shamberger.
34 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

During my term as Sta te enginee r the growing problem of wa ter supply in 

Las Vegas Valley compelled us to change the entire concept of adm inistration 

of thi s vital ground wa ter resource. The ever-increasing concentration of 

development in areas of criti cal ground wa ter supply thr eatene d to cause immedia te f ail ure of many of the wells in these area s.

Through the efforts and assista nce of the Desert Research Insti tute of the 

University of Nevada, the U.S. Geological Survey, the dep artment of conservation and natur al resources, the Las Vegas Valley Ground Water Board, and 

our Governor, Gran t Sawyer, the Division of Water Resources ins titu ted a program of ground water adm inistration in the valley which to the best of our 

knowledge has never been attempted successfully anywhere in the world. All 

ground wa ter development in the valley today is scientifically analyzed by the use 

of an electric analog computer.

Our p rogram provides f or the development of the major w ate r supplies in area s 

where they will cause the lea st detrim ental effect on existing are as of withdrawal. In order to comply with our program, the Las Vegas Valley Water 

District and the city of North Las Vegas, the two major wa ter suppliers in the 

basin, have been compelled to develop their wa ter supplies at points which are 

seve ral miles from the ir are as of use. All applications for wa ter are care fully 

weighed to determine if they are really needed, and wherever possible, applicants are requ ired to obtain their service from the m ajor wa ter suppliers.

It is not my intent to bore you with the details of our adm inistrative problems, 

but I feel th at it is important for y our committee to know th at we in Nevada have 

left no stone unturned in our efforts to prevent dis aster in the w ate r crises with 

which we are faced in Las Vegas Valley, but in spite of our efforts, we cannot 

overcome the fac t th at we are presently withdrawing 3 gallons of water from 

our ground water aqu ifers for every gallon they receive in rech arge and that 

we can see no relief in the ever-increasing demand for wa ter supply. For a 

sho rt time our adm inistrative efforts will delay the day of disaster in the 

critical areas of the basin, but we can only prevent dis ast er if immediate steps 

are taken to import w ate r from L ake Mead.

In the interests of the we lfare of the people in Las Vegas Valley and th e overall 

effect on the economic stru ctu re of our entire State, I urgently requ est that you 

take fav orable action on this bill.

R es olu ti on

Wherea s the Colorado River Commission was created by an act of the Legislatur e of the Sta te of Nevada in 1935 to, among other things, receive, protect, 

safe guard, and hold in trus t for the Sta te of Nevada all water, water rights, 

and all oth er rights, interests, or benefits in and to the waters of the Colorado 

Riv er ; and

Whereas th at act, as amended, authorized the Commission to request on behalf 

of the Sta te of Nevada from the Secretary of the Interio r of the United States 

the ins tallation of water service facilities as the commission in its discretion may 

deem necessary or convenient to meet and serve the future wa ter requirements 

of the S tat e of Nevada ; and

Whereas th at act, as amended, authorized and direc ted th e commission to 

negotiate for and obtain and ente r into and execute an d cau se to be executed such 

con trac ts, documents, and ins truments as are app rop riate and requisite to carry 

such requ ests into effe ct: an d

Whereas that act authorized the Commission und er suitable contract, or contra cts , with the Secretary of the Interio r to accept t ransfer of the care, operation 

and maintenance of such w ate r service fac ili tie s; and

Wherea s the economy a nd grow th of L as Vegas Valley is being placed in grave 

jeopar dy by the alarming overd raf t of its valuable underground ba sin; and

Whereas the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has planned the southern Nevada 

wa ter supply project, which project includes the necessary facilities to bring 

wa ter from Lake Mead into Las Vegas Valley ; and

Wherea s Nevada has been allocate d a total of 300,000 acre -feet from the 

Colorado River for use in Nevada : and

Wherea s this water must be placed into use in the are a by 1968 to meet the 

wa ter needs of the are a and to safeguard aga inst the ruin ation of our valuable 

underground basin : Now. therefore, be it
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJ ECT 35

Resolved, That the commission urges the Senate Subcommitte e on Irriga tio n 

and Reclama tion of the Sena te Committee on Interio r and Insu lar Affair s to give early fav orable consi deration to passa ge of S. 32, a bill coauthored by Sena tors Alan Bible and How ard Cannon to authorize the sou thern Nevada wa ter supply 

pr oj ec t; be i t furth er

Resolved, Th at the Commission is willing and anx ious to enter into the 

nece ssary repa yme nt contr act wit h the Unite d Sta tes to repay the entire cost of the pro jec t including the ap pro pri ate inte rest, and in turn will enter into appr o­ pri ate contr act s with the wa ter using agenci es sat isfact ory to th e Secr etary 

of I nte ri or ; be it fu rth er

Resolved, Th at the commission auth oriz es its adm ini str ato r, Mr. Pat Head, to present any testimo ny and make any statem ents n ecessary for the commission in 

supp ort of S. 32: be it f ur th er

Resolved, Th at the commission wishe s to express to the cha irm an and to the Subcomm ittee on Irr igati on and Reclama tion its since re app reciation for the opp ortu nity afforde d the local agencies and the commission to appea r before it to pre sen t testim ony in sup port of this so vitally needed, pr oj ec t; and be it 

fu rth er

Resolved, T ha t a copy of thi s reso lutio n be se nt to Senator Clinton P. Anderson, 

cha irm an of the Senate Subco mmittee on Irr iga tio n and Reclamation, to Gov­ ernor Gr an t Sawyer, to Sen ator s Alan Bible and How ard Cannon, and to Congress man Walter Barin g.

Colorado River Com m is si on of Nevada,

R. B. Gr if f it h , Chai rman .

A tt es t:

C. F. Neu m a n n, Secretary .

Uni ve rs it y of Nevada,

Deser t Rese arch I ns ti tute ,

Cen ter for W ater Resou rces Res ea rc h,

Reno, R ev., May 1 1,1965 .

Senator Clin to n P. Ande rso n,

Chai rman , Sen ate Subcommittee on Irr ig atio n and Recl amation, U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator : Your comm ittee is today receiving testimon y in supp ort of 

the sou thern Nevada wa ter supply pro ject to place to beneficial use the wat ers of the Colorado River to which Nevada is enti tled . I wish to tak e this op­ por tun ity to lend by who lehe arted supp ort in endorsem ent to th at proj ect and I urge ear ly favorable conside ration for its aut hor iza tion and construction. I am now asso ciate director in charge of wa ter rese arch for the Desert Re­ search Insti tut e, an arm of our State univ ersity at Reno. I was director of the De par tme nt of Conse rvation and na tu ra l resources, a positio n I held from the time of the crea tion of th at depar tment in 1957 unt il Ja nu ar y of thi s year. Prior to th at time I was in the Sta te engineer ’s office, sta rti ng in 1935, and 

from the peri od 1951 to 1957 I was S tat e engineer. During my position as dir ect or of the dep artm ent of cons ervation and na tur al resour ces, and while in the Sta te eng inee r’s office, I was inti ma tely acqu ainte d with the rap id ground wa ter development in the Las Vegas Valley, beginning in 1936 when I first inventoried all the wells th at had been drilled. The serious ov erd raf t now occurring in th at gro und water basin will be covere d in deta il by witnesses before you today . However. I wish to tak e thi s opportu nity to add my opinion th at the con tinuat ion of the pre sen t gro und water ove rdraft will place thi s vit al resource in a peril ous condition if th at ov erd raf t is not 

reduced by the ye ar 1968. It is imp erat ive th at a pipel ine be constructed from Lake Mead into the Las Vegas Valley and Eldo rado Valley at the earliest possible time. I feel the best possible plan has been set for th by the U.S. Bureau of Reclama tion in its repo rt 

entitled "The Southern Nevada W ate r Supply Pro ject.” I app rec iate this opportu nity to convey to you my endorsement of the legislatio n before you identified a s S. 32.

Sincer ely yours,

H ug h A. Shamberg er, Associate Direc tor.
3G SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

City of L as Vegas, Nev.,

May 10, 1965.

Sen ator Clinton P. Anderson,

Chairman, Senate Su bcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation,

Ncic Senate Office Building,

'Washington, D.C.

Hear Senator Anderson : In regard to the May 20, 1965, hearin gs before the 

Senate Interior Irriga tio n and Reclamation Subcommittee on S. 32 southern 

Nevada water supply project authorization, please he advised the city of Las 

Vegas strongly supp orts this project. Wa ter supply development in this area 

is vital to the continued grow th and development of the city of Las Vegas.

The population of Las Vegas has more than doubled since the I960 census 

and projections to 1970 indicate an increase of 13.500 per year based on the 

growth of the existing economic base.

Engineering stud ies have shown that continued ove rdrafting of our ground 

wa ter supply results in depletion of the underground basin at a rate which has 

become critical, making it imperative to bring Lake Mead wa ter to this are a 

to insure continued population growth and ind ust rial expansion.

Very t ruly yours,

Oran K. Gragson, 

Mayor, C ity o f Las Vegas.

[Telegram]

North Las Vegas. Nev.,

May 7, 1965.

Hon. Alan Bible,

U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.:

It is impe rative th at prompt consideration and action be taken on S. 32 the 

sou thern Nevada water supply project authorization. Our present underground 

aquafirs cannot sustain the tremendous population grow th North Las Vegas 

has experienced the last 5 years. Favorable consideratio n by the Interior 

Irr igation and Reclama tion Subcommittee would be greatly appreciated by all 

the people of N orth Las Vegas.

Sincerely,

William Taylor. 

Mayor, N orth La s Vegas, Nev.

Boulder City, Nev., May 12, 1965.

Senator Clinton P. Anderson,

Chairman, Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Anderson : The city of Boulder City, Nev., is vitally inte rested 

in the passage of legislation which would authorize co nstruction of the southern 

Nevada water supply pro jec t to provide add itional wa ter for the m unicipalities, 

wa ter d istricts, and Feder al agencies located in Clark County, Nev.

While those entitie s located within the Las Vegas Valley have access to u ndergrou nd aquifers which supply a portion of the wa ter needs of the area, Boulder 

City is completely dependent upon surface water runoff for its needs. Our 

pre sen t supply (provided for under term s of th e Boulder City Act of 1958, Public 

Law 85-900) is limited to a maxim um of 3,G50 gallons per min ute pumped from 

Lake Mead.

Our population has increase d approximately 25 percen t in the past 5 years. 

Pro jection s by ou r plann ing consultants indicate a sim ilar or greater percentage 

increase in the n ext 5 y ears. Consequently we must begin work now to provide 

addition al water necessary to accommodate this growth. As a p art of ou r overall 

wa ter picture, the Bureau of Reclamation has just completed a study financed 

by the city indicating th at our immediate need is for an additional 20 million 

gallons of storage capacity. It is anticip ated th at such a fac ility would be designed and constructed to tie in with the so uthern Nevada wa ter project.

The city council has made commitments to the Colorado River Commission 

of Nevada to p articipate in the project, and has indica ted on several occasions its 

willingness to enter into a repa yment con tract for our share of the cost of 

development.
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 37

We urge th at the subcommittee give ear ly and fa vorable consideratio n to legislation authorizing this project, which is of vita l importance to the sou thern 

Nevada region in general and to Boulder City in particular .

Very truly yours,

W. F. Cottrell, City Manager.

City of H enderson, Nev., Jfa// 13, 1965.

Senate Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation,

U.S. Senate, Wash ington, D.C.

(Attention Senator Clinton P. Anderson, Ch airma n).

Gentlemen : The city of Henderson joins the other local and Sta te agencies

in urgently requesting th at favorable consideration be given in this session of 

Congress to the authorization and construction of our vitally needed southern 

Nevada water supply project.

The only w ate r ava ilable to the c ity of Henderson at the present time is from 

Lake Mead und er con tract w ith Basic Management, Inc., for 5 million gallon s per 

day, or about 5,600 acre-feet per year. This amount is not sufficient to supp ly 

all of the present needs of the city and falls fa r short of supplying the ne ar ­

future requirem ents to meet our expa nding population with in our city.

The city of H enderson has determined th at the souther n Nevada wa ter supply 

project, planned and proposed by the Bureau of Reclamation of the U.S. De partment of the Int erior, is a sound and logical means of supplying the much-needed 

wa ter to the city as well as to other agencies within the proposed project a rea .

A grea t deal of the Las Vegas Valley wa ter require ments are now being met 

from an alarming overd raf t of our valuable ground water basin. Although 

the city of Henderson does not enjoy the und erground resources available to 

most of the valley, we look with ala rm and concern on the situation th at will 

exist in the entire valle y in the very near future if thi s mining of wa ter is 

not discontinued.

The city of Henderson, therefore, lends all the sup por t at its command to the 

southern Nevada wa ter supply project autho rization and wishes the comm ittee 

to know that it will gladly accept wate r delivered to it from the southern Nevada 

water supply project under suitable conditions and con tracts with the Colorado 

River Commission of Nevada and, in turn, will bear its proportion ate share of 

the financial burden of the construction, operation , and maintenance of the 

works constructed und er thi s project.

Sincerely,

Wm. B. Byrne, Mayor.

County of Clark, Nev.,

Las Vegas, Nev., May 12, 1965.

Senator Clinton P. Anderson,

Chairman, Senate Subcom mittee on Irrigation and Reclamation,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Anderson: The Clark County Boa rd of Commissioners, of 

which I have the pleasu re of serving as chairman, joins the other agencies in 

urging favorable action by your committee to a uthorize the very urgently needed 

southern Nevada w ate r supply project.

Over the past two deca des Clark County has enjoyed a phenomenal grow th 

in its population and economy. In 1950 the population of Clark County was 

48,300. The population grew from 120.000 in 1960 to the present estimate of 

over 250.000. The enrollment in our schools has more tha n doubled since 1960. 

We cannot, of course, expect this phenom enal grow th to continue. However, 

I believe it is safe to assume that our population will be in the order of 350,000 

people before the year 1970.

We are fortu nate in having a larg e underground basin lying beneath the 

Las Vegas Valley to meet our water requirem ents up to this time. However, 

we are placing th at valuable resource in grave jeopardy by the ov erd raf t th at 

is prese ntly taking place. In 1964 we drew about 78.000 acre-feet of wa ter 

from our underground basin, while at the same time it is estimated that our 

average ann ual recharge is only about 30.000 acre-feet. Therefore, las t yea r 

we took from this underground basin about three times the wa ter retur ned 

to th e basin.

We have been informed by experts th at we can expect an ann ual dr af t on our 

underground basin of over 100,000 acre-feet by 1970 if supplemental wa ter is
38 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

not made ava ilab le to the area. The se same exp erts inform us th at thi s drastic 

overd raf t may well overe xtend the capabil ities of our und erground basin to 

the extent th at this basin may no long er be ava ilabl e to us.

Thi s means th at if our economy is to be sus tain ed and allowe d to continue 

its grow th we must have impo rt fac ilit ies as plann ed in the sou thern Nevada 

wa ter pro ject before 1970. In fact, we believe it imp erati ve th at these facilities 

be constructed in order th at wa ter be avai labl e from thes e fac ilit ies by the 

summ er of 1968.

The Clark County Board of Commissioners pra y th at the way will be cleared 

for early cons truction of the urg ent ly needed sou ther n Neva da wa ter supply 

pro ject th rough its authorizat ion in thi s session of Congress.

We app reciate this oppo rtuni ty to make our views known to you r committee 

as you receive testimo ny on and consider the legislation before you.

Since rely yours,

J am es G. R ya n,

Chairman, Board of County Commissioners.

L as Vegas Cha mb er of Com merce,

Las Vegas, Nev., May 12, 196.5.

Hon. Clinton P. Anderson.

U.S. Senator. Chairman, Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation, U.S.

Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Sen at or : The Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce join s th e local wa ter 

using agencie s, the Colorado Riv er Commission, the Sta te of Nevada, and othe r 

inte rest ed orga nizations in sou thern Nevada in giving its wholehearted endorsement to S. 32. the bill to author ize our sou ther n Nevada wa ter supply project. 

Inf orm atio n and data avai labl e to us dem onst rate withou t question th at this 

pro ject mus t be in opera tion pri or to 1970 if the Las Vegas Valley is to be spar ed 

a catast rop hic deterio ration in its economy.

Where our population in 1950 was 48.300. our population toda y is estim ated 

to be 250, 000 people. We have been very fo rtu na te in having a very valua ble 

unde rgro und resou rce availab le to us to dra w upon to sus tain our growin g economy. However, th at resource is being dange rousl y ove rdrafte d a t the pres ent 

time. It is estimat ed by exp erts th at the rech arge to thi s basi n is in the order 

of 25,000 to 30.00 0 acre-feet. When you consid er th at in 1964, 78,00 0 acre-fee t of 

wa ter were dra wn from this underground basin, you can readily see th at we a re 

mining thi s resou rce at a dang erous rate.

The time has come when the water alloc ated to Nevada from the Colorado 

Rive r m ust be pu t to beneficial use in order to n ot only se rve our pres ent economy 

but to prov ide f or our ever-expanding population and economy.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has done an outstan din g job in prep arin g a 

plan for the construction of fac ilit ies to convey wa ter from Lake Mead into 

Las Vegas Valley. This is the pro jec t th at is b efore you today f or consideration . 

We believe th at it is a well-engineered plan and has economic justificatio n fa r 

beyond th at shown in the report by the Bur eau of Reclamation, which, in itself, 

indicat es a very sati sfactory benefit-to-eost ratio.

The c ham ber of commerce pra ys th at y our committee w ill give early considera ­

tion to S. 32 in order th at this pro ject may be placed into operation at the 

earliest, possib le date.

We wish to expre ss our sincere app recia tion for this opp ortu nity to make our 

views known to your committee.

Very tru ly yours,

R obb C. J oh ns on . Pr es id en t.

B oulder Cit y Cha mb er of Com merce.

Boulder City, Nev., May llt

, 196.5.

S e n a to r Cli nt on P. Ande rso n,

Chairman, Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator : The city of Bou lder City has enjoyed over the p as t many years 

an ade qua te wa ter supply from Lak e Mead. The faciliti es making this water 

supply possib le were cons tructed by the Unite d Sta tes dur ing the buildin g of 

Hoover Dam. The growth of our city is now taxing those facilit ies to the ir full 

capa city , an d additional wa ter is urg ently needed to m eet t he demand .
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 39

Our chamber wishes to take this opportunity to urgently request early favor­ able considertaion of your committee bill S. 32, a bill to authorize southern 

Nevada water project. We fully endorse th is plan as prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation as the best means of satisfying future requests of Boulder City, Eldorado Valley, and the large metropolitan area in Las Vegas Valley. We appreciate this opportunity to make our views known to you and your 

committee.

Cordially yours, Jim Cokey, President.

Henderson, Nev., Chamber of Commerce,

May 13, 1963.

Senator Clinton P. Anderson,

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Anderson : The Chamber of Commerce of Henderson has been concerned over the wate r supply available to the city of Henderson during the past few years. Our population continues to expand while our water supply available to us remains static. Our only source of supply at the present time is from the Basic Management, Inc., facilities bringing water from Lake Mead. Our entitlement under those facilities is for less than 0,000 acre-feet annually. Our present requirements for water are fa r above the water to which we are entitled. We are living on borrowed time now. It is imperative t hat additional facilities be constructed to bring the urgently needed water from Lake Mead into this area if we ar e to not only meet our potential growth but to meet our 

present population and economy. The Henderson Chamber of Commerce joins all the local and State organiza­ tions communicating with you today in wholehearted support and endorsement of S. 32, a bill to authorize the southern Nevada wate r supply project. The water to which Nevada is entitled under the Colorado River compact and the recent Supreme Court decision in the Arizona v. California suit must be put to 

use if the Las Vegas Valley, of which we are a part, is to avoid grave deterioration of its economy. I and the chamber of commerce appreciate the opportunity you are affording us and the other local people in presenting to you our wholehearted support 

of the legislation before you.

Sincerely yours, Ronald J. Langford, President.

Southern Nevada Industrial Foundation, Inc.,

Las Vegas, Nev., May 12,1963.

Senator Clinton P. Anderson,

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator: Water is the most precious commodity any community can own and, especially, in an arid region such as southern Nevada. Without it life 

just cannot exist. Southern Nevada, in the early days, was blessed by an abundant supply of underground water. It flowed from artesian wells ■which were completely adequate for the small population of the southern Nevada area. Las Vegas was the only population center of southern Nevada of any great proportions, it being a railroad town and existing on this industry for its life. There were few water problems then because the population remained somewhat static until 1930. During the construction of Hoover (Boulder) Dam, starting in 1930, the area was subjected to mild growth which, while not taxing the water supply, did give indication that, if the expansion continued, Las Vegas would, sometime in the future, suffer from lack of water. Following the completion of the dam, the anticipated decline in population failed to materialize and the southern Nevada sector continued to grow, putting a further strain on the water supply. Shortly before World War II, the Army Air Force set up the aerial gunnery school north of Las Vegas, and, while the wate r company was not serving the
40 SOUTHER N NEVADA WATER PROJECT

base, the water table in the valley was affected by the wells which were sunk 

to supply wate r for the base.

At the s ta rt of t he war, basic magnesium plant was established at Henderson, 

and it was this project which brou ght abo ut additio nal wa ter for the valley 

thro ugh a pipeline from Lake Mead. This gave hope that the development of 

the valley are a would not be hampered by a lack of water.

On Jul y 1, 1954, the Las Vegas Valley Wate r District took over the dis tribution system from the Union Pacific sub sidiary which had supplied wa ter to the 

citizens since the founding of the town. At th at time, wa ter consumption in the 

valley was 5,182 million gallons per year. Most of thi s was supplied from the 

artesi an wells because it was cheaper to provide thi s wa ter t han get it from the 

Lake Mead pipeline. However, the w ater dis trict did constru ct a pipeline from 

Henderson to Las Vegas and the wa ter from the lake was used to augmen t the 

underground supply.

In the 10 yea rs from 1954 to 19G4, the growth of the southern Nevada are a 

has been phenomenal, and this grow th was reflected in the use of w ater. In the 

year 1964 the wa ter d istrict supplied 13,670 million gallons of w ate r to the populace, a consum ption of nearly three tim es th at of 1954.

While it is hard to predict what will happen by 1970, j us t 5 yea rs hence, the 

best estimates of engineers who have studied the problem are th at wa ter 

consumption in the Las Vegas Valley will approximate some 160,000 acre-feet 

per year. This w’ould be an increase of some 1% times the amount now being 

used.

This wa ter must come from somewhere. The underground tab le has been 

declining rap idly since 1950, and add itio nal burdens on the supply will almost 

completely deplete the available underground wate r unless new sources are found.

Both time and water are running out. Th at is why the southern Nevada w ate r 

project is so imp orta nt. Without th is project it is entirely conceivable that 

the are a can dry up and blow away on the wings of the dust devils w hich are 

prevalent in some of the dese rt are as surroun ding the valley.

The project is imperative, also, if the plans for future development in Eldorado Valley are to be carried out. A program, which has been ini tia ted by the 

Colorado Riv er Commission of Nevada is entirely depe ndent on availability of 

water. The water is available in Lake Mead, but delivery of that wa ter to the 

ultimate consumer is a problem which migh t be greater than the resident of 

Nevada can solve withou t help from the Federal Government.

A southwest water project is a necessity if all of this arid land in this section 

is to be put to beneficial use. However, the need for w ate r in southern Nevada 

is acu te right now7, and gre at harm w’ould res ult i f thi s southern N evada project 

is not completed as rapidly as possible.

Sincerely yours,

Herbert E. Grie r, P re si de nt .

Reso lutio n of th e Board of Directors of B asic Man ag em en t, I nc.

Wherea s bills have been introduced in the Congress of the United States 

for a uth orization of the southern Nevada wa ter supply project to be constructed 

by the Burea u of Reclamation (S. 32 and H.R. 2020) ; and

Whereas Basic Management, Inc., and its in dustrial stockholders own th e only 

existing sub sta ntial w’orks for the diversion and transmission of wa ter from 

Lake Mead to gether with ap purtenant industr ial and municipal w ater ri ghts ; and

Whereas said works and wa ter rig hts were purchased from the U nited States 

af te r their construction for defense purposes during World War I I : and

Wherea s the capacity of the said works is not sufficient to meet the Nevada 

demands for Lake Mead wa ter thi s ye ar or in the fu tu re ; and

Wherea s the southern Nevada wa ter supply project is greatly needed to meet 

water requ irem ents in the Las Vegas Valley and the costs of said project can be 

fully reim bursed by water users witho ut financial assistance from the United 

St ates ; and

Wherea s under alleged autho rity of the Boulder Canyon Proje ct Act (45 

Stat. 1057) the Department of the In terio r ass erts the power to limit the intra ­

state priority of existing rights to the use of Colorado River wa ter in Nevada 

to the maximum use in any yea r prior to J an ua ry 1, 1964; and

Whereas any such limitation on valid existing rights purchase d from the 

U ni t'd States would be taking of pro per ty without due process of law and without j us t co mp ens ation; and
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 41

Whereas the Secretary of the Interior has testified previously, as follow s:

“I think that the tradition al law of prior appropriation which lias been one of 

the gre at resource laws of the West and developed by the court s in most of the States of the West over a period of years, makes sense in terms of equity and 

logic and commonsense as fa r as wa ter development within any Sta te is concerned. As to applying it intra sta te, I don’t th ink any one has any qua rrel with 

this” (Hearings on S. 1658, Committee on Inter ior and Insu lar Affairs, U.S. Senate, 88tli Cong., April 16, 1964, p. 465) : Now. therefo re, The Board of 

Directo rs of Basic Management, Inc., does resolve as follows : 1. Th at the Congress of the United States enact into law legislation for the 

construction of the southern Nevada water supply project at a n early da te; and 2. T hat such legislation contain an app rop riate provision requiring the Secreta ry of the Inter ior to recognize the intra sta te prior ity of existin g water righ ts 

held under certificates of app rop riation issued by the Sta te of Nevada.

Adopted May 18, 1965.

Nevada Power Co.,

Las Vegas, Nev., May 13,1965.

Senator Clinton P. Anderson,

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Anderson : I have the pleasure of serving as president of the 

Nevada Power Co., located in Cla rk County, Nev. In that capacity and for the 

company I wish to take this opportu nity to inform you th at the Nevada Power 

Co. wholehearted ly endorses and supports S. 32 to authorize the construction of 

the southern Nevada water supply project. I fu rth er implore you to give early 

favo rable consideration to the legislation before you in order th at thi s project may be placed under construction immediately. This project is needed at least 

by the year 1968 if our wonderful community with its outstandi ng clim ate is 

going to continue to prosper. The company actu ally came into being in about 1906 und er a differen t name. 

It became the Southern Nevada Pow er Co. in 1929, which name was changed in 

1961 to its present name, Nevada Pow er Co. Since 1950 the g rowth of this company has been phenomenal, as could be expected if it was to meet the rapid 

grow th of the area. Our electric energy requirements have averaged slightly 

over 18 percent increase per year f or the p ast 15 years which, I believe, is a true 

index of the astounding grow th and increase in wealth of our community.

I app reciate thi s opportunity to make known to you and your comm ittee our 

wholehe arted supp ort of the sou thern Nevada wa ter supply project.

Sincerely yours,

Elmer J ohnson, President.

Southwest Gas Corp..

Las Vegas, Nev., May H, 1965.

Hon. Clinton P. Anderson,

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation, U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator Anderson : Southw est Gas Corp, w ishes to join all th e other local 

organiz ations in sup port of the legislation before your com mittee today to auth or­ ize the southern Nevada wa ter supply projec t My fam ily has resid ed in Las 

Vegas fo r a num ber of years. We have seen the fantastic growth th at has taken place in our population and in our economy. For m any yea rs we have been very 

concerned over the continued overuse of our valuable underground water resource. The time has come when the overd raft of our und erground basin must 

cease.

The southern Nevada water supply project will bring pa rt of Nevada’s share 

of the Colorado River into this area. Water from the Colorado River is the only 

means by which we may not only save our present economy but provide for the 

future of our area.

Southwest Gas Corp, was formed in 1931, but it was not until 1954 that the 

company introd uced natur al gas into s outhern Nevada to m eet the growing needs of Las Vegas Valley and surroun ding are as. Over the past 8 yea rs our invest-
42 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

ment h as increased approxima tely 17 percent p er yea r to a total of $22,500,000 to 

meet the expanding needs of our community.

We urge with every mean s at our command th at your committee give early 

and favorable consideration to S. 32.

Sincerely yours,

W. M. Lau b, President.

Senator Bible. Mr. Head, let me ask you this question concerning 

the interest rate. You make mention tha t you would like to have the 

same interest rate as the Water Supply Act of 1958 and, of course, I 

think it is very clear that I would too.

You also make reference to other comparable projects. Have you 

any projects in mind that we could look to for guidance in securing an 

interest rate that is a little move favorable than the 4-percent rate?

Mr. Head. Mr. Chairman, yes, I could name quite a few’ I have 

worked on myself. There is a project before Congress at this time for 

the Central Valley, the Trinity Division and Central Valley project 

and they are all done on the basis to the allocation, to the municipal 

industrial function and the interest-rate formula is used on those that 

I speak of here today.

Senator Bible. They always tell me when I ask this question of 

people in reclamation tha t they also have built into it certain joint 

costs that are not built in here. I do not know and this is the th ing I 

asked of Commissioner Dominy a short time ago.

Mr. Head. Yes, I believe, Mr. Chairman, it comes down to whether 

you consider this project as part of the Colorado River system and part 

of the project development that was intended in the Boulder Canyon 

Act itself and I spoke of the Colorado River development fund that 

was set up to aid in the investigation and construction of the reclamation projects.

My personal opinion is this is part of the development of the Colorado River system that was called for in the canyon south.

Senator Bible. If tha t is true, then there should be a certain factor 

for joint cost, whatever that factor is. I do not know’ liowT you 

determine that factor, but there must be some factor tha t goes in 

there for general cost.

Mr. H ead. There certainly must be.

Senator Bibee. I see. Well, than k you, very much, Mr. Head. 

That is a very, very able presentation. I want to p artic ularly compliment you on the manner in which you have accumulated all that 

testimony and presented it. It is an outstanding job.

Mr. H ead. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Bible. Our next witness is Mr. Stewart, president of the 

Las Vegas Valley Water District.

STATEMENT OF GRANT STEWART, PRESIDENT, LAS VEGAS VALLEY 

WAT ER DISTRICT

Mr. Stewart. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am Gran t Stewart, president of the Las Vegas Valley Water 

District. My district covers nearly all of the Las Vegas Valley floor 

except the areas served by the city of North Las Vegas and by the city 

of Henderson.

Las t year, we served over 30,000 customers a total of 42,000 acrefeet of water. Nearly all but about 6,000 acre-feet of water made
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT 43

available to our customers came from the ground water basin underlying Las Vegas Valley. It can be reliably reported tha t over 78,000 

acre-feet of water was pumped from the underground basin during 

1964 while our ground water basin recharged only about 25,000 acrefeet.

We, of all people, are certainly aware of the damaging effects of this 

tremendous overdraft of our underground basin. However, this has 

been absolutely necessary if we were to meet the water requirements 

of the area.

To this point, except in a few isolated cases, our underground basin 

has not been damaged from this overdraft. However, we cannot continue the present use of this basin to meet our expanding population.

My family and I are all native Nevadans. We have had a wonderful life in Nevada, especially in the Las Vegas Valley area. I, personally, have been a resident of Las Vegas for 40 years. I look forward to my family, my children and their families having the wonderful life that I have had in the area. That, of course, cannot occur 

unless additional water is brought into the area.

The southern Nevada water supply project, as planned so well by 

the Bureau of Reclamation, furnishes the additional means of meeting the near future water requirements of Las Vegas Valley.

The Las Vegas Valley Water District fully endorses the operation 

and maintenance of the facilities by the Colorado River Commission. 

We are only too willing to enter into the necessary repayment contracts with the Colorado River Commission to assure the repayment 

of our share of that project with the commission to take and pay for 

up to 90,000 acre-feet annually at the first stage of the southern Nevada 

water supply project.

Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, our district appreciates very much the opportunity to appear before you in support of 

S. 32, the legislation before you to authorize the southern Nevada 

water supply project.

We urge your early, favorable consideration to this legislation in 

order tha t this project may be constructed and placed in operation by 

1968 in order to alleviate the tremendous overdraft of our ground 

water basin and, in turn , assure its optimum use for many years to 

come.

Although you are hearing today testimony with regard to the southern Nevada water supply project, our district is also very much in terested and concerned with providing water in this area when the 

300,000 acre-feet available from the Colorado River no longer will meet 

our needs.

We are fully in accord with the provisions in the legislation being 

considered in Congress to authorize the Lower Colorado River project 

and the studies to provide the means for import of large amounts of 

water into the Southwest.

We wish to join all the agencies in the Southwest involved in the 

large-scale plans to bring about such a project.

Mr. Chairman, I might make one comment on the question tha t was 

asked about the overdraft of the basin. All of our wells now are 

down to the 1,000-foot range in depth. Several years ago the freeflowing artesian wells were only 400 or 500 feet. Our lift in some 

wells has dropped from t hat to where we are lifting 100 feet. We are
44 SOUTHE RN NEVADA WA TER PR OJ EC T

lift ing in some wells, 300 and 350 feet in the same area. We have had 

a few wells that the one time could pump at the rate of 2,500 gallons 

per minute that are now down to about 1,200 gallons per minute because that is all the recharge that particular well is receiving from 

the underground basin.

As to how much water underground, nobody can really tell but the 

water table has definitely dropped in the whole valley in the last several years.

Senator Bible. I am glad to have that additional information, Mr. 

Stewart. I want to thank you for your very fine statement and particularly the evidence of interest tha t you have shown coming from 

Las Vegas here to make this presentation which again underscores the 

need and urgency in this project.

There are no further witnesses.

The hearing stands adjourned.

(Thereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned, subject to 

the call of the Chair.)

o
AP PE ND IX

1 « 0 f u

\ * * /)

Assembly J oin t R esolution No. 18

Urging the Congress of the United States to enact at this session the necessary 

legislation to begin the Southern Nevada water supply project.

W H ER EA S, The ra pid gr ow th of po pu la tio n in C la rk C ounty , 

N ev ad a, du ring th e pa st tw enty- fiv e an d es peciall y du ring the pas t ten 

ye ars ha s cr ea te d a ne ed fo r w at er fa r in excess of th e nat ura l gro un d 

w ater su pp ly, le ad in g to a ra te of with dr aw al m or e th an do ub le th e 

ra te o f re ch ar ge an d c ons eq ue nt de pl etio n of the ar te si an rese rv oir; an d

W H ER EA S, The fu tu re de ve lopm en t of the en tire su rr ound in g 

ar ea an d even th e m ain te nan ce of su ch im po rtan t fe de ra l in st al la tio ns 

as Ne lli s A ir F orc e Bas e an d th e N ev ad a Ato m ic Tes t Site de pe nd 

up on the pr ov isio n of adequat e w at er from so me oth er so ur ce ; an d

. W H ER EA S, A dditio nal w at er ca n be mad e av ai la bl e on ly fr om 

Lak e M ea d by th e in st all ati on of ad eq ua te pi pe lin e an d pu m pi ng faci litie s; an d

W H ER EA S, N evada’s ri ght to a sh ar e of th e w at er fr om th is 

so ur ce h as b ee n de te rm in ed by the Su prem e C ourt of the U ni te d St at es ; 

an d

W H ER EA S, T he ec on om ic f ea sibilit y an d fa vo ra bl e ra tio o f ben efit to co st of th e Sou th er n N ev ad a water su pp ly pr oj ec t ar e sh ow n by 

th e 19 63 re port to th e B ur ea u of Rec la m at io n; an d

W H ER EA S, T he ne ed an d w or th o f this p ro je ct ha ve been fu rt her 

re co gn iz ed b y its in cl us io n in th e so uthw es t Pa cific w at er p la n pro po se d 

by t he S ec re ta ry o f th e In te ri o r; an d

W H ER E A S, By th e natu re of this pr oj ec t it ca n be co m pleted 

an d us ed in de pe nd en tly of th e oth er elem ents of this pl an ; an d

W H ER E A S, Nec es sa ry le gislation fo r the co ope ra tio n of th e Sta te 

of N ev ad a in th e pro je ct ha s be en en ac te d as C hap te r 34 8, Sta tu te s of 

N ev ad a 19 63 , an d C hap te r 5, Sta tu te s of Nev ad a 19 64 ; an d

'*>ftaaiKrrr*r**K*****aHMeKKK*grr****.*r***r*!rr*******x<*M^^ r ?

IMMMHWidMHtaiUKItMMKMtiNMMMMKMMKjKJKMMf* MMMNNMMNHM *** *** * **** * *«*»•*# «-ii * ** *

45
46 SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER PROJECT

:

W H ER E A S, T h e Con gr es s of the U nited St ates had be fo re it at 

th e last sessi on an d ha s be fo re it at this session, as Se na te Bill 32 , leg ­

is la tio n to au th or ize th e So ut he rn N ev ad a w ater su pp ly pro je ct ; an d

W H ER EA S, T h e ev er m ore critic al ne ed fo r im m ed ia te ac tion is 

sh ow n by a r ec en t news re leas e of the D ep ar tm en t of the In te ri or sh ow ­

in g th at in Dec em be r 19 64 , gr ou nd w at er lev els in th e Las Veg as ar ea 

re ac he d a re co rd low; no w , ther ef or e, be it

R ESO LV ED BY T H E ASS EM BLY A N D SEN A T E O F T H E 

STA TE O F N E V A D A , JO IN T L Y , T h at this Leg islatu re re sp ec tfu lly 

ur ge s th e Co ng ress o f th e U nite d States, at this sessi on , to en act the 

nece ssary legislation to be gi n th e So ut he rn N ev ad a w at er su pp ly pro jec t; a nd be i t fu rt her

R ESO LV ED , T h a t ce rti fie d co pies of th is R es ol ut io n be pre par ed 

an d tran sm itt ed fo rt hw ith by the Le gislative C ou ns el to the Sec re ta ry 

of th e In te ri or an d to each M em be r of th e N ev ad a Con gr es sion al 

D eleg atio n.

PASSED BY TH E SENATE 

March 1 6,1 965

PASSED BY TH E ASSEMBLY 

February 12,1965

C L i —

President of the Senate

Secretary of the Senate

Speaker of the Assembly

Chief Clerk of the Assembly

Governor of the State of Nevada