14 Attorney General Report

• Board Meeting Date: 11/18/2008
• Description: Attorney General's Report and Legal Briefing
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Page 5
12. Preparation for Future Colorado River Compact Litigation
One of the concerns underlying the creation of the Colorado River Subunit was the possibility
that, as a result of the failure of the Seven States Agreement or other circumstances, Colorado
would become involved in interstate litigation over the Colorado River Compact. To this point,
the Lower Division States appear to have invested much more time in preparing for such
litigation than the Upper Division States. For example, Arizona has retained outside counsel to
assist with litigation preparation. California has a State Board devoted to Colorado River issues.
Nevada continues to threaten to force reconsideration ofthe Compact if its need for additional
water supplies is not met. This concern is heightened by the knowledge that, due to the
complexity of the factual and legal issues, the number of parties affected, and the sheer number
of possibly relevant documents, adequately preparing for Colorado River Compact litigation will
take years.
To respond to this concern, the Colorado River Subunit has been charged with the task of
preparing Colorado for future Colorado River Compact litigation. This task involves three
elements.
First, the Subunit has begun to prepare memoranda researching issues that may arise in future
Colorado River Compact Litigation. These memoranda include those prepared in connection
with the 7-States negotiations, described above.
Second, the Subunit has been actively involved in developing and organizing an electronically
searchable database of the States' Colorado River documents. This database is coded and
organized so as to assist the State with respect to future Colorado River Compact litigation.
Every document entered into the database is stored in word searchable format. In addition, every
document entered into the database is coded so as to make the document searchable by such
"objective" information as date, title, author, recipient, organization, type of document, and other
similar information. Finally, every document entered into the database is reviewed by a member
of the Subunit and then coded so as to make the document searchable pursuant to one of four
"subjective" outlines. This "subjective" coding thus makes the document searchable by the
issues addressed, the geographic location, the provisions within the Law of the River to which
the document is relevant, and by the type of authority represented by the document.
The Subunit is currently in the process of subjectively coding the documents scanned into the
Colorado River Database system. It is hoped that this database will prove invaluable were
Colorado to become involved in any Colorado River Compact interstate litigation, dramatically
reducing the amount of time necessary for litigation preparation. In addition, the database has
already proven useful with respect to Colorado River negotiations. Documents in the database
were relied upon in responding to issues that have and continue to arise during the 7-States
negotiations and the Bureau's NEPA process, as well as the negotiation of Mexico's role in
s ortage s aring.
Third, the Subunit is working with the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the Upper
Division States, and the staff at the Upper Colorado River Commission to develop and
organize an electronically searchable database of the Commission's Colorado River
documents. This has entailed developing a Memorandum of Agreement among the Upper