WSP10896 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

OJD4J3 -14- under part onel "Betv.een the Upper and Lower Basins," are entitled, The Colore do River Compact, the Boulder Canyon Project Act, Contrncts for Power and linter. and Boulder Canyon Project Adjustment Act. Hith respect to Chapter III, "DividinG the Hater ," Colorado suggests revisions, amend- ments, and rearrangements of the information. as followsl . (1) Early in said chapter, under the heading, "Between the Up. per and Lower Basins," inc lude the full text of the Colorad 0 River Com- puct, - a document involving but 4 printed pages which is of such impor- tance as to justify its reproduction in full. Its inc lusion will not add to the length of the Report, for thereby many of the explanatory state- ments as to provisions of the Compnct can be deleted, some of which state- ments may not be entirely accur<lte, or at least must be revised to make them accurate. Colorado suggests that introductory conunents, concerning the fears, hopes and contentions, that a.re said to have motivated the negotiation of the Compact, should be confined to statements of physical conditions and relations affecting development needs and programs, and should so far as possible avoid interpretations of decisions (such as the decree entered in 1922 in the case of Hyoming v. ColoradO respecting the lAre.mie River, which Colorado says is wrongly interpreted in the Report, as evidenced by subsequent interpretation, thereof by the Court itself); and should eliminate legal opinions such as those concerning "the law respecting rights to the use of waters of interstate streams," and contentions such as that "the federal government was the agency which logically should effect the regu la.tion 0 f river develo.,ment" (since the lower part of the Colorado River WaS or had been navigable). In the event the Bureau of Reo lamation elects to conunent on legal questions as the same may have been interpreted in 1922, the Report should include a review of the case of Kansas v. ColoradO respecting the Arkansas River, decided in 1907 (and recently reaffirmed), which stream also was or had been navigable in its lower reaches) and which decision definitely cover- ed both questions of interstate and federal-state rela.tions. , (2) In part (2) entitled, "Congressional Acts," include brief digests of the Doulder Canyon Project Act, and the Boulder Canyon project Adjustment Act, together with such other Acts of Congress as may be re- lated thereto, and such agreements thereunder between the United st<ltes and interested organizations as related to the authorization and construc- tion of Boulder Dam; and also a summary of the contracts for pov.er which were ente~ed into and are now in effect. . (3) In part (3) of the Chapter on "Dividing the Hater ," entit- led, "Between the states of the Lower Division," summarize all the con- tracts entered into between the Uni ted States and the Sbtes of the Lower Division and interests therein, having to do with the delivery or use of waters of the Colorado River system. Colorado says that numerous contracts have been made, only a few of which are mentioned in the Re- port, and that such information (including the recently negotiated con- traot with Arizona, which is not mentioned in the Report) should be pre- sented, together with suggestions by the BureaU of Reclamation us to what steps might be taken to "clarify interstate relations," as request- ed in the Report.