| OCR Text |
Show -10- a compact without attempting to envision, through adequate studies the pattern of basin development probably would result in a lopsided, ill-advised develop- ment and lead to future difficulties. As a matter of fact, all recent com- pacts in the West have been preceded1 by joint investigations, in which the federal and state governments participated, or by studies conducted by interested federal agencies with opportunity for consideration of the views of state officials, (c) Adequate adraini strati on provisions should be contained in a water compact. Within the inherent limitations of compact administrative pro- , cedure, the compact should be couched in such terms as-will allow flexibility to meet changing administration conditions. 6. ADMINISTRATION. Powers cannot be granted to administrators, which in their exercise will titanscend the. specific and implied compact terms which have been ratified )by the state legislatures and approved by Congress. Changes in specific provisions may always be accomplished by unanimous * ap- proval of the signatory states with the consent of Congress, but usually compliance with such procedure is difficult. A compact commission in an extra-legal manner may encourage the adjustment of disputes. Furthermore, a compact may provide for the appointment of commissioners to consider and adjust specified claims or controversies, subject to ratification by the legislatures of the states affected. (See Article VI Colorado River Compact.) A periodic review of compact provisions by the administrative commis- sioners is advisable in many cases. This will serve the ends of flexibility. However, such review should not extend to basic principles upon which the compact is founded; and the provisions of the compact under the law must remain in full force and effect until changed and amended within the intent of the compact by modification approved by the legislatures of the signatory states and Congress. There has been no evidence of state legislative interference in compact administration. In the nature of the case, there can be none. A compact commission can be controlled only through the unanimous action of the legis- latures of all of the"signatory states. Any legislative interference by all of the signatory.states, which had the effect of changing the terms of compact, would reauire the approval of Congress. 7. -GRANTING OF.JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS TO COMPACT ADMINISTRATORS QUESTIONED. The granting of judicial functions to a compact administrative commission is questioned. It is doubtful that a compact could create a judicial body to settle disjputes on an interstate stream within the" political and legal concepts of the federal and state constitutions. The primary obligation to abide by the terms of a compact rests upon the constituted authorities of the signatory states. This involves determination by the officials of each state of tHe interpretation of its terms. Controversies among the states on the issue of alleged failure to comply with the terms of a compact or on a question, of their interpretation must be resolved by appropriate action in the Supr-eme Court of the United States. Therefore, a compact commission's powers must be limited to those of an administrative character and such powers for the purpose of enforcement cannot supersede, expressly or by |
