BOARD00087 ‎(2)‎

• Board Meeting Date: 11/14/2006
• Description: Report of the Attorney General
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

~-=---

~

....

'.

Page 2

United States has until November 10 to file a notice of appeal. Counsel will
update the CWCB during executive session at this meeting.

.

5. Rio Grande New Confined We,ll Rules. 2004CW24 (3).

We are still waiting for a decision from the Water Court.

6. Ground Water Rieht for Grea~ Sand Dunes National Park, 2004CW35 (3).

No trial date is set, but there is an additional scheduling conference set for
November 6,2006. How this case proceeds may depend on how the Water Court
rules in the Rio Grande New Confined Well Rules case.

7. Conseios de Desarrollo Economico de Mexicali v. Norton.

C.D.E.M., a Mexican economic development group, and two U.S.
environmental groups filed an action challenging the proposed lining of the All-
American Canal, which conveys Colorado River water to California's Imperial
Valley. The Congressionally authorized canal-lining project is intended to salvage
seepage water from the canal, resulting in less seepage water recharging the
Mexicali aquifer. Plaintiffs object to the lining project, concerned that the project
will make less seepage water available to Mexican resources and for use by
Mexican business interests.

.

In their complaint, the Plaintiffs asserted eight claims: (1) deprivation of
property without due process; (2) unconstitutional tort; (3) violation of the
doctrines of equitable apportionment or equitable use; (4) estoppel; (5) violation of
NEP A; (6) violations of the ESA; (7) unlawful take of a listed migratory bird
. species; and (8) violation of the San Louis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act. Defendant, the United States of America and Defendant-Intervenor, the
Central Arizona Water Conservation District moved to dismiss Counts 1-4 and 6-8
for lack of standing and for summary judgment with respect to Count 5.

The district court granted the motions ,to dismiss and for summary judgment,
resulting in the completed dismissal of the Plaintiffs' complaint. However, on
appeal to the Ninth Circuit, the Plaintiffs were granted a stay with respect to the
order of dismissal. Concerned about how a stay on the lining project would affect
the Seven States Agreement, the CWCB Board authorized the Attorney General to .
file an Amicus Brief on behalf of the Defendants.