Page 40

40 RELEASE OF COLORADO RIVER WATER Therefore, would you be good enough to inform me whether there were in fact findings by the Section that there has been a surplus of water in the Colorado River. If so, please supply me with copies of such findings and as much as is practicable of the data on which they were based. Also, I am curious as to the source of the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to release such water. The treaty itself is silent on the question of who issues the order for release. The act of September 13, 1950, which provides for the fulfilment by the United States of certain sections of the treaty, appears to vest operational authority in the Secretary of State, acting through the U.S. Commissioner of the Commission. Likewise, the quite extensive hearings by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in early 1945 on ratification of the proposed treaty and the committee's report (Executive Rept. No. 2, 79th Cong.) do not, as far as I have been able to ascertain, throw any light on the matter. I do not at this time question the humanitarian or political desirability from the point of view of our international relations of releasing the additional 40,000 acre-feet to Mexico. But I would appreciate being informed of the facts and circumstances of the deliveries of the 200,000 acre-feet a year over a period of several years, particularly as to whether there were findings that there was a surplus of water in the Colorado, and the source of authority for your action. Sincerely yours, CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Chairman. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., August 11,1961. Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: This is in reply to your letter of August 8, 1961, concerning the delivery of water to Mexico under the treaty of February 3, 1944, between the United States and Mexico. Enclosed is a copy of a memorandum of understanding dated February 14, 1945, between the Department of State and the Department of the Interior setting forth the specific jurisdiction and functions to be exercised by the agencies of the Department of State and the Department of the Interior with respect to the operation and maintenance of works as may be necessary to the fulfillment of treaty provisions. The document is self-explanatory, but we have underlined pertinent parts that we believe would be most useful to you. In line with that memorandum, the Regional Director, Bureau of Reclamation, Boulder City, Nev., who has immediate responsiblity for the operation and maintenance of Boulder Dam and various other facilities downstream within the United States used partly for the performance of the treaty provisions, annually reviews storage conditions, runoff forecasts, and expected Colorado River water deliveries within the United States On the basis of that information he notifies the Commissioner, U.S. Section, International Boundary and Water Commission, El Paso, Tex., as to the amount of water he believes available for delivery to Mexico under the terms of the treaty. Enclosed are copies of such letters dated November 1, 1957, December 2, 1958, February 10, 1960, and March 10, 1961, to Commissioner Hewitt. Also, there are enclosed copies of letters dated November 6, 1957, December 5, 1958, February 15, 1960, and April 20, 1961, to Engineer David Herrera Jordan, Commissioner for Mexico, International Boundary and Water Commission, which constitute the annual determinations for the years 1958, 1959, 1960, and 1961 by the U.S. section, International Boundary and Water Commission as to availability of water for scheduled deliveries to Mexico under the terms of the treaty. The relationship between power generation at Hoover, downstream demands in the United States, runoff forecasts, and the elevations at Lake Mead in the past several years would have made it most difficult to find that the additional 200,000 acre-feet of water were not available to Mexico. This was especially true since during that period filling operations at Glen Canyon were still many years in the future. However, with the poor runoff forecast for 1961, which followed a poor runoff in 1960, and considering the scheduled closure at Glen Canyon in the fall of 1962, or spring of 1963, so as to catch 1963 runoff, it became apparent that within prudent operations the finding of surplus water could not be made for calendar year 1961.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 24 bit, 6,425,088 byte