1999-2000 Annual Report
Status of Active Adjudications
Introduction
Adjudications are currently underway in both federal and state courts in New Mexico for which the State Engineer's attorneys have the responsibility to prosecute on behalf of the State of New Mexico. The entire Pecos Stream System is the subject of a comprehensive adjudication which began in 1956. Adjudications of several tributaries to the Upper Rio Grande were started between 1966 and 1983 and involve water rights of most of New Mexico's Indian Pueblos and Tribes, the federal government, municipalities, community ditches and thousands of individual defendants. The adjudication of the lower portion of the Rio Grande began in 1985 and involves an irrigation district, a major federal reclamation project, municipal and county water rights, a state university, the City of El Paso and thousands of individual groundwater claims within Doña Ana County.
The State Engineer is mandated by law, NMSA 1978 Section 72-4-13 (1997), to perform hydrographic surveys and investigations of each stream system and source of water supply in the State, beginning with those used primarily for irrigation. Upon completion of the survey, the State Engineer, through his attorneys who are commissioned special assistant attorneys general, institutes an adjudication to obtain a judicial determination and definition of water rights within each stream system and underground basin as required by law, NMSA 1978 Section 72-4-15 (1997), so that he may effectively perform water rights administration, as well as meet New Mexico's interstate stream obligations.
The legal bases and characteristics of each and every water right claim within an adjudication must be identified and surveyed, reduced to a written offer, conveyed to the claimant, accepted or rejected by the claimant, and, if rejected by the claimant, litigated between the state and the claimant through evidentiary hearings before a Special Master or Judge. After individual water rights claims have been adjudicated between the state and individual claimants, an individual defendant or group of defendants may challenge the water rights of others during the inter se (among themselves) phase of the adjudication. After hearings on any challenges are held, the Court issues a final decree which defines the rights of each and every claimant on the stream system.
Pecos River Basin
The adjudication of the Pecos River Stream System began in 1956 with the filing of the action denominated, State of New Mexico ex rel. State Engineer v. Lewis in the Fifth Judicial District Court. The objective at that time was to adjudicate all groundwater rights in the Roswell Artesian Basin to obtain administrative control of illegal and excessive pumping. Because a number of groundwater rights were supplemental to the Hagerman Canal surface water rights, a separate action was filed to adjudicate the Canal. After all rights had been adjudicated and subfile orders had been entered, the two cases were consolidated and a partial final decree was entered by the District Court adopting all subfile orders.
In 1972, the adjudication was expanded to include the Hondo Basin because of anticipated large new diversions by the Mescalero Apache Indian Tribe. The Tribe's rights were then adjudicated, along with all non-Indian rights in the Hondo Basin. That portion of the Lewis case is essentially complete.
In 1976, after the Carlsbad Irrigation District asked the State Engineer to administer priorities, the Lewis case was expanded to the entire Pecos River Stream System.
The Carlsbad Irrigation District priority call continues to be one of the two driving forces behind the Lewis adjudication. The other is the Supreme Court's 1988 Amended Decree in Texas v. New Mexico. Under the Amended Decree, New Mexico is required to meet its water delivery obligations to Texas pursuant to the Pecos River Compact within a relatively short time frame. If New Mexico under-delivers, the shortfall must be remedied within six months.
The state has three current objectives in the Lewis adjudication: (1) perform preliminary work necessary to administer the Pecos River according to the laws of New Mexico; (2) perform work necessary to meet New Mexico's delivery obligations to Texas under the Pecos River Compact and; (3) perform preliminary work necessary to enjoin uses if New Mexico under-delivers.
The state's current area of concentration in furtherance of these objectives is the Carlsbad and Roswell Basins. A description of the status of the state's efforts in the various sections within this massive adjudication follows.
Rio Hondo. This adjudication as between claimants and the state was completed in August 1997. Inter se proceedings are expected to begin soon.
Roswell Basin. The state is currently undertaking the readjudication of priority dates of pre-1947 groundwater rights. All water rights owners with priorities of 1946 or earlier have been served with an Order to Show Cause. The state served interrogatories to the approximately 700 to 800 claimants who filed answers to the Order to Show Cause. Many claimants have served answers to the interrogatories and the state is currently evaluating the answers. Many other claimants have withdrawn their responses to the Order to Show Cause and the state has and will continue to file motions to adjudicate their priorities in accordance with their subfile orders. The State has completed the development of the database for analyzing the claims.
Carlsbad Project. The Court ordered and the State conducted supplemental service of a Stipulated Offer of Judgment involving the rights of the United States and the Carlsbad Irrigation District in the Carlsbad Project. A special committee counsel, appointed by the Judge Pro Tem, submitted a proposed Pretrial Order which the Court entered on February 26, 1996. In accordance with the Pretrial Order, briefing on procedural issues has also been completed. Briefing on threshold legal issues has been completed. The State filed its Motion to Consolidate Member and Project Adjudications In Part on April 12, 1996 and the Motion was subsequently granted. The purpose of consolidation is to allow members to participate in briefing on issues which potentially affect them such as ownership of water rights. The Court has issued its final decision on all but one of the threshold legal issues.
Carlsbad Members. Joinder of the Carlsbad Irrigation District members and other water rights claimants within the Carlsbad Irrigation District boundaries is complete. The first and second volumes of the member hydrographic survey has been completed and filed with the Court. The remaining volumes should be published in the next several months. One-hundred-fifty-three-offers of judgment have been served. Over the last several months, the State has begun negotiating those offers with individual members. Many offers are expected to be resolved through negotiation, while others will need to go to trial.
Carlsbad Underground Basin. The hydrographic survey is scheduled to be completed by December, 2001. Joinder of water rights owners and service of offers of judgment will follow shortly thereafter.
Black River. The Hydrographic Survey Report and maps for this section also should be completed by December, 2001. As with the Carlsbad Underground, joinder of defendants and service of offers of judgment will soon follow.
Gallinas River Basin. The state has finalized the adjudication of the Storrie Project subfiles. Due to the pressing demands of other adjudications, the remainder of the subfiles will have to await staff availability before they may be completed.
Las Vegas Inter Se Proceedings. The City's appropriative water rights claims was held in Las Vegas, New Mexico in February 1997. The court's decision was rendered and the city appealed. All appeals have been concluded, so that the City's appropriative rights claim has been finalized. The State, the City, Storrie Project, and acequias are continuing their efforts to arrive at a negotiated solution to the City's Pueblo Water Rights Doctrine claims.
Rio Grande Basin
Rio Pojoaque System. State of New Mexico ex rel. State Engineer v. Aamodt, U.S. District Cause No. CIV 6639-M, was filed in 1966 and involves the Rio Pojoaque system and its tributaries. Phases of the case currently active include:
Nambe Reservation Reserved Rights Claim. After the conclusion of an evidentiary hearing lasting approximately four weeks, the Special Master prepared a draft report on these claims, recommending their denial. Further briefing and oral arguments are expected before a final report is submitted to the court.
Post-1982 Domestic Wells. On January 13, 1983, the Court ordered that all subsequent domestic well permittees in the basin would be restricted to indoor uses only. In 1996, the Court allowed litigation to commence concerning all aspects of this Order, and in 1997, discussions began as to possible settlement of this litigation. After more than a year of negotiations, representatives of the State, Pueblos, United States, and individual well owners have agreed on a draft settlement agreement to be submitted to the various parties for their approval, and thereafter, to the Court. The Court entered its Order approving that settlement agreement on October 4, 1999. The State will now identify and notify all post-1982 well owners and encourage them to participate in this settlement, which will allow outdoor uses for all settling well owners. Public meetings were held throughout 2000 to obtain the greatest possible participation in the settlement.
Comprehensive Basin Administration Plan. The State and the United States have jointly proposed a plan for the metering and/or measurement of all diversions in the basin for the purpose of administration of rights. Refinement of the metering plan, development of a water-rights administration plan for the basin, and attempts to obtain funding for implementation of the plans are ongoing.
Pueblos' Domestic and Livestock Rights. The court has ordered mandatory settlement negotiations on the Pueblos' domestic and livestock rights claims, and those are continuing under the supervision of a federal Magistrate Judge.
Rio Pueblo de Taos and Rio Hondo Systems. State of New Mexico ex rel. State Engineer v. Abeyta and State of New Mexico v. Arellano, U.S. District Court Cause Nos. CIV 7896-SC and CIV 7939-SC, are consolidated lawsuits for the adjudication of the Rio Pueblo de Taos and Rio Hondo stream systems. Most non-Indian claims have been provisionally adjudicated. Claims on behalf of the Pueblo of Taos were originally filed on August 1, 1989, and subsequent claims were made in 1992, 1996, and 1997. A motion by the state and certain non-Indian defendants to disallow some of these claims is still pending before the Special Master. Preparation for trial of the Pueblo claims is occurring simultaneously with efforts to explore possible settlement of these claims. At the joint request of many of the parties in the Taos adjudication, including the State, the United States Congress has approved funding of approximately two million dollars for hydrologic investigations in the Taos area. The data to be obtained by this program is critical to the hydrologic foundation of any settlement.
Activity on non-Indian claims is presently limited to those rights listed in Supplement A of the hydrographic survey and those rights being currently identified in an on-going hydrographic survey of an unnamed drainage basin between the Rio Hondo and Rio Pueblo de Taos basins, which was recently added to the consolidated adjudication.
The Supplement A proceedings are complete as to surface rights and for groundwater rights of individuals. Proceedings to determine or re-determine both quantities and priorities for all of the twelve Taos-area Mutual Domestic Water Consumer Associations are underway, and trial is scheduled for 2001.
Rio Chama. State of New Mexico ex rel. State Engineer v. Aragon, U.S. District Court Cause No. CIV 7941 SC, involves the adjudication of all water rights in the Rio Chama stream systems, including the claims of the United States, the Pueblo of San Juan and the Jicarilla Apache Tribe. The suit was filed in federal court in 1969, although it incorporates prior state court orders adjudicating non-federal water rights on the mainstream Rio Chama below Abiquiu Dam and the Rio Puerco, a tributary to the Rio Chama. The Rio Chama mainstream section, consisting of the mainstream of the Rio Chama from El Vado Dam to the confluence of the Rio Chama and the Rio Grande, including the waters of Abiquiu Creek, the Rio Frijoles and the Los Ojitos de Agua Salada Donosa, has been adjudicated. This area is administered by a Watermaster appointed pursuant to the 1971 Partial Final Decree. Section 6, Canones Creek area, and Section 8, Rio Puerco area, have been adjudicated. Sections without decrees are undergoing initial hydrographic surveys. The amended hydrographic survey report for Section 5, Rio Gallina, was filed with the Court in January of 2000. The water users in Section 5 identified in the report have been joined to the adjudication suit and the determination of claims in this area is ongoing. Hydrographic surveys for Section 3, Rio Nutrias, Rio Cebolla and Canjilon Creek, were also completed and filed with the Court between June and August 2000. Water rights claimants in Section 3 will be joined in the Fall of 2000 and the adjudication of these claims is scheduled to begin in 2001. The hydrographic survey for Section 7, the area above El Vado dam, is scheduled for completion in 2001.
Red River. The Red River Stream System adjudication suit, State of New Mexico ex rel. State Engineer v. Molycorp, Inc. U.S. District Cause No. CIV 9780 SC, was filed by the State in 1972. The scope of the adjudication incorporates all of the water rights of each water use claimant in the Red River Stream System, including the surface waters of the West Latir Creek and ground water in the Sunshine Valley and Costilla areas.
The suit was filed for two reasons. First, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was investigating whether to construct the Cerro Unit as a tributary project under the San Juan-Chama diversion project. The construction and operation of the Cerro Unit would require a determination of all existing water rights that may be affected by it. Reclamation subsequently found that the Cerro Unit was not feasible. Second, the State disputed certain water rights claimed by Molycorp, Inc. Prior litigation over these claims was voluntarily dismissed in order to adjudicate them in the Red River case. See State of New Mexico ex rel. Reynolds v. Molybdenum Corp. of America, 82 N.M. 690, 496 P.2d 1086 (1972) (reversing involuntary dismissal of state court suit) and State of New Mexico v. Molybdenum Corp. of America, 570 F.2d 1364 (10th Cir. 1978)(State prevails in disputed water right claim).
In 1980, a Partial Final Decree approved and confirmed all subfile orders adjudicating the water rights of 650 defendants, but reserved jurisdiction to adjudicate the rights of the United States. Approximately 11,400 acres with irrigation water rights were confirmed by the decree. Non-irrigation water rights totaled a diversion of about 2,250 acre-feet per year. In 1992, the water rights of the United States were adjudicated in a Final Judgment and Decree. The Decree adjudicated water uses by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, including instream flow rights for the Wild and Scenic River segment of the Red River. The description of the instream flow right was based upon a 1984 Stipulation between the United States, Molycorp, and the State.
In 1989, approximately 300 motions to amend subfile orders were filed by defendants. The State responded to these motions and the Special Master held hearings in 1990. In 1992, the Special Master filed a report on disputed water right claims and the defendants filed approximately 47 objections. Those objections have now been resolved. For the past several years, the State has been engaged in an errors and omissions process, wherein any discrepancy within an adjudicated subfile order was corrected. This process was lengthy and required several hearings, including a field office hearing conducted by the Special Master in the Village of Questa.
By April 2000, all errors and omissions had been resolved, and the adjudication advanced into final inter se proceedings. Inter se allows each water right owner to object to the water rights of others if they believe the other rights would detrimentally affect their own. Inter se is the final process before the Court enters a final decree. The State does not participate in these proceedings, other than to provide the Court with relevant documentation. Before sending out the Notice of Inter Se Proceedings to all water right owners of record, the Special Master required the State and all of the acequias in the Red River system to update the ownership records for individual water right holders. This task proved to be very onerous, but very necessary as many of the subfile orders had been entered in the 1970's. The Notice of Inter Se Proceedings was mailed to all known water right owners of record in May 2000, and the notice was published in two newspapers for a three-week period. No inter se objections were filed.
As of July 2000, a proposed final decree is being prepared and circulated for comment. The Court has proposed a presentment hearing on December 1, 2000, for the entry of the proposed final decree. The entry of the final decree will conclusively end the Red River Stream System adjudication.
Rio Santa Cruz and Rio de Truchas System. The Santa Cruz River and Rio de Truchas adjudication suits, State of New Mexico ex rel. State Engineer v. Abbott, U.S. District Court Cause No. CIV 7488 & 8650 SC, were filed in 1968 and 1970, respectively. The suits were consolidated in 1970 because water right claimants in the Rio de Truchas suit used the Acequia de la Sierra to divert water from the North Fork of the Rio Quemado, a tributary of the Santa Cruz River, for use in the Truchas area.
The Santa Cruz River suit was filed because the San Juan-Chama diversion project could provide water for the Llano Unit, a tributary project. The Llano Unit would divert water from the Rio Grande at Velarde and deliver it for use as a supplemental supply for lands irrigated from the lower Santa Cruz River. All water rights in the Santa Cruz River system that might be affected by the tributary project would have to be adjudicated. The tributary project failed to get local support for its construction and the project water has been allocated to other uses.
In 1975, the Court entered a Partial Final Decree confirming and approving all orders adjudicating water rights in the Santa Cruz and Truchas Stream Systems. The Court Decree reserved jurisdiction to adjudicate water right priorities and the water rights of the United States and the Pueblos of San Juan, Santa Clara and San Ildefonso. The 1975 Decree adjudicated inter se the water right claims of 2,500 defendants which were determined in approximately 3,500 individual subfile orders. The adjudicated irrigation water rights totalled 5,045.38 acres in the Santa Cruz River System and 2,159.80 acres in the Rio de Truchas system.
Since then, community acequias in Truchas have identified land which they claim should have been adjudicated irrigation water rights. In the Santa Cruz River, approximately 155 individual water right claimants, involving 186 tracks, submitted written requests for correction to subfile orders adjudicating their water rights. With funding from the 1999 legislature, the OSE's Hydrographic Survey Bureau staff, the acequia liaison, the claimants and acequia representatives (as well as the State Engineer) field checked each claim. The OSE is wrapping up its findings and will report them in late October 2000. This pilot project will aid other Northern New Mexico adjudications.
At the time the 1975 Partial Final Decree was entered, approximately thirteen community ditches and 300 individuals filed objections to water right priorities adjudicated to other parties in subfile orders. The Court reserved jurisdiction in the 1975 Decree to consider and decide the objections at a later time. The Court appointed two historians to investigate the records of the Spanish and Mexican archives to find evidence documenting the existence or construction of irrigation ditches or the irrigation of lands. The historians' draft report was completed in 1986. In 1995, the state filed pleadings describing streamflow allocation rights between community acequias in the Santa Cruz and Truchas systems. The state also took the depositions of individuals who have knowledge of stream flow allocation. At the conclusion of the depositions, and after the Court's historian completes additional research on the Santa Cruz system priorities, the State will decide whether it is appropriate to offer streamflow allocation rights to the community acequias. Such an offer would be subject to objection by any individual water right claimant. If streamflow allocation is ultimately accepted in the court, then water rights based on adjudicated priority dates for community ditches would be subordinated to the streamflow allocation rights. In the Truchas section, the parties have briefed disputed priorities in the Truchas system and the matter is now pending before the Special Master.
The proprietary water claims of the United States and Indian Pueblo water right claims are currently being adjudicated. The Court has entered procedural orders for the completion of this adjudication.
Rio San Jose. State of New Mexico ex rel. Reynolds v. Kerr-McGee Corp., Cibola County Cause Nos. CB-83-190-CV and CB-83-220-CV, is the general water rights adjudication suit concerning the Rio San Jose Basin. In November 1992, the Special Master issued a report recommending, among other matters, that the state's motion for partial summary judgment on the water rights of the Pueblos of Acoma and Laguna be granted. The Special Master then resigned to accept a federal appointment. The District Court adopted the report and included language permitting interlocutory appeal. The Pueblos and the non-Indian defendants requested interlocutory appeal, which was granted by the New Mexico Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals ultimately remanded the case to the District Court for further action on issues relating to the quantification of the Pueblos' claims for existing and historic uses. Petition for certiorari to the New Mexico Supreme Court was denied. After the remand of this case to the district court, the case was inactive for several years. The parties are now in the process of seeking the appointment of a new special master. After this appointment, it is expected that the court will enter a new scheduling order to govern the course of future proceedings. The hydrographic survey work by the State Engineer necessary to complete the adjudication of non-Indian claims is expected to take two years, and has been scheduled for 2003 and 2004. The United States reports that it will require one year to complete its hydrographic survey of Indian claims, and the adjudication of these claims is expected to begin in 2001.
Jemez River. United States v. Abousleman, U.S. District Court No. CIV 83-1041-SC, is a suit filed by the United States in its own behalf and on behalf of the Jemez, Santa Ana and Zia Pueblos to adjudicate water rights in the Jemez River system.
In 1988, hearings were held on questions related to the historic use of water. In 1990, the Special Master also recommended rulings to the Court on Summary Judgment motions argued by the state, United States, Pueblos and non-Indian defendants. The Master's report was objected to and oral arguments were held on those objections before the District Court. The Court has not yet issued a ruling on the 1990 Special Master's report.
During the 1996 summer drought, the Pueblos of Jemez and Zia moved for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction seeking to cut off irrigation uses above the Pueblos which the Pueblos claimed diminished surface water supply for their agricultural activities. No TRO or preliminary injunction was granted by the Court. Instead, an Order was entered adopting a stipulation between the Pueblos and the community acequias. These parties are now exploring settlement options for the negotiation of the Pueblos' historic, present and future use claims.
The Court has entered a Partial Final Decree for the U.S. proprietary claims except for its Wild and Scenic River claim, which is pending before the Special Master, awaiting resolution of this issue in the Chama Adjudication.
In 1991, a proposed partial final decree on non-federal non-Pueblo water rights claims was prepared and made available for inspection. Inter se objections were filed by the Pueblos to sixty-one subfiles. The Special Master dismissed nineteen of the objections, and after hearing evidence on the remaining forty-two, issued a report and recommendations on April 24, 1995. The District Court has entered orders on the objections.
The court and the parties anticipate a partial Final Decree embracing all non-federal, non-Pueblo rights to be entered on or about December 1, 2000.
Santa Fe River. Anaya v. Public Service Company of New Mexico, Santa Fe County Cause No. 43, 347, was filed in 1971 and refiled in 1974. The state intervened in the suit in 1975 and completed the Santa Fe hydrographic survey in 1978.
In 1990, the Public Service Company was ordered to release Santa Fe River water from its dams in an amount calculated to reach the downstream Acequias Madre and Cerro Gordo. There is now in place an operating agreement to ensure delivery of water to these two acequias.
The Sangre de Cristo Water Company, a subdivision of the Public Service Company of New Mexico, sold its water rights and water system to the City of Santa Fe. The City of Santa Fe's claims will now be consolidated with those formerly claimed by Sangre de Cristo. A review of the status of all subfiles has been completed in Volumes I and II of the hydrographic survey. That review indicated an update of the entire hydrographic survey is needed. Currently, domestic wells prior to 1980 are being adjudicated.
Lower Rio Grande Basin. State of New Mexico ex rel. Office of the State Engineer v. Elephant Butte Irrigation District, et al., Third Judicial District Cause No. CV 96-888 (formerly: Elephant Butte Irrigation District v. State Engineer, Doña Ana County Cause No. CV-86-848) was originally filed in 1986 during the height of the litigation surrounding the applications of the City of El Paso for water from southern New Mexico. After 10 years of litigation over procedural matters involving venue, jurisdiction and indispensable parties, the Office of the State Engineer secured from the legislature $250,000 for the purpose of initiating the hydrographic survey of the Lower Rio Grande. During the 1997 Legislative Session, the OSE and the ISC successfully lobbied for passage of legislation to authorize the issuance of bonds to fund the hydrographic survey for the region. Laws 1997, Ch.241 and Ch.246.
With sufficient funds in hand, the OSE hired a private engineering firm to conduct the hydrographic survey with a projected completion date in the year 2000. The first phase of the hydrographic survey, the Nutt-Hockett Basin was completed on April 29, 1998 and filed with the Court. The second phase of the hydrographic survey, the Rincon Section, was completed on May 20, 1999. The third phase of the hydrographic survey, the North Mesilla Section, was completed on June 22, 2000. Work on the fourth (South Mesilla) and fifth (Outlying Areas) sections is expected to be completed by the end of 2000.
Adjudication of all water rights in the Nutt-Hockett Basin has been largely completed and subfile orders have been entered for most of the water rights. Adjudication of water rights in the Rincon Section is progressing. Most of the Rincon Section offers of judgment have been served. North Mesilla offers of judgment will begin to be served in October 2000. Batches of about one hundred offers of judgment will be served on water-right claimants every week.
The OSE has also been successful in its request to the court to adopt procedures to streamline the adjudication process. In place of traditional adversarial litigation, the Court has adopted an alternative dispute resolution process (ADR) for resolution of legal issues and factual disputes before any formal hearings or trials are scheduled by the Court. ADR provides an opportunity for claimants to resolve issues arising after service of the original offer of judgment through informal negotiations with the OSE or formal mediation. This process should allow for acceptance of negotiated or mediated offers of judgments over the course of a couple of months after the original offer of judgment is served upon a water right claimant in the Lower Rio Grande adjudication. This fast-track approach is intended to result in a fairly rapid adjudication of water rights in the Lower Rio Grande so that the area can adequately plan for future growth. According to preliminary estimates, there are about 16,600 claims to surface and groundwater rights that will need to be adjudicated in the Lower Rio Grande, most of which are claims of individuals within the elephant Butte Irrigation District. Adjudication of the surface and groundwater rights among the many claimants will include all municipal, domestic, agricultural, industrial and other uses.
United States of America v. Elephant Butte Irrigation District, et al. No. 97-0803- JP/RLP/WWD (D.N.M.) was filed on June 12, 1997 by the United States against Elephant Butte Irrigation District; El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1; Hudspeth County Conservation and Reclamation District No. 1; City of El Paso; New Mexico State University; Stahmann Farms, Inc.; and the State of New Mexico. Subsequently, the City of Las Cruces was allowed to intervene. Additional motions to intervene were filed by the State of Texas, the State of Colorado, the Pueblo Isleta Del Sur, the Texas Lower Valley Water Users Association and a private trust.
In this lawsuit, the United States of America claimed to hold "title" to all of the waters of the Lower Rio Grande, below Elephant Butte Dam, exclusive of all other water right claimants. This lawsuit sought to move Elephant Butte Irrigation District v. State Engineer to federal court. In response to the filing of the lawsuit, El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 filed counterclaims against the United States and cross-claims against Elephant Butte Irrigation District claiming that they have been deprived by the United States and Elephant Butte Irrigation District of the benefits of the Rio Grande Project in terms of water quantity and water quality. Through the counter and crossclaims, El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 sought reallocation of the Rio Grande project water on an equitable basis in terms of both water quality and quantity. Court-ordered mediation came to a halt by order of federal Magistrate Judge William Deaton on November 30, 1999 and the parties proceeded to brief motions to dismiss. Briefing on the motions to dismiss was completed on April 25, 2000. On August 22, 2000, federal District Court Judge James Parker ruled, dismissing the United States' complaint and the cross-claim against EBID by El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1. Judge Parker, nonetheless, afforded El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 time to request that its crossclaim instead be transferred to a Federal Texas District Court. Following, however, a request from the New Mexico entities, the Judge dismissed the crossclaim without prejudice. The El Paso District subsequently requested on September 22, 2000 reconsideration of that dismissal. On October 19, 2000, the United States filed an appeal of Judge Parker's dismissal of the United States Complaint. The OSE will continue to expend resources to combat this serious challenge by the United States to the water rights of the Lower Rio Grande.
Upper Colorado River Basin
San Juan River. In New Mexico v. United States, et al., San Juan County Cause No. 75-184 the parties vacated by Joint Motion the Pre-Trial Scheduling Order. It is anticipated that a new scheduling order will be established by the Judge Pro Tempore. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New Mexico appointed the Honorable Frank B. Zinn as Judge Pro Tempore to continue adjudicating the claims in this cause. However, the Navajo Nation excused Judge Zinn, an excusal that was denied under the New Mexico rules of Civil Procedure. Negotiations continue with the Navajo Nation. The State Engineer is engaged in early planning and evaluation of the costs of an updated hydrographic survey of non-Native American uses in the basin.
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
Next: Appendix B: Status of Hydrographic Surveys
