Page 17

17 apparently contemplated by the Commission's August 16 order is wholly unwarranted inasmuch as the Secretary has already disclosed and made public his plan on August 26, 1963.7 With the Secretary's plan thus being formulated, at least from the Secretary's point of view, with respect to development on the Colorado River, there is no reason why that plan cannot be filed in the instant proceeding immediately rather than being delayed until January 15, 1964, as permitted by the August 16 order. This is particularly so since this Commission is one of the interested agencies to which the Secretary has submitted his plan for comments prior to formal submission to Congress under Section 1 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (58 Stat. 887). Inasmuch as the Secretary has in fact already submitted his plan to this Commission, albeit pursuant to the aforesaid Section 1, the further submission in the instant proceeding by January 15, 1964, apparently contemplated by the August 16 order, is superfluous and serves only to engender unwarranted delay. Indeed, by permitting the Secretary's submission in this proceeding to be postponed until January 15, 1964, the Commission has placed 7 The speed with which the Secretary has promulgated his plan after the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. California plainly reveals, as Arizona has repeatedly urged, the inaccuracy of the representation in Assistant Secretary Holum's letter of November 1, 1961 (Exh. 300-31, p. 1) that "pending a Supreme Court decision, this Department has been unable to proceed with the necessary studies for complete and full utilization of the water of the Colorado River between the Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead."Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 14,981,120 byte