Laserfiche WebLink
<br />attached Appendix I) Some of these points were included in the recommendations <br />of the Ad Hoc Committce but not necessarily all. Also sevcral important sub-issucs <br />were not rcsolved in thc Ad Hoc Committce's report. Among thcse sub-issues were <br />the designation of a marketing agent; the specification of the marketing- authority; <br />and the exact water charges that would be made for industrial purposes. The im- <br />portant point here is that agreement could not be reached on what authority the <br />federal government was exercising in approaching the marketing issue nor what <br />agency could take the lead, <br />Subsequently, and over eight months later. the Secretary of Army and the <br />Secretary of Interior unilaterally agreed in a memorandum of understanding dated <br />February 24. 1975. that the Department of Interior would be the marketing agency <br />for a two-year period. I am sure each of the Committee Members have seen the <br />memorandum of understanding and will recognize that the memorandum goes far <br />beyond the matter of desig-nating a marketing agency. <br />The memorandum states that the Secretary of Interior shall determine how much <br />water from the main stem reservoirs that had been allocated to irrigation is in excess <br />of that needed for present irrigation and for the probable extent of future irrigation, <br />In addition, the Secretary of Army shall determine how much of the water determined <br />by the Secretary of Interior to be excess to present irrigation needs can be made <br />available for industrial uses. Notc that in these two instances the states are com- <br />pletely ignored with regard to making this determination. In view of the states' <br />interests and rights in water utilization and control for beneficial consumptive use <br />as guaranteed by the 1944 Flood Control Act, it seems strange that the Secretary of <br />Interior and the Secretary 'of Army can arbitrarily make these decisions, It also <br />appears strange that in view of the several rccommendations coming out of the <br />Missouri River Basin Ad Hoc Committee which included deliberations by the tcn <br />Missouri River Basin states, that these decisions would be made unilaterally by <br />the federal agencies without state input or Congressional authorization. <br /> <br />Modification of Memorandum <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />It is believed Congress. acting through this or other Committees. should <br />direct the Dcpartment of Interior and Department of Army to modify the memorandum <br />of agreement in order to meet more clearly the needs of the states in the Missouri <br />River Basin. While it is recognized that assignment of responsibility in issues of <br />this magnitude is desirable. I would certainly urge that such assignment be on a <br />more formal basis and that such assignment be on an extended period of time <br />rather than the limited two-year period. <br />It is also recommcnded that any modification of the memorandum should recog- <br />nize other recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee and should recognize the needs <br />and the dcsircs of the affccted states. In dctermining the extent of allocations of <br />watcr necessary studies should be carried out through the Missouri River Basin <br />Commission, South Dakota. like many of the Upper Basin States. is currently <br />working on identifying its needs for agriculture. municipal, and industrial uses <br />in view of changing conditions. <br /> <br />-3- <br />