DOCSLIB.ORG

The Formulation of an Interstate Compact to Address the Diverse Problems of the Red River Basin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Formulation of an Interstate Compact to Address the Diverse Problems of the Red River Basin Oklahoma Law Review Volume 38 Number 1 1-1-1985 Where East Meets West in Water Law: The Formulation of an Interstate Compact to Address the Diverse Problems of the Red River Basin Ann Marguerite Chapman Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr Part of the Water Law Commons Recommended Citation Ann M. Chapman, Where East Meets West in Water Law: The Formulation of an Interstate Compact to Address the Diverse Problems of the Red River Basin, 38 OKLA. L. REV. 1 (1985), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr/vol38/iss1/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Oklahoma Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 38 SPRING 1985 NUMBER 1 WHERE EAST MEETS WEST IN WATER LAW: THE FORMULATION OF AN INTERSTATE COMPACT TO ADDRESS THE DIVERSE PROBLEMS OF THE RED RIVER BASIN MARGuERITE ANN CHAPMAN* Introduction The completion of the Red River Compact in 1978 and its subsequent approval by Congress in 1980 was an important milestone both in the proper management of an increasingly precious natural resource and in the use of the interstate compact device to address the multifaceted problems of a re- gion such as the Red River basin. The overall objective of this article is to examine the formulation and approval of the Red River Compact in ad- dressing the diverse problems arising within the watershed of the Red River system. Part I assesses the divergent legal, environmental, and intergovernmental problems which shaped the compact. The genesis of the compact, of course, *B.A., 1973, J.D., 1976, University of Arkansas (Fayetteville); LL.M., 1985, George Wash- ington University. Assistant Professor, University of Tulsa College of Law. The author wishes to thank the following officials of the Oklahoma Water Resources Board for their cooperation in providing access to correspondence, minutes of negotiating sessions, and other records pertaining to the deliberations that led to the formulation and approval of the Red River Compact: James R. Barnett, Executive Director and Commissioner for Okla- homa; R. Thomas Lay, General Counsel and Oklahoma member of the Legal Advisory Com- mittee to the Red River Compact Commission; and Richard Cochran, Tulsa Branch Manager. Appreciation is also expressed to Laurence N. Flanagan, U.S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Lower Mississippi Valley Division, and to John Saxton, Acting Chairman of the Red River Compact Commission, and Americ J. Bryniarski, Arkansas representative to the Engineering Advisory Committee of the Red River Compact Commission and other staff of the Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission, for copies of other records. Unless otherwise indicated, the views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the governmental officials and agencies heretofore identified. The author also wishes to thank Richard B. Webber II and Maureen Hennessy, whose ex- cellent work as research assistants facilitated the completion of this article. This article was adapted from a manuscript submitted to George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the degree of Master of Law in Environmental Law.-Ed. Published by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons, 1985 OKLAHOMA LA W REVIEW [Vol. 38:1 did not occur in a political or legal vacuum. In order to provide a context in which the negotiations were undertaken, part II of this article chronicles the adjustment of interstate disputes from colonial days until the middle of the twentieth century when the impetus to negotiate the Red River Compact began. The principal alternative mechanism for resolving interstate water problems, i.e., resort to litigation, is discussed in part III, which also reviews the enunciation by the Supreme Court of the basic principles applicable to interstate water disputes. As a background to the preliminary assessment of the compact made herein, part IV examines the expansion of federal au- thority over the nation's waters. Part V reviews the impetus to negotiate the compact, charts the progress of the deliberations from 1956 until congres- sional approval of the compact in 1980, and recounts some of the difficulties encountered during the negotiations. Finally, part VI explains the compact's structure and primary powers and offers a preliminary assessment of its accomplishments. In sum, this article endeavors not only to describe the development of the compact and to explain and evaluate its provisions, but also to assess the position of this compact in the nation's history of the adjustment of interstate disputes. I. The Red River Compact in Perspective The Showdown at Denison Dam More than a hundred and fifty persons watched at high noon, May 12, 1978, as the duly authorized representatives of the states of Arkansas, Lou- isiana, Oklahoma, and Texas and of the United States government assembled atop Denison Dam on the Red River near Denison, Texas, to sign the Red River Compact.' The formal signing of this multipurpose compact expressed, inter alia, the agreement of the four signatory states to an equitable ap- portionment of the water of the Red River system, 2 the sixth longest river 1. States Ink Water Pact, Oklahoman & Times, May 13, 1978, at 3, col. 1. An editorial in one Oklahoma newspaper heralded the historic signing of the compact as "at least a start at facing up to Oklahoma's future water needs," which constituted "easily Oklahoma's No. I problem of the 1980's and '90's." Time to 'Divvy Up', Daily Oklahoman, May 9, 1978, at 8, col. 1. The same editorial couched the apportionment of water made by the compact in terms of state versus federal control of decision making, observing that while "[i]t's not much fun to share Oklahoma water with other states.... it's better for these states to make those sharing decisions than for Uncle Sam to do the dividing-up for them." Id. The signing of the Red River Compact was viewed by one news analyst as possibly "the first step in keeping waters from the Red River Basin from later being drawn off by arid regions demanding relief through federal courts." E. Kelley, Historic Red River Water Pact Ready for Signing, Sunday Oklahoman, May 7, 1978, at 1, col. 1. An official of the Oklahoma Water Resources Board (OWRB) commented that presidential approval of the compact 'would make it difficult' from a legal standpoint for Texas to use the basin's tributaries as a source of water for piping it to the thirsty High Plains region." Id. However, the exportation of water from the system is not prohibited by the compact. See infra text accompanying notes 550-554. 2. Red River Compact, art. I, § 1.01(b), Act of Dec. 22, 1980, Pub. L. No. 96-564, 94 Stat. 3305 (1980) [hereinafter cited as Red River Compact, with applicable U.S. Stat.]. For purposes of the compact, "Red River" means the stream below the crossing of the Texas- https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr/vol38/iss1/9 19851 WHERE EAST MEETS WEST IN WATER LAW 3 in the United States? The ceremony ended more than twenty-two years of congressionally authorized negotiations between and among the four states over the creation of an interstate legal framework for the conservation and development of the Red River system, one of the greatest resources of the 4 Southwest. The official signing ceremony culminated sixty formal meetings of the Red River Compact Negotiation Commission (RRCNC)5 since the enactment by Congress and the promulgation by President Dwight Eisenhower on August 11, 1955, of legislation specifically consenting to the negotiations.6 During the ensuing year and a half following the formal signing ceremony, the compact was ratified by the respective legislatures of the signatory states and approved by the Congress. 7 The Red River Compact became legally effective and binding on December 22, 1980, when President Jimmy Carter approved the consent legislation.8 Oklahoma state boundary at longitude 100' west. Id. § 3.01(b), 94 Stat. 3307. "Red River basin" denotes all of the natural drainage area of the Red River and its tributaries east of the New Mexico-Texas state boundary and above its junction with the Atchafalaya and Old rivers in Louisiana. Id. § 3.01(c). The term "Red River system" is used interchangeably with "water of the Red River basin" to refer to the water originating in any part of the Red River basin and flowing to or into the Red River or any of its tributaries. Id. § 3.01(d), 94 Stat. 3308. 3. See Oklahoma ex rel. Phillips v. Guy F. Atkinson Co., 313 U.S. 508, 520 (1941), citing H.R. Doc. No. 541, 75th Cong., 3d Sess. 17 (1938). 4. 126 CONG. Rac. H11386 (daily ed. Dec. 1, 1980) (statement of Rep. Hall). 5. Minutes of the 60th Meeting of the Red River Compact Negotiation Comm'n (RRCNC), at 1 (May 12, 1978). Although governmental records generally refer to the commission that negotiated the Red River Compact as the "Red River Compact Commission," the author uses "Red River Compact Negotiation Commission" or "RRCNC" to denote the commission that negotiated the compact and to distinguish it from the Red River Compact Commission or "RRCC," the interstate agency created to implement the compact. Unlike other river basin compacts, no bound volume of the official records of the negotiations has ever been compiled for the Red River Compact. See Verbatim Transcript, Red River Compact Comm'n, at 21 (2d Annual Meeting, Apr.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Where East Meets West in Water Law: the Formulation of an Interstate Compact to Address the Diverse Problems of the Red River Basin Marguerite Chapman
    University of Tulsa College of Law TU Law Digital Commons Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works 1985 Where East Meets West in Water Law: The Formulation of an Interstate Compact to Address the Diverse Problems of the Red River Basin Marguerite Chapman Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/fac_pub Part of the Water Law Commons Recommended Citation 38 Okla. L. Rev. 1 (1985). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by TU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works by an authorized administrator of TU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 38 SPRING 1985 NUMBER 1 WHERE EAST MEETS WEST IN WATER LAW: THE FORMULATION OF AN INTERSTATE COMPACT TO ADDRESS THE DIVERSE PROBLEMS OF THE RED RIVER BASIN MARGuERITE ANN CHAPMAN* Introduction The completion of the Red River Compact in 1978 and its subsequent approval by Congress in 1980 was an important milestone both in the proper management of an increasingly precious natural resource and in the use of the interstate compact device to address the multifaceted problems of a re- gion such as the Red River basin. The overall objective of this article is to examine the formulation and approval of the Red River Compact in ad- dressing the diverse problems arising within the watershed of the Red River system. Part I assesses the divergent legal, environmental, and intergovernmental problems which shaped the compact.
    [Show full text]
  • Ground-Water Quality and Geochemistry in the Strawberry River Watershed in Northeast Arkansas
    Ground-Water Quality and Geochemistry in the Strawberry River Watershed in Northeast Arkansas By Tim M. Kresse and John A. Fazio Arkansas Ambient Ground-Water Monitoring Program Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Report WQ04-01-1 January 2004 Water Quality Planning Branch The Water Quality Planning Branch consists of seven biologists/ecologists and two geologists. This branch deals with a variety of issues related to surface and ground water. Among the numerous activities is the management of the State Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Network for both surface and subsurface waters. Included in the network is routine monitoring as well as intensive, special investigations of watersheds and/or aquifers. The data generated from these activities are used to prepare the biennial “Water Quality Inventory Report (305B)” and the “List of Impaired Waterbodies, (303(d) list)”, and to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for impaired water bodies. The data are also used to develop water quality standards and criteria for designated use assessment. The staff continues to develop and/or enhance ecoregion-based, biological assessment criteria for both fish and macroinvertebrates. The staff additionally is active in the development and updating of water quality standards and technical review and administration of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits Biomonitoring Program. Ground-water issues of concern in recent years have included the investigation of pesticides in ground water, potential impacts from confined animal operations, and saltwater contamination in southeastern Arkansas. Various staff members represent the Department on numerous Federal, State, local, and watershed-based advisory boards and technical support groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Occurrence of Arsenic in Ground Waters of Arkansas and Implications for Source and Release Mechanisms
    Occurrence of Arsenic in Ground Waters of Arkansas and Implications for Source and Release Mechanisms By Tim Kresse and John Fazio Arkansas Ambient Ground-Water Monitoring Program Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Report WQ03-03-01 March, 2003 WATER DIVISION, PLANNING SECTION The Water Quality Planning Branch has seven biologists/ecologists and two geologists on staff. This branch deals with a variety of issues related to surface and ground water. Among the numerous activities is the management of the State Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Network for both surface and subsurface waters. Included in the network is routine monitoring as well as intensive, special investigations of watersheds and/or aquifers. The data generated from these activities are used to prepare the biennial “Water Quality Inventory Report (305B)” and the “List of Impaired Waterbodies, (303(d) list), and to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for impaired waterbodies. The data are also used to develop water quality standards and criteria for designated use assessment. The staff continues to develop and/or enhance ecoregion-based, biological assessment criteria for both fish and macroinvertebrates. The staff additionally is active in the development and updating of water quality standards and technical review and administration of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits Biomonitoring Program. Ground-water issues of concern in recent years have included the investigation of pesticides in ground water, potential impacts from confined animal operations, saltwater intrusion in southeastern Arkansas, and the natural geochemical evolution of ground water as a result of water/rock interactions. Various staff members represent the Department on numerous Federal, State, local, and watershed-based advisory boards and technical support groups.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Arkansas
    STATE OF ARKANSAS ARKANSAS NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION 101 EAST CAPITOL, SUITE 350 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 MIKE HUCKABEE GOVERNOR COMMISSIONERS Alec Farmer Corbet Lamkin Ann Cash Commissioner Chairman Commissioner Jonesboro Chidester McGehee David Feilke Sloan Hampton James Neal Anderson Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Stuttgart Stuttgart Lonoke Robert White Jerry Mitchell Daniel Bryant Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Fayetteville Harrison North Little Rock J. Randy Young, P.E. Executive Director Jonathan R. Sweeney, P.E. Deputy Director/Chief Engineer 2 Arkansas Natural Resources Commission Ground Water Management and Protection Section Staff Earl T. Smith, Jr., P.E. Chief, Water Resources Management Division D. Todd Fugitt, R.P.G. Geology Supervisor James L. Battreal, R.P.G. Professional Geologist Jay Johnston, C.P.G. Professional Geologist Derek Taylor Geologist Chris Kelley Ground Water Technician Michael Ritchey Chief Construction Inspector Perry Dotson Water Well Inspector Lynn Richardson Administrative Secretary Shelly Murphey Administrative Secretary 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks to: Tony Schrader, Greg Stanton, Terry Holland, John Czarnecki and John Terry of the United States Geological Survey Water Resources Division, Little Rock, Arkansas. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................................................ 9 WATER POLICY ..............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas Public Water System Compliance Summary
    Arkansas Public Water System Compliance Summary Arkansas Department of Health Center for Local Public Health Environmental Health Branch Engineering Section Revised March 2018 This Page Left Intentionally Blank Executive Summary Community Public Water System Compliance Responsibilities This document is intended to be a summary of the responsibilities of community public water systems in complying with: the "Arkansas Rules & Regulations Pertaining to Public Water Systems" (See Appendix A); the "National Primary Drinking Water Regulations"; the “National Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Standards” (See Appendix B); the “Water Operator Licensing Law”; and the “Rules and Regulations Pertaining to Water Operator Licensing” as administered by the Arkansas Department of Health ; Engineering Section’s Public Water System Supervision Program. It does not include all details necessary to insure compliance, but advises the operator of the primary areas of responsibility and refers the operator to the appropriate location for the regulatory citation, as well as the location of any additional information. The Arkansas State Board of Health’s “Rules and Regulations Pertaining to Public Water Systems” (RRPPWS) are promulgated under the authority of Act 96 of 1913 and Act 8 of the Second Extraordinary Session of 1961, as amended. The Arkansas State Board of Health’s “Rules and Regulations Pertaining to Water Operator Licensing” (RRPWOL) are promulgated under the authority of Act 333 of 1957, as amended. The "Arkansas Rules and Regulations Pertaining to Public Water Systems" and Federal Public Law 93- 523 (The Safe Drinking Water Act) require that water from all public water systems meet the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, as promulgated by the U.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Bradley Calhoun, and Ouachita Counties, Arkansas
    Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Bradley Calhoun, and Ouachita Counties, Arkansas By DONALD R. ALBIN CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1779-G Prepared in cooperation with the Arkansas Geological Commission UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1964 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washln!1ton, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract---------------------------------------------------------- G1 Introduction______________________________________________________ 1 Purpose and scope _____________________ - _______ ------------____ 1 Location and well-numbering system_____________________________ 2 Acknowledgments_________ ____________________________________ 3 General geology of deposits of Cenozoic age___________________________ 3 Tertiary System _______________________________ --- ___ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 8 Paleocene Series ____________________________ -- ___ -_________ 8 ~idway Group_____ ___________________________________ 8 Eocene Series_____________________________________________ 9 Wilcox GroUP----------------------------------------- 9 Claiborne Group______________________________________ 9 Carrizo Sand______________________________________ 9 Cane River Formation_____________________________ 10 Sparta Sand_ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 10 Cook ~ountain Formation_________________________
    [Show full text]
  • A Model for Groundwater Flow in the Alluvial Aquifer of the Arkansas River at Dardanelle, Arkansas
    STATE OF ARKANSAS Arkansas Geological Commission Mac B. Woodward, State Geologist _______________________________________________________________________ W A T E R R E S O U R C E S C I R C U L A R 1 8 _______________________________________________________________________ A Model for Groundwater Flow In the Alluvial Aquifer of the Arkansas River at Dardanelle, Arkansas By Stephen W. Kline, Ph.D., P.G. Center for Energy, Natural Resources, and Environmental Studies Arkansas Tech University And Nicolas R. Horn, Cathy Baker, Ph.D., and John D. Horn Department of Physical Sciences Arkansas Tech University Little Rock, Arkansas 2003 STATE OF ARKANSAS Mike Huckabee, Governor ARKANSAS GEOLOGICAL COMMISSION Mac B. Woodward, State Geologist COMMISSIONERS Dr. Richard Cohoon, Chairman ......................................Russellville Donald Reinbold, Vice Chairman.......................................... Turrell David J. Baumgardner .................................................... Little Rock John Blake.................................................................Siloam Springs David Lumbert................................................................ Little Rock James W. Parham............................................................... Magnolia William Willis................................................................ Hot Springs A Model for Groundwater Flow In the Alluvial Aquifer of the Arkansas River at Dardanelle, Arkansas By Stephen W. Kline, Ph.D., P.G. Center for Energy, Natural Resources, and Environmental Studies Arkansas Tech University And Nicolas R. Horn, Cathy Baker, Ph.D., and John D. Horn Department of Physical Sciences Arkansas Tech University Abstract The municipal wells of the City of Dardanelle tap the alluvial aquifer of the Arkansas River in an area where the alluvial plain is about 1.4 mi (2.3 km) wide and 68 ft (21 m) thick, flanked by areas of Paleozoic shale bedrock outcrop. The city planners were concerned about potential contamination of their water-supply system if the river were to be polluted.
    [Show full text]
  • (Upper Claiborne) Aquifer in Southern Arkansas and the Wilcox (Lower Wilcox) Aquifer of Northeastern and Southern Arkansas, 2012
    Prepared in cooperation with the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission and the Arkansas Geological Survey Potentiometric Surfaces and Water-Level Trends in the Cockfield (Upper Claiborne) Aquifer in Southern Arkansas and the Wilcox (Lower Wilcox) Aquifer of Northeastern and Southern Arkansas, 2012 94º 93º MISSOURI 92º 91º ARKANSAS CLAY GREENE 90º 36º OZARK PLATEAUS CRAIGHEAD TENNESSEE MISSISSIPPI POINSETT OKLAHOMA Arkansas Valley S CROSS D N LA OUACHITA H G ST. FRANCIS I CRITTENDEN 35º PROVINCE IN H A PL LEE L A Mississippi Alluvial Plain INTERIORST Ouachita Mountains OA C Mississippi River HOT SPRING ARKANSAS GRANT MISSISSIPPI JEFFERSON 34º DALLAS CLEVELAND CLARK LINCOLN DESHA OUACHITA NEVADA DREW HEMPSTEAD CALHOUN TEXAS BRADLEY West Gulf Coastal Plain CHICOT ASHLEY COLUMBIA UNION LOUISIANA Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5232 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Potentiometric Surfaces and Water- Level Trends in the Cockfield (Upper Claiborne) Aquifer in Southern Arkansas and the Wilcox (Lower Wilcox) Aquifer of Northeastern and Southern Arkansas, 2012 By Kirk D. Rodgers Prepared in cooperation with the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission and the Arkansas Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5232 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas Ground-Water Quality
    ARKANSAS GROUND-WATER QUALITY By E.E. Morris U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-0714 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information: For sale by: Chief Hydrologist U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section 407 National Center Federal Center Reston, VA 22092 Box 25425 Denver, Colorado 80225 Use of trade names in this report is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey FOREWORD This report contains summary information on ground-water quality in one of the 50 States, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands, Saipan, Guam, and American Samoa. The material is extracted from the manuscript of the 1986 National Water Summary, and with the exception of the illustrations, which will be reproduced in multi-color in the 1986 National Water Summary, the format and content of this report is identical to the State ground-water-quality descriptions to be published in the 1986 National Water Summary. Release of this information before formal publication in the 1986 National Water Summary permits the earliest access by the public. Contents Ground-Water Quality ................................................... 1 Water-Quality in Principal Aquifers ....................................... 1 Background Water Quality .......................................... 1 Alluvial Aquifer ............................................... 1 Cockfield
    [Show full text]
  • Genetically Modified Organisms in Aquaculture : from Present to Future
    MISSISSIPPI RIVER VALLEY ALLUVIAL AQUIFER AND SPARTA AQUIFER COMPARISON REPORT FOR THE STATES OF MISSISSIPPI, ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA, TENNESSEE, AND MISSOURI CATHERINE JANASIE, RESEARCH COUNSEL II RACHEL BUDDRUS, UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI SCHOOL OF LAW, CLASS OF 2019 OCTOBER 2018 NSGLC-18-06-05 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction……………………………………….........3 II. Water Law Basics………..............................................4 a. Surface Water………….............................................4 b. Groundwater…………………………………….......5 c. Interstate Disputes………………………………......6 III. State by State Analysis of Water Laws…………........7 a. Mississippi……………………………......................7 b. Arkansas……………………………………….........8 c. Lousiana….................................................................9 d. Tennessee……………………………......................10 e. Missouri……………………………………………12 IV. Management Programs Addressing Scarcity…..........13 V. Additional Factors Regarding the Use of Water……..15 a. Role of Water Management Districts……………...15 i. Mississippi…………………………………......16 ii. Arkansas………………………………………..16 iii. Louisiana………………………………….........17 iv. Tennessee…………………………………........17 v. Missouri……………………………………......17 b. Drainage Tiles…………………………………......17 c. Aquifer Storage and Recovery…………………….18 VI. Conclusion…………………………………………..18 2 I. Introduction The Mississippi River Valley Alluvial Aquifer (MRVA) is located in multiple states, including Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee.1 The bulk of the aquifer is in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee.2
    [Show full text]
  • National Guard Association
    Always Ready, Always There Page 1 From the Adjutant General Contents: It is my pleasure to present the Arkansas Na- tional Guard’s annual report for Fiscal Year 2009. This report documents another historic year for us – a year full of both challenge and success. The Joint Staff 3 Within these pages you will find an overview of our organization and visualize the contributions Major Commands 4 made by our Citizen Soldiers and Airmen as well as our force of civilian employees who work to support them. Together we comprise a truly Joint Staff 5 Force which has done an outstanding job through our dual mission to support the communities of Year of the NCO 6 Arkansas and the nation as a whole. Our federal mission hit a high point for us in December 2008, as we welcomed History 7 home over 3,200 Soldiers who had served on the 39th Infantry Brigade Combat Team’s second tour in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Nearly every unit of Unit Listing 8 the Arkansas Army Guard was tapped to help fill in the ranks for that deploy- ment, bringing our level of trained and experienced troops to unprecedented levels. Army Units 10 With this return, our deployed troop numbers dropped to their lowest lev- Air Units 12 els since 2001, but our role in the war on terror didn’t end. We witnessed the deployment and return of Airmen from the Security Forces Squadrons of our two Air Guard wings, who served overseas in Kyrgyzstan. We said goodbye Separate Units 14 to our Airmen with the 188th Fighter Wing’s Civil Engineering Squadron, who deployed to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with the mission of helping to close our Federal Missions 16 nation’s detention facility there.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Law in Arkansas
    Water Law in Arkansas Arkansas Natural Resources Commission Revised by the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission in 2011 Preface The development of this publication is the continuation of a project entitled Arkansas State Laws, Policy and Programs Pertaining to Water and Related Land Resources first commenced in 1968. In 1981, Paul Douglas Mays wrote Arkansas Water Law, which was published and distributed by the Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission, now known as the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission. Some aspects of the work of Mr. Mays served as the basis for the body of this work which was authored by Professor, now Circuit Judge, J. W. Looney. In 2011, Professor Looney’s work was updated by Commission staff to include new developments in water issues. Substantial parts of the current work are drawn from the following articles which provide more detail on the matters outlined here: J.W. Dellapenna, “The Law of Water Allocation in the Southeastern States at the Opening of the Twenty First Century,” 25 Univ. of Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 9 (2002). J.W. Looney, “Modification of Arkansas Water Law: Issues and Alternatives,” 38 Arkansas Law Review 221 (1984). J.W. Looney, “An Update on Arkansas Water Law: Is the Riparian Rights Doctrine Dead?” 43 Arkansas Law Review 573 (1990). J.W. Looney, “Enhancing the Role of Water Districts in Ground Water Management and Surface Water Utilization in Arkansas,” 48 Arkansas Law Review 643 (1995). J.W. Looney, “Diffused Surface Water in Arkansas: Is It Time for a New Rule?” 18 UALR Law Journal 393 (1996). Martha L.
    [Show full text]