WSP02956 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. .. ' . Southern Nevada Water Authority and the States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. Each of the reply briefs argue essentially a similar set of points. They contend that questions of the Secretary's discretion with respect to releases of mainstream water outside of the context of the 1944 Mexican Water Treaty are not authorized by law. The Treaty clearly describes the obligations of the United States to Mexico. The reply briefs generally rely on the language within the BCP A and the 1964 Supreme Court Decree in Arizona vs. California. Specifically, the plaintiff's contention that there was Secretarial discretion in issuing an amended 2002 AOP, or suspending the interim surplus guidelines, is irrelevant. Article II specifically defines the Secretary's role in operating and maintaining the river and reservoir system, meeting downstream demand in the United States, and complying with the terms of the Mexican Water Treaty. Several of the briefs also point out that the appropriate forum for coordination of endangered species issues between the two countries resides in the Executive Branch, through the Secretary of State. As you will recall, this process is already underway in the Minute 306 forum, which is administered by the American and Mexican Sections of the International Boundary and Water Commission. Also, as the reply briefs point out, Section 8 of the ESA establishes the appropriate diplomatic course through which the United States State Department and its Mexican counterpart must address endangered species issues of international importance. WATER QUALITY Selenium Committee Last November, the Board was informed that the Forum was exploring the option offormally establishing a "Selenium Committee", composed ofa minimwn of two members from each state. Walt Shannon from the State Waters Resources Control Board, a representative from lID, and myself will represent California on the Committee. The Committee has been created and charged with the following tasks: . Gather information concerning seleniwn and determine what is occurring within each Basin State with regard to seleniwn; Review the Salinity Control Act to determine if the Forum has authority to expend funds for selenium control; Develop the "pros" and "cons" related to the Forum's involvement in this matter; and Present a committee report, at the May 2003 Forum meeting, delineating its fmdings, without making any recommendatioos. . . . An initial conference call, among the Committee members has been schedule for February 19, 2003. ~~.._~-- - ~erald . erman xecutive Director --' 12