| OCR Text |
Show Commissioner Bashore, commenting upon California's objections to the Arizona contract, states: "California is fearful that Arizona may contend, to California's prejudice, that certain provisions of the proposed contract amount to an administrative determination that Arizona is entitled to 2,800,000 acre feet of III(a) water. California's fears are unfounded for at least two reasons. First, the delivery of water is expressly 'subject to its availability under the Colorado River Compact and the Boulder Canyon project Act,! and secondly, Article 10 was purposely designed to prevent Arizona, or any other state, from contending that the proposed contract resolves any issue on the amounts of water which are apportioned or unapportioned by the compact and the amounts of apportioned or unapportioned water which are available to the respective states, and it expressly reserves for future judicial determination any issues involving the intent, effect, and interpretation of the compact and act." Calif. Ex. 7606: Letter from Commissioner H. W. Bashore, Bureau of Reclamation, to Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes, dated February 8, 1944 Following the hearing upon California's objections to the proposed 1944 Arizona contract on February 2, 1944, Commissioner Bashore wrote to Secretary Ickes briefly summarizing the terms of the Arizona contract, reviewing the history of its negotiation and the objections of California to the contract: "At the first meeting of the Committee [of Fourteen] on the proposed contract held early in May, Bureau representatives, acting under your instructions, took the position that any contract proposed should not commit the Department as to any controversial 111-71 |
