WSP06673 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. I I J I I I I I I I t I a I I I I I o <.;J ..... Mention of the foregoing regional picture will serve to place the Texas requirements in a more realistic and proper perspective. Moreover, it deals with the problems of un- certainties discussed in the €oJrtracted quotation from the NWC Final Report, cited in Comment 1, above. '. ' l'\j ~ '. 3. Special Importance of Interstate Compact and Related Water Rights Problems. The staff believes that more emphasis should be' given to the need for the early, proper, equitable resolution of interstate stream water allocation issues and problems. While mention is made, somewhat parenthetically, throughout the captioned document (e. g., See the repetitive notation on each of the Instream Flow Needs tables, pages 47 - 50, stating that " the flows available for instream use are dependent upon State-administered water rights and interstate agreements for those interstate streams whpre compacts have been ratified." And, see also the Problem Characterization Worksheets, pages 86 - 90, that Code 50 (Institutional) problems have been checked off in each of five major problem matrices derived for the Texas portion of the AWR Region.) -- these random remarks do not convey the real urgency, importance, and necessity to resolve all major problems and issues rehttive to interstate stream water allocation and related water rights matters. This matter warrants special discussion and emphasis in the captioned report. The present references to this matter appear to be presented in an indirect, subdued and incidental manner not commensurate to the truly pivotal nature of the matter in the A WR regional planning. ADJ :fh Alfre J. D'Arezzo, Ph, D., (C. E.) Special Analyst for Environment and Interagency Coordination NOTED: 181