DOCSLIB.ORG

Water Management Along the U.S.-Mexico Border the Role of the International Boundary and Water Commission

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Water Management Along the U.S.-Mexico Border the Role of the International Boundary and Water Commission INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMISSIONCOMMISSION COMISIÓN INTERNACIONALUNITED STATES SECTIONDE LÍMITES Y AGUAS Water Management Along the U.S.-Mexico Border The Role of the International Boundary and Water Commission Jayne Harkins, P.E. Commissioner International Boundary and Water Commission Two Nations One Water April 25, 2019 TWO NATIONS ONE WATER The International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico, is responsible for applying the boundary and water treaties between the two countries and settling differences that arise in their application. Excellence through teamwork. TWO NATIONS ONE WATER Colorado River Tijuana River Rio Grande TWO NATIONS ONE WATER 228 USIBWC employees working boundary-wide TIJUANA RIVER u Under the 1944 Water Treaty: ►Plans for equitable distribution of water between the two countries ►Plans for storage and flood control ►Under Article 3- prioritize uses and agree to give preferential attention to the solution of border sanitation problems TIJUANA RIVER u South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant- 25 MGD, treats sewage from Tijuana, BC Flood Control Project u Tijuana River Flood Control Project International WWTP u Minute 320 Work Groups ►Sediment ►Solid waste ►Water quality TIJUANA RIVER COLORADO RIVER u 1944 Water Treaty ► Water Allocation-1.5 million acre-feet allotted to Mexico ► Construction of diversion and storage infrastructure by the U.S. and Mexico ► Flood control ► Water Accounting- gaging stations to keep a complete record of the water delivered to Mexico MAIN AREAS IN SOUTHERN CA AND AZ THAT IBWC PLAYS A ROLE u 1944 Treaty, other areas: ► Water delivery/allocation ► Water quality monitoring- salinity, toxic substances ► Sanitation issues in Mexicali/Calexico, Nogales Az/Son u IBWC Binational Technical Workgroups: ► Ecosystem enhancement ► Habitat monitoring in response to water operations ► Conservation strategies in response to drought ► New Water Sources MORELOS DIVERSION DAM COLORADO RIVER u Water management strategies to address supply ► Conservation ► Shared reductions ► Environmental and social component COLORADO RIVER Canal lining and repair of irrigation Binational technical work groups: system in Mexico Ø Projects Ø Flow Variability Ø Minute Oversight Group Ø All-American Canal Turnout Ø Environment Ø Hydrology Ø Salinity Ø Desalination RIO GRANDE Ø Convention of 1906 § Applies to the allocation of water of El Paso-Juarez the Rio Grande to Mexico at the Convention of 1906 Acequia Madre (El Paso-Juarez) International Dams Ø 1944 Water Treaty § Allocation of water to the United 1944 States and Mexico from Fort Water Quitman, Texas to the Gulf of Treaty Mexico PROJECTS Canalization and Rectification Ft. Quitman Gage Fabens Las Cruces Caballo El Paso Hatch Ciudad Juarez Ø Canalization Project - 105 river miles from Percha Dam, NM to El Paso, Texas Ø Rectification Project – 83 river miles from El Paso to Ft. Quitman, Texas Ø Mission – Water Deliveries and Flood Control § Maintain river channel and levees § O&M of five sediment control dams § O&M of American Dam and International Dam § O&M of gaging stations § Environmental Restoration Activities CONVENTION OF 1906 - Overview Ø Distribution between Mexico and the US of the waters of the Rio Grande in El Paso-Juarez Ø U.S. to deliver 60 kaf/year Ø In case of extraordinary drought, water deliveries to both countries are reduced by the same percentage United States § Given present project storage conditions at Elephant Butte and American Canal Caballo reservoirs, proportional reductions are anticipated this Mexico year. § Wait and see how snow- melt/runoff will improve allocation projections. § Allocation committee will provide American Dam initial allocation in April with monthly updates thereafter. CONVENTION OF 1906 2019 Irrigation Season Ø Release date from Caballo – May 31st Historical Annual Deliveries to Mexico Ø EP#1, EBID, and Mexico all start (1939 to present) during the 1st week of June Ø Monthly binational meetings between US Section and Mexican 60,000acre-feet Section of the IBWC, Reclamation, CONAGUA, EP#1, EBID Ø Discuss § Basin hydrologic conditions. § Present/Forecasted Project Storage Conditions § Allocation § Delivery schedules § O&M activities REGIONAL PRIORITIES Address River Sediment Issue Ø Estimated 450,000 – 490,000 cubic yards of silt enters the Canalization reach annually (Tetra Tech report 2015). Ø Historically, removed less than 200,000 cubic yards annually. Ø High Priority for the Agency § Better management of internal sediment removal efforts. § Working with stakeholders on sediment deposition sites. § Developing SOW to contract desilting efforts when funding exists. Tetra Tech report identified nine problem locations. 1944 WATER TREATY RIO GRANDE WATER ALLOCATION u To Mexico: u To the United States: ► All waters of the Rio Grande ► All of the waters reaching the main channel from the San Juan, Alamo of the Rio Grande from the Pecos and Rivers, Devils Rivers, Goodenough Spring, Alamito, ► One-half of the Rio Grande Terlingua, San Felipe and Pinto Creeks below the lowest major ► One-half of the flow below the lowest international reservoir international reservoir ► Two-thirds of the flow reaching ► One-third of the flow from the Conchos, the main channel of the Rio San Diego, San Rodrigo, Escondido, Salado, Grande from the Conchos, San and Las Vacas Arroyo (shall not be less Diego, San Rodrigo, Escondido, than 350,000 acre-feet as an annual Salado, and the Las Vacas average in cycles of five years) Arroyo ► One-half of all other flows not otherwise ► One-half of all other flows not allotted otherwise allotted by the Treaty 5 YEAR CYCLE Luis L. Leon Dam on the Rio Conchos View of spillway INTERNATIONAL STORAGE DAMS AMISTAD DAM FALCON DAM STREAM GAGING AND WATER QUALITY STATIONS u 56 gaging stations in the Rio Grande basin ►Flow data is posted on the USIBWC website u 67 water quality stations ►Conventional parameters, bacteria, metals ►Monthly and quarterly sampling ►Dual IBWC/Texas monitoring program TRANSBOUNDARY AQUIFER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM- NM and TX UNITED STATES – MEXICO TRANSBOUNDARY AQUIFER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM UPDATED JOINT WORK PLAN April 1, 2010 References cited: u Creel, B.J., Hawley, J.W., Kennedy, J.F., and Granados-Olivas, A., 2006, Groundwater resources of the New Mexico- Texas-Chihuahua border region: New Mexico Journal of Science, v. 44. p. 11-29. u Hawley, J.W., and Kennedy, J.F., 2004, Creation of a digital hydrogeologic framework model of the Mesilla Basin and southern Jornada del Muerto Basin TRANSBOUNDARY AQUIFER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM- AZ SUMMARY u IBWC’s role: u Current topics: ►Water Accounting ►Environmental enhancement ►Flood control ►Sediment removal ►Sanitation issues ►Transboundary issues (trash, ►Water quality sediment, health) ►Facilitate the discussions with ►Transboundary resources the Mexican Section of the (drought, groundwater) IBWC TWO NATIONS ONE WATER Thank You Photo: Rio Grande downstream of Presidio, Texas.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sharing the Colorado River and the Rio Grande: Cooperation and Conflict with Mexico
    Sharing the Colorado River and the Rio Grande: Cooperation and Conflict with Mexico December 12, 2018 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45430 {222A0E69-13A2-4985-84AE-73CC3DFF4D02}-R-065134085251065165027250227152136081055238021128244192097047169070027044111226189083158176100054014174027138098149076081229242065001223143228213208120077243222253018219014073197030033204036098221153115024066109133181160249027233236220178084 SUMMARY R45430 Sharing the Colorado River and the December 12, 2018 Rio Grande: Cooperation and Conflict with Nicole T. Carter Specialist in Natural Mexico Resources Policy The United States and Mexico share the waters of the Colorado River and the Rio Grande. A bilateral water treaty from 1944 (the 1944 Water Treaty) and other binational agreements guide Stephen P. Mulligan how the two governments share the flows of these rivers. The binational International Boundary Legislative Attorney and Water Commission (IBWC) administers these agreements. Since 1944, the IBWC has been the principal venue for addressing river-related disputes between the United States and Mexico. The 1944 Water Treaty authorizes the IBWC to develop rules and to issue proposed decisions, Charles V. Stern called minutes, regarding matters related to the treaty’s execution and interpretation. Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Water Delivery Requirements Established in Binational Agreements. The United States’ and Mexico’s water-delivery obligations derive from multiple treaty sources and vary depending on the body of water. Under the 1944 Water Treaty, the United States is required to provide Mexico with 1.5 million acre-feet (AF) of Colorado River water annually. The 1944 Water Treaty also addresses the nations’ respective rights to waters of the Rio Grande downstream of Fort Quitman, TX. It requires Mexico to deliver to the United States an annual minimum of 350,000 AF of water, measured in five-year cycles (i.e., 1.75 million AF over five years).
    [Show full text]
  • B-196345 Contractual Arrangements Relating to Sale Of
    is ,[GEN1RAL OF UN ITED AT43L \ X~~~~~~~~~~~~~VA~fl1tlG70t4, Vteet 24544 13-196345 flay 1, 1980 The Honorable Abraham K~azen, Jr. House of IRepresentafires Dear 1\r. Kazen: 8ittI*,O .Plblo rAd IIIg* This is in answer to your request for our *pinion ot whether contracts for the disposition and trvelztsmission of powyer and energy from the Falcon and Amistad hydro-eleculec p~rojects violate the preference provision of the Falcon-Amis tard Darn Act, (Act'of June 18, 1954, Pubu. L. No, 83-406, 68 Sta~t 255, as ame nded by the Act of December 23, 1963, Pzub, L. No. 88-237, 77 Stat.t 475). as well1 axs on certain relatend issues, We have studied the view's of all the parties concerned as well as the relevant statutory provisions and other applicable documents. Wye do not believe the contracts in question vriolate either the }preterence clause or any other applicable stattltory provision, This and your other questions are addressed belowg in the, order, they appear In your, letter. Backgrouund On August 9, 1977, the SIouthd-Texas Electric Cooperative, Ines (OTE C) and Medina Electric Cooperative'.Inc. (MEC) contracted with the United States Burcau of Reclamation, De6'parttennt of Interior (Burceau), to pi~r- 'V,',Wchase all of then pouver and energy',(hereafter referred to'collectively £qs powver) to be generated at the AmilI'tad and Falcon hydro-'blectric facli~ties after the Amistad plant Is placed Ipto coffinercial operation,, The Ce'tral Power and Light Company (CPLi oisvn's the only transmission lines in the vicinity of either the Falcon or Amistad dams and construction of dupli-.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Draft Draft Draft 10/31/05
    Binational Rio Grande Summit Cooperation for a Better Future Cooperación para un Futuro Mejor Cumbre Binacional del Río Bravo November 17-18, 2005 Reynosa,Tamaulipas & McAllen, Texas BACKGROUND DOCUMENT International Boundary and Water Commission United States and Mexico “Lasting peace will come from the careful, patient, practical solution of particular problems.” ---United States President Lyndon B. Johnson “The factors that unite us are enough to construct a solid pedestal of enduring friendship.” ---Mexican President Adolfo Lopez Mateos Remarks at El Paso, Texas-Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, September 25, 1964, regarding the Chamizal Project on the Rio Grande, which settled a longstanding boundary dispute between the United States and Mexico. Binational Rio Grande Summit Background Document INDEX Page # Message from the Commissioners ........................................................................................... 4 Introduction................................................................................................................................ 5 The International Boundary and Water Commission............................................................ 5 Geography and Hydrology of the Rio Grande Basin ............................................................ 6 Convention of 1906 .................................................................................................................... 8 1944 Water Treaty ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lead and Arsenic Contamination by a Smelter Plant Located in the Mexico-USA Boundary Area
    Lead and Arsenic Contamination by a Smelter Plant Located in the Mexico-USA Boundary Area F.E. Porras Hernández 1, M.T. Alarcón Herrera 2, A. Granados Olivas 1, and I.R. Martin Domínguez 2. 1Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Autonomous University of Ciudad Juarez (UACJ), Autonomous University of Ciudad Juarez, Ave of Charro 450 North Ciudad Juárez, México 2Environment and Energy Department, Advanced Materials Research Center (CIMAV), Chihuahua, Mexico Key Words: contamination, soil, arsenic, lead, smelting Summary The ASARCO smelter, located in El Paso del Norte border region between Chihuahua (Mexico) and Texas and New Mexico (United States of America), was working for approximately 100 years, mainly in the casting of metals. The direct impacts to soil and water due to the emissions coming out from the smelter are considered in this study. It is assumed that during the period of its operation, the plant continuously released lead, cadmium and arsenic to the atmosphere. This research is limited to an area enclosed in 5 km-perimeter circle, Ciudad Juarez included. A geospatial analysis, using a digital-thematic cartography, is presented. The types of soil in the area of interest included variables such as: geology, topography, surface hydrology and regional climate. Taking the main chimney of the smelter as a center, the study area is enclosed into concentric circles with radii that range from 500 m up to 5000 m. Within this area, 160 soil samples of 0.60 m depth and 160 soil samples of 0.05 m were collected. The lab analysis of the samples showed that after the closing of the plant, 10 years ago, the pollution of soil by arsenic and lead still remains in some points near the main Chimney.
    [Show full text]
  • El Paso Del Norte: a Cultural Landscape History of the Oñate Crossing on the Camino Real De Tierra Adentro 1598 –1983, Ciudad Juárez and El Paso , Texas, U.S.A
    El Paso del Norte: A Cultural Landscape History of the Oñate Crossing on the Camino Real de Tierra Adentro 1598 –1983, Ciudad Juárez and El Paso , Texas, U.S.A. By Rachel Feit, Heather Stettler and Cherise Bell Principal Investigators: Deborah Dobson-Brown and Rachel Feit Prepared for the National Park Service- National Trails Intermountain Region Contract GS10F0326N August 2018 EL PASO DEL NORTE: A CULTURAL LANDSCAPE HISTORY OF THE OÑATE CROSSING ON THE CAMINO REAL DE TIERRA ADENTRO 1598–1893, CIUDAD JUÁREZ, MEXICO AND EL PASO, TEXAS U.S.A. by Rachel Feit, Heather Stettler, and Cherise Bell Principal Investigators: Deborah Dobson-Brown and Rachel Feit Draft by Austin, Texas AUGUST 2018 © 2018 by AmaTerra Environmental, Inc. 4009 Banister Lane, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78704 Technical Report No. 247 AmaTerra Project No. 064-009 Cover photo: Hart’s Mill ca. 1854 (source: El Paso Community Foundation) and Leon Trousset Painting of Ciudad Juárez looking toward El Paso (source: The Trousset Family Online 2017) Table of Contents Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 The Oñate Crossing in Context .............................................................................................................. 1 .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Texas-Mexico International Bridges and Border Crossings
    TEXAS-MEXICO INTERNATIONAL BRIDGES AND BORDER CROSSINGS Existing and Proposed 2015 Texas-Mexico International Bridges and Border Crossings Existing and Proposed 2015 Table of Contents Overview ...............................................................................................................................................................................i Map ..................................................................................................................................................................................... II Summary ........................................................................................................................................................................... III Veterans International Bridge at Los Tomates ................................................................................................................ 1 Gateway International Bridge ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Free Trade Bridge ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 Weslaco-Progreso International Bridge ......................................................................................................................... 10 Donna International Bridge ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Geomorphology and American Dams: the Scientific, Social, and Economic Context
    Geomorphology 71 (2005) 3–26 www.elsevier.com/locate/geomorph Geomorphology and American dams: The scientific, social, and economic context William L. Graf Department of Geography, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA Received 13 November 2002; received in revised form 11 May 2004; accepted 12 May 2004 Available online 31 May 2005 Abstract American geomorphologic research related to dams is embedded in a complicated context of science, policy, economics, and culture. Research into the downstream effects of large dams has progressed to the point of theory-building, but generalization and theory-building are from this research because (1) it is highly focused on a few locations, (2) it concerns mostly very large dams rather than a representative sample of sizes, (3) the available record of effects is too short to inform us on long-term changes, (4) the reversibility of changes imposed by dam installation and operation is unknown, and (5) coordinated funding for the needed research is scarce. In the scientific context, present research is embedded in a history of geomorphology in government service, with indistinct boundaries between bbasic and appliedQ research. The federal policy that most strongly influences present geomorphological investigations connected with dams is related to habitat for endangered species, because the biological aspects of ecosystems are directly dependent on the substrate formed by the sediments and landforms that are influenced by dams. The economic context for research includes large amounts of public funds for river restoration, along with substantial private investments in dams; and geomorphology is central to these expensive issues. The cultural context for research is highly contentious and dominated by advocacy procedures that include intense scrutiny of any geomorphologic research related to dams.
    [Show full text]
  • Baseline Report Rio Grande-Caballo Dam to American Dam FLO-2D Modeling, New Mexico and Texas
    Baseline Report Rio Grande-Caballo Dam to American Dam FLO-2D Modeling, New Mexico and Texas Prepared for: United States Section International Boundary and Water Commission (USIBWC) Under IBM 92-21, Task IWO #31 Prepared by: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Prime Contractor) Albuquerque District Subcontractors: Mussetter Engineering, Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado Riada Engineering, Inc., Nutruiso, Arizona September 4, 2007 Table of Contents Page 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................1.1 1.1. Project Objectives ......................................................................................................1.1 1.2. Scope of Work............................................................................................................1.1 1.3. Authorization ..............................................................................................................1.3 2. GEOMORPHOLOGY..........................................................................................................2.1 2.1. Background ................................................................................................................2.1 2.2. Pre-Canalization Conditions.......................................................................................2.1 2.3. Canalization Project ...................................................................................................2.1 2.4. Subreach Delineation.................................................................................................2.3
    [Show full text]
  • Dam Safety in the United States: a Progress Report on the National
    NDSP_Biennial_06-07.qxp 3/9/2009 10:30 AM Page c1 Dam Safety in the United States A Progress Report on the National Dam Safety Program Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007 FEMA P–759/February 2009 NDSP_Biennial_06-07.qxp 3/9/2009 10:30 AM Page c2 Cover photo courtesy: Folsom Dam, CA Bureau of Reclamation NDSP_Biennial_06-07.qxp 3/9/2009 10:30 AM Page i Preface Dams are a vital part of our Nation’s infrastructure, • encourage acceptable engineering policies and providing economic, environmental, and social benefits, procedures to be used for dam site investigation, i including hydroelectric power, river navigation, water design, construction, operation and maintenance, and supply, wildlife habitat, waste management, flood control, emergency preparedness; and recreation.The benefits of dams, however, are countered by the risks they can present. In the event of a • encourage the establishment and implementation of dam failure, the potential energy of the water stored behind effective dam safety programs in each state based on even a small dam is capable of causing loss of life, state standards; significant property damage, and an extended period of denial of the services dams provide. • develop and encourage public awareness projects to increase public acceptance and support of state dam For almost 30 years, reducing the risk of dam failure has safety programs; been the cornerstone and driving force of the National Dam Safety Program.The purpose of the National Dam • develop technical assistance materials for federal and Safety Program, as expressed
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond the Rio Grande Water Debt
    ISSUE BRIEF 12.08.20 Beyond the Rio Grande Water Debt Stephen P. Mumme, Ph.D., Nonresident Scholar, Center for the United States and Mexico The Rio Grande water war1 is over, at least Mexico’s capacity to meet the treaty’s for now. A summer’s worth of rancor, requirements. There is clearly a need to recrimination, violent protests, and one rethink at least some of the elements that tragic death ended abruptly on October 21, factor into the fulfillment of Mexico’s Rio three days before payment in full was due, Grande treaty obligations. when Mexico agreed to transfer water stored Ironically, the pertinent provisions of the in Rio Grande dams to the United States. 1944 water treaty, officially titled “Utilization Mexico’s last-minute decision to of Waters of the Colorado and Tijuana Rivers meet its 1944 water treaty2 obligation and of the Rio Grande,” were thought, at was greeted with both sighs of relief and the time, to be exceptionally flexible and annoyance in Texas where irrigation demand to Mexico’s advantage in meeting its treaty peaked July through September, diminishing deal (Enriquez Coyro 1976, 1174). Those the utility of the suddenly restored water provisions, located in the treaty’s Article 4, supply (Arevalo 2020). It peeved Mexican commit Mexico to delivering 350,000 acre- irrigators as well. In Chihuahua, riled feet of water annually to the United States, farmers seized control of La Boquilla Dam a figure that is calculated as an average in the upper Rio Conchos in August to avert over a water delivery cycle of five years, a depletion of that reservoir to fulfill Mexico’s sum obligation of 1,750,000 acre-feet in treaty obligation, and a protest erupted each cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • El Paso Federal Flood Assessment Conference Proceedings Report
    Federal Flood Assessment Conference Recommendations and Proceedings September 6, 2006 Convened by Congressman Silvestre Reyes 16th Congressional District of Texas Organized by Peter Brock, Community Liaison, El Paso Office of the 16th Congressional District of Texas 310 N. Mesa, Suite 400 El Paso, Texas 79901 Proceedings Editor: Dr. Ari Michelsen El Paso Agricultural Research Center Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Texas A&M University 1380 A&M Circle, El Paso, Texas 79927 915-859-9111 Participating Agencies and Organizations: NOAA, National Weather Service U.S. Geological Survey U.S. International Boundary and River Commission U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Bureau of Reclamation El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 Elephant Butte Irrigation District Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Texas Department of Transportation U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Federal Flood Assessment Proceedings Table of Contents Background and Purpose ………………………………… page 3 Summary of Priority Recommendations ……………………….... 4 Conference Agenda ……………………………………………… 5 Agency and Organization Proceedings Reports ………………… 7 National Weather Service …………………………………. 8 U.S. Geological Survey ……………………………………. 11 U.S. International Boundary and River Commission ……... 12 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers…………………………….. 15 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency…………………… 19 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation………………………………. 23 El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1………. 31 Elephant Butte Irrigation District…………………………. 34 Department of Homeland Security ……………………….. 36 Texas Department of Transportation……………………… 37 Federal Emergency Management Agency………………… 38 Full List of Agency Priority Recommendations…………………. 39 Participant List and Contact Information………………………… 44 Gauge Station Location and Operating Organization Maps.…... 46 Gauge Stations Along the Rio Grande ………….…….. 47 Gauge Stations in El Paso County…………………….... 48 Conference Power Point Presentations Appendix……………….
    [Show full text]
  • International Boundary and Water Commission Construction
    Proposed Appropriation Language CONSTRUCTION For detailed plan preparation and construction of authorized projects, $31,900,000, to remain available until expended, as authorized. 696 INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION CONSTRUCTION International Boundary and Water Commission - Construction Resource Summary ($ in thousands) Appropriations FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 CR FY 2012 Request American Positions 18 18 18 Funds 43,250 43,250 31,900 Program Description The International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) is a treaty-based binational organization comprised of a United States Section and a Mexican Section. The United States Section is headquartered in El Paso, Texas, and the Mexican section is headquartered in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua. Both Sections have field offices strategically situated along the boundary, which enables the IBWC to carry out its mission objectives and meet its required obligations. Pursuant to treaties between the United States (U.S.) and Mexico and U.S. law, the IBWC carries out several construction projects. This appropriation provides funding for construction projects undertaken independent of, or with, Mexico to rehabilitate or improve water deliveries, flood control, boundary preservation, and sanitation. Since the Convention of February 1, 1933, which provided for rectification of the Rio Grande through the El Paso–Juarez valley, the two governments have participated in several binational construction projects. The Treaty of 1944 provided for the two governments to construct diversion and storage dams on the Rio Grande and Colorado River. The dams provide the means for conservation and regulation of international river waters. In addition, the 1944 Treaty provides for flood control works on the Rio Grande, Colorado River, and Tijuana River.
    [Show full text]