WSPC06582 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

001375 . 2. However, the most fundamental question is this: Does the Colorado River Commission of Arizona. have power to b:ind the State of Arizona so as to make effeotive Seotion 13, subdivision (c), which is quoted on page 12 of your brief and whioh reads as follows: "( 0) Also all pa.tents, grants,. oontraots, oonoessions, leases, permits, licenses, rights of way, ar Other privileges from the United States or \mder its authority, neoessary or oonvenient far the use of waters of the Colorado River or its tributaries, or for the generation or transmission. of electrioal energy generated by means of the waters of said river or its tributaries, whether under this act, -the Federal wa-ter p ower ao-t, or o-therwise, shall be upon the express condi-tion and with -the express covanan-t -tha-t -the rights of the recipients or holders thereof 1;0 wa-ters of the river ori-ts tribu-tarios, for -the use of whioh -the same are neoessary, oonvenient, ar :inoiden-ta.l, and -the use of the same shall likewise be subject -to and oon-trolled by said Colorado River Compao-t." i.' It can be argued -tha-t if Arizona aocepts a permi-t for such a projec-t from -the Federal Power COmmission, subjeo-t -to the above quo-ted subdivision of Seo1;1on 13 of the Boulder. Canyon Project Ao-t, it would be bound by such a res-tric-tion. However,:in considering such an argumeII\; "two questions should be kept in mind, namely: (1) Does the Colorado River Commission of Arizona have power, :in the absence of ratifioation by the State of Arizona. of the Colorado River Compaot by appropriate legislative aotion, to effeotively aocept the provisions of the Compact so fa.r as this parti<mlar project is conoerned? (2) Could the State of Arizona take the position that suoh a restriction is without binding effect on the State in the absenoe of ratifioation by the legislature? -I, We know and appreciate the attitude of the present Colorado River Commission. In view of the present attitude of the Commission it would be easy for all the states to agree to. the prelim:inary permit be:ing issued by the Federal PoWer Commis8ion, 8ubjeot to the reservation and restriction above quoted. But the question whioh was suggested at Salt Lake when this matter was under disoussion by the Committee of Fourteen was whether this subdiv.ision, above quoted, would be binding fg ainst the Sta-te of Arizona if some fubure Commission should take the position that :in the absence of ratification of the Compact Arizona would not be bO\md by the restriction under discussion. In other words, it might be urged that ratification by a s-tate of the provisions of a compact allooating waters of an :interstate river :in so far as it applies to a particular project oould not be accomplished by a restriction plaoed in a. federal aot or a rElstriction imposed by a permit of the Federal governmeII\;, and that the Qnly way the State of Arizona could be bound to -the .p revisions of this C<ompaot, :in so far as it applies to any use of water, would be by aotual. ratification by the legislature. This carries with it. of course, the other ques-tion which I have intimated whether the present act creating the Coa,rado River Commission of AriZona oan go so far, under the oonstitution of the State of Arizona, to give -the Colorado River Commission of Arizona the power . to agree to restriotions whioh are tantamount to acoepltence of the provisions of tho Colorado River Compaot in so far as the 8!ll1l0 apply to a particular projeot.