| OCR Text |
Show 162 UPDATING THE HOOVER DAM DOCUMENTS It was agreed that each party would prepare two documents: (a) formulate and exchange (but not file with the Court) not later than January 15, 1968, its formal objections to the PPR claims of the other parties; and (b) compute the PPR claims of all parties. These would be exchanged (see Regional Solicitor's memoranda to the Solicitor dated November 14 and 30, 1967). The November 14, 1967, memorandum by the Regional Solicitor provided the Solicitor with a detailed legal analysis of the term "present perfect right." It discussed the nature and basis of a "water right," which is what a "present perfected right" is, as well as the rule of "beneficial use" and "reasonble use." This memorandum emphasized that "diversions less returns" did not accord with the Decree definition of PPRs, which is "a water right acquired in accordance with State law..." and should be the quantity of water reasonably acquired for beneficial use on the acreage to which the claim relates. The November 30, 1967, memorandum of the Regional Solicitor was accompanied by the aforementioned two documents; "A" (United States objections to the Lists of PPRs of Arizona and California) and "B" (the United States version of the PPRs in Arizona and California) called for at the meeting of October 31, 1967. G.3. Supreme Court Action Postponed On December 1, 1967, the Solicitor General advised the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the Status of the Negotiations and stated his assumption that the Court would not act on the claims which had been filed with the Court absent application by one or more of the parties. The Clerk's response presumed that the Court could proceed sua sponte, but was sure the Court would notify the parties if it intended to do so. G.4. Exchange of Parties Objections to PPR Claims of Other Parties and Their Restatement of all Claims On January 9, 1968, Interior's Solicitor transmitted to the Attorney-General the attachments "A" and "B" which the Regional Solicitor at Los Angeles had provided with his aforesaid memorandum of November 30, 1967. These provided a detailed review of the PPR claims including the objections of the United States to each claim. On January 15, 1968, the Solicitor General furnished these two memoranda to the three States. On January 8, 1968, California provided its versions of attachments "A" and "B," reiterating its adherence to the statement of PPRs in terms of a single consumptive use figure on a noncoincidental basis (or "cumulative" approach) and the desirability of a negotiated settlement. The use of the "noncoincidental basis" resulted in the enlarged claims predicted by the Regional Solicitor's memorandum of October 11, 1967. The increases from the prior California PPR claims listed and filed with the Supreme Court on March 9, 1967, were: Imperial from 2,806,000 acre-feet to 3,086,600 acre-feet Palo Verde from 208,100 acre-feet to 241,400 acre-feet California also objected to the "consumptive use" figures used by the Arizona claimants and to some of the priority dates; e.g., Valley Division, and alleged that most of the miscellaneous claims had been lost by forfeiture or abandonment. California also objected to the United States statement regarding the PPRs for the Indian Reservations, and provided its own figures of the consumptive use requirements. On January 12, 1968, the Regional Solicitor requested the views of the Phoenix Area Office, BIA, on those comments. BIA's reply of January 25, 1968, criticized California's consumptive use approach which assumed only 3.5 acre-feet per acre. On January 28, 1969, Arizona filed its statements "A" and "B" with the other parties. It objected to California's "noncoincidental use basis" as without legal basis; asserted California's failure to follow the Decree definition of PPRs; and was critical both of the claims and of the priority dates for Imperial and Palo Verde. It suggested a statement for PPR claims which would name a specific number of acres of specifically defined land but avoided the dual limitation urged by the United States. |
