Section 103(A) (2) is hereby amended by adding thereto the following additional language:

"Appropriate lands will be substituted by the Secretary for any lands removed from the jurisdiction of the Yuma Mesa Irrigation and Drainage District. Any excess or unused water capacity in the Gila Main Gravity Canal shall be available for use by the substituted lands."

Mr. JOHNSON. Our next witness will be Mr. Frank M. Clinton, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of southern California.

STATEMENT OF FRANK M. CLINTON

Mr. CLINTON. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is Frank M. Clinton, and I am general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of southern California.

I am pleased to be appearing before you today in support of H.R. 12165, the proposed Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act.

I have a prepared statement, Mr. Chairman, filed with your committee, and I would like to make a few comments on the legislation. Mr. JOHNSON. Your statement will appear in the record as if presented in full, Mr. Clinton. You may summarize.

Mr. CLINTON. This bill represents a key step in a continuous and long-standing effort to deal with the salinity problem of the Colorado River. While much of the present thrust of this legislation is due to the salinity problem in Mexico, it is important to note that the Federal Government and the seven Colorado River States have been working on the overall Colorado River salinity problem for many years.

Your committee has received expert testimony on the Colorado River salinity problem, and the various salinity control programs from the various Federal and State representatives. The metropolitan water district was pleased to work with the Colorado River Board of California in preparation of the statement presented by the Committee of Fourteen; and we have enthusiastically supported the statement. Remembering many years of controversy between the Colorado River Basin States over water rights we find it especially gratifying for those of us in California to be joining with representatives of the six Colorado River Basin States in this matter of great mutual concern.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I also wish to file a statement by the San Diego County Water Authority which supports H.R. 12165. The authority is one of our large-member agencies and uses the largest share of our Colorado River supply; it is also represented on the Colorado River Board.

Mr. JOHNSON. That statement will appear in the record. Are there any questions, Mr. Udall?

Mr. UDALL. I have no questions.

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Hosmer?

Mr. HOSMER. This may be the last time the witnesses will appear before us; and I certainly want to pay tribute to the contribution this gentleman has made to the conclusion of water problems.

Mr. UDALL. May I join in this comment Mr. Hosmer has made. You have played a very important role over the years in water affairs in the Southwest, and we are very grateful for your public service.

Mr. JOHNSON. You have done a fine job with the metropolitan water district; and I am glad that you are still joined as a "team member" with Colorado, Arizona, and the other States.

Mr. CLINTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you for coming. If you retire, we wish you a happy retirement; I know you are going to enjoy it.

Mr. CLINTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The written statement of Frank M. Clinton, and the statement of the San Diego County Water Authority are as follows:]

STATEMENT OF THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, PRESENTED BY FRANK M. CLINTON, GENERAL MANAGER

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California joins with the many other state and local agencies of the Colorado River Basin that have appeared before your committee in support of H.R. 12165, the proposed "Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act." This bill represents a key step in a continuous and long-standing effort to deal with the salinity problem of the Colorado River.

While much of the present thrust for this legislation is due to the salinity problem with Mexico, it is important to note that the Federal Government and the seven Colorado River states have been working on the overall Colorado River salinity problem for many years.

Your committee has received expert testimony on the Colorado River salinity problem and the proposed salinity control program from various federal and state representatives. The Metropolitan Water District was pleased to work with the Colorado River Board of California in preparation of the statement presented by the Committee of Fourteen and we enthusiastically support that statement. Remembering the many years of controversy among the Colorado River Basin states over water rights, we find it especially gratifying for those of us from California to be joining with representatives of the other six Colorado River Basin states in this matter of great mutual concern.

In the past, most of the measures to deal with Colorado River salinity have involved doing something about the water after it reaches the service area. For instance, Metropolitan Water District constructed the world's largest water softening plant to reduce the hardness of a portion of the water it serves from about 350 ppm to about 125 ppm. This plant has been in operation since 1941 and presently softens an average of 150 million gallons a day. Another example of salinity control measures undertaken by local users are the extensive sub-surface drainage tiles installed by agricultural water users.

The various measures that have been taken to deal with salinity in the local service areas have been of limited effectiveness. Of particular long-range importance are the vast tonnages of salt that are gradually building up in the groundwater basins where Colorado River water is used on the surface and for replenishment. We therefore believe that one of the most significant features of the control program provided in H.R. 12165 is that for the first time a major effort would be made to remove salt from the Colorado River system at the source of the salt. Taking the Paradox Valley Project as an example, approximately 200,000 tons of salt a year presently enter the Dolores River and become part of the Colorado River water supply. This salt enters the river as a highly concentrated brine of 160,000 parts per million, over five times the salinity of sea water. The Bureau of Reclamation has indicated that it would be feasible to trap most of this brine before it enters the Dolores River and convey it to an evaporation pond. We believe this concept makes eminently good sense-to keep highly saline brine out of our water supply.

In a similar way, the proposed Las Vegas Wash Project and the Crystal Geyser Project would permit removal of saline brines containing 130,000 tons a year and 3,000 tons a year, respectively, from the Colorado River system.

We would also like to comment briefly on the proposed Grand Valley Project. This project has two basic phases-renovation of the irrigation canal system in the valley and development of improved irrigation management practices. This program will benefit downstream users by reducing the amount of salt leached from the shales underlying the lands in the valley. It is estimated that the salt load from the valley can be reduced by 200,000 tons a year. The program will also benefit the farmers in the valley in that better irrigation practices should result in higher crop yields.

That part of H.R. 12165 dealing with the salinity of Colorado River water delivered to Mexico is particularly welcome, as this problem has been with us in one form or another since 1961. This District has followed the situation very closely and representatives of Metropolitan met with Ambassador Brownell in the fall of 1972. The Committee of Fourteen has described to you the position of the seven states with respect to the program developed by Ambassador Brownell and contained in Minute 242 of the International Boundary and Water Commission. The Metropolitan Water District fully supports the statement of the Committee of Fourteen, including the reservations expressed by the committee. Notwithstanding these reservations, we are extremely hopeful that this problem can be resolved within the general framework provided in Minute 242.

In connection with our relations with Mexico, I think your committee will be interested in an emergency arrangement that has been worked out to serve water to the City of Tijuana, Mexico, through facilities owned by local agencies in the United States. That city's population has swelled to almost a half million persons and there has been an acute water shortage. Approximately two years ago, the Mexican Government urgently requested the United States Government to work out an emergency program for delivering a portion of Mexico's Colorado River entitlement to Tijuana through facilities in the United States. The arrangements

were completed in the summer of 1972 and the water furnished under this program presently provides about one-third of Tijuana's needs.

Although there is no obligation on the part of the United States or Southern California water agencies to make any deliveries to Tijuana, four Southern California agencies made major efforts to deliver water to help solve this serious problem. The Metropolitan Water District pumps the water from Lake Havasu and conveys the water through its system to Otay Reservoir, which is owned by the City of San Diego. Lastly, the Otay Municipal Water District conveys the water from Otay Reservoir to the Mexican Border, where there is a connection with a pipeline constructed by the City of Tijuana. Each of the California agencies involved is paid for its share of the costs involved in the water transfer. The San Diego County Water Authority acts as representative of the four agencies in administering the contract with Tijuana and the International Water and Boundary Commission oversees the program. The program is scheduled to be in operation for five years, during which time it is hoped that Mexico will be able to complete facilities for conveying Colorado River water from Mexicali to Tijuana. In conclusion, the Metropolitan Water District appreciates the opportunity to testify before your committee in support of the proposed Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program.

STATEMENT OF THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY

The San Diego County Water Authority comprises 761,000 acres in San Diego County, California, and was formed in 1944 by the California state legislature, to provide water for municipal, domestic and other beneficial uses throughout San Diego County. The Authority is a member of The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, an obtains its supplies of supplemental water from that District. At present, all of the water delivered to the Authority by Metropolitan Water District comes from the Colorado River.

The Authority succeeded to the rights of the City of San Diego and County of San Diego to Colorado River water, and assigned its rights to Metropolitan Water District when it joined that District. In 1972-1973, the Authority received over 340,000 acre feet of Colorado River water for use within its area, and also received 6,776 acre feet for subsequent delivery to the Republic of Mexico. Water distribution agencies in the Authority area, in turn, delivered 304,000 acre feet of Colorado River water to their customers, and 38,000 acre feet were available from local sources. These deliveries included 69,500 acre feet for agricultural use, amounting to 93% of the total agriculture water used within the Authority's area. Population within the Authority was estimated to be 1,460,000 as of April 1, 1973, which is 96% of the total population of San Diego County.

As the preceding indicates, San Diego County has a large stake in the Colorado River. The crops grown within the Authority area are predominantly those that have a high market value, such as avocados, citrus, cut flowers, winter vegetables, and similar crops. Growing these crops is risky; however, they are essential because the operating costs of farms in the Authority area are very high, among the highest paid by farmers anywhere in the country, and without receiving high returns, San Diego farmers could not continue in production.

These specialty crops are especially vulnerable to high levels of salinity in the water supply. If the salinity of the Colorado River water rises significantly, the Authority's farmers will find it difficult to continue in production.

In urban areas of the Authority, with a population approaching 11⁄2 million, also are aware of the present high level of dissolved salts in their water supplies, and are strongly opposed to increases in the water supply's salinity. Colorado River water salinity levels have reached the point where it is considered very aggressive from the standpoint of corrosion. Current estimates of the cost due to excessive levels of corrosion in water heaters and other plumbing facilities range from $10 to $20 million per year for San Diego_water users.

For these reasons, the San Diego County Water Authority fully supports the statements made by the Colorado River Board of California pertaining to the need for control of the salinity of the Colorado River. The Authority concurs in the joint statement of the Seven Colorado River Basin states that was presented to Congress on H.R. 12165, and we join with the recommendation of that statement in urging the passage. We believe that this legislation is necessary in order to prevent further increases of the river's salinity which would be of special concern to our farmers, our commercial and industrial establishments, and to our residents.

Because of our continuing and close relations with the Republic of Mexico, we also urge the passage of this legislation which we believe is necessary, in all its provisions, so that we may indeed achieve a definitive, equitable, and permanent solution to the salinity problem with Mexico.

Mr. JOHNSON. Our next witness is Mr. Lowell Weeks, general manager of the Coachella Valley County Water District.

STATEMENT OF LOWELL WEEKS

Mr. WEEKS. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I have Mr. Maurice Sherrill on my right, who is the attorney for the district; and we have in the audience today Mr. Leon Kennedy, the president of the board; Mr. Raymond Rummonds, who is the vice president of the board; and also the chairman of the Colorado River Board for the State of California.

Mr. JOHNSON. We are glad to have these people with us here this morning.

Mr. WEEKS. We have filed with your committee a written statement of the district, and we will just summarize very shortly the fact that Coachella Valley is located in the desert portion of California, and lies just north of the Salton Sea. We are one of the portions of the district that has three supplies of water; we have a supply from the natural underground; we have four repayable contracts with the Bureau of Reclamation for Colorado River water; and we now have a contract with the State of California for State water.

We are in agreement with the bill, H.R. 12165, except that we would like to see the section entitled "section 102 (a) and (b)" revised along the lines that were recommended by the Committee of Fourteen.

I think in summary for our support of the bill we would say that we are willing to enter into another repayment contract with the United States, and certainly would support and recommend H.R. 12165 with the revisions as proposed in title I, section 102.

I think if there are any questions, Mr. Sherrill will be pleased to

answer.

Mr. JOHNSON. Your complete statement will appear in the record and we appreciate your summary.

Mr. Udall, do you have any questions?

Mr. UDALL. No, I don't; I will be glad to have the presentation of you gentlemen and your support of the legislation. We appreciate your testimony.

Mr. JOHNSON. I, too, want to say that I am glad to hear you support this bill. You will have a great modification there, and you will be obligated to repay that back to the Government.

Mr. WEEKS. Very likely we are going to have another 40 years added to what we already have.

Mr. JOHNSON. You'll probably never see the end of this one, but that's the way it goes. Do you have any questions you would like to raise at this time?

Mr. WEEKS. None whatsoever.

Mr. JOHNSON. How about your attorney?

Mr. SHERRILL. No, Mr. Chairman, I have nothing to add.

Mr. JOHNSON. We certainly thank you for appearing here today, and we will do the best we can to follow the suggested amendments