BOARD00060 ‎(3)‎

• Board Meeting Date: 1/24/2007
• Description: WSP Section - Colorado River 7-State Agreement Approval
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

l.I/.lli/06 DRAFT Sho\ViIl~ Ch:lIll!.cS rrom Dr:! '! sentttl Secretary 02/03/06

like authorities and entities of other stiltes in the performance of any lawful
power, duty, or authority. WYo. STAT. ANN. I 16-1-101 (LEXISNEXIS 2005).
Wyoming and its State Engineer represent the rights and interests of all
Wyoming appropriators with respect to other states. Wyoming v. Colorado,
286 U.S. 494 (1922). See Hinder/ider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek
Ditch Co., 304 U.S. 92 (1938). In signing this Agreement, the State Engineer
intends that this Agreement be mutually and equally binding between the
Parties.

B. Background

l. Federal law and practice (including Section 602(b) of the 1968 Colorado River
Basin Project Act, 43 U.S.C. ~ 1552(b), and the Criteria for Coordinated Long-Range
Operation of Colorado River Reservoirs Pursuant to the Colorado River Basin Project
Act), contemplate that in the operation of Lakes Powell and Mead, the Secretary of the
Interior consults with the States through Governors' Representatives, who represent the
Governors and their respective States. Through this law and practice, the Governors'
Representatives have in the past reached agreements among themselves and with the
Secretary on various aspects of Colorado River reservoir operation. This Agreement is
entered into in furtherance of this law and practice.

2. On January 16, 200 I, the Secretary adopted Colorado River Interim Surplus
Guidelines (IS G) based on an alternative prepared by the Colorado River Basin States,
for the purposes of determining annually the conditions under which the Secretary would
declare the availability of surplus water for use within the states of Arizona, California
and Nevada in accordance with and under the authority of the Boulder Canyon Project
Act of 1928 (45 Stat. 1057) and the Decree of the United States Supreme Court in
Arizona v. California, 376 U.S. 340 (1964). The ISG are effective through calendar year
2015 (through preparation of the 2016 Annual Operating Plan).

3. In the years following the adoption of the ISG, drought conditions in the
Colorado River Basin caused a significant reduction in storage levels in Lakes Powell
and Mead, and precipitated discussions by and among the Parties, and between the
Parties and the United States through the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of
Reclamation. The Parties recognize that the Upper Division States have not yet
developed their full apportionment under the Colorado River Compact. Although the
Secretary has not imposed any shortage in the Lower Basin, the Parties also recognize
that with additional Upper Basin development and in drought conditions, the Lower
Division States may be required to suffer shortages in deliveries of water from Lake
Mead. Therefore, these discussions focused on ways to improve the management of
water in Lakes Powell and Mead so as to enhance the protection afforded to the Upper
Basin by Lake Powell, and to delay the onset and minimize the extent and duration of
shortages in the Lower Basin.

.;1. On May 2, 2005, the Secretary announced her intent to undertake a process to
develop Lower Basin shortage guidelines and explore management options for the

4

Deleted: I
Deleted: 13

.

.

r------ -.--- ~._-' -- .-.-
Deleted: 4. Shortages in the Lower
. Basin will also trigger shortages in the
delivery of water 10 Mexico pursWlot to
l the Mexican Water Treaty of 1944,
February 3, 1944, U.S.-Mex., S9 S:at.
J}~9, T;S: 9?4:3~.~;:!::~. 3_~3. ~~_._

r~~leted: ,

.