N.M. Stat. Ann. § 72-15-19
That the state of New Mexico does hereby ratify, approve and adopt the compact aforesaid, which is as follows:
PECOS RIVER COMPACT
The state of New Mexico and the state of Texas, acting through their commissioners,
John H. Bliss for the state of New Mexico and
Charles H. Miller for the state of Texas,
after negotiations participated in by Berkeley Johnson, appointed by the president as the representative of the United States of America, have agreed respecting the uses, apportionment and deliveries of the water of the Pecos river as follows:
ARTICLE I
The major purposes of this compact [this section] are to provide for the equitable division and apportionment of the use of the waters of the Pecos river; to promote interstate comity; to remove causes of present and future controversies; to make secure and protect present development within the states; to facilitate the construction of works for:
(c) the protection of life and property from floods.
ARTICLE II
As used in this compact:
(i) the term "unappropriated floodwaters" means water originating in the Pecos river basin above Red Bluff dam in Texas, the impoundment of which will not deplete the water usable by the storage and diversion facilities existing in either state under the 1947 condition and which if not impounded will flow past Girvin, Texas.
ARTICLE III
(f) Beneficial consumptive use of unappropriated flood waters is hereby apportioned fifty percent (50%) to Texas and fifty percent (50%) to New Mexico.
ARTICLE IV
(c) New Mexico and Texas each may:
(h) All facilities shall be operated in such manner as to carry out the terms of this compact.
ARTICLE V
(d) The commission, so far as consistent with this compact, shall have power to:
1. adopt rules and regulations;
2. locate, establish, construct, operate, maintain and abandon water-gaging stations, independently or in cooperation with appropriate governmental agencies;
3. engage in studies of water supplies of the Pecos river and its tributaries, independently or in cooperation with appropriate governmental agencies;
4. collect, analyze, correlate, preserve and report on data as to the stream flows, storage, diversions, salvage and use of the waters of the Pecos river and its tributaries, independently or in cooperation with appropriate governmental agencies;
5. make findings as to any change in depletion by man's activities in New Mexico, and on the Delaware river in Texas;
6. make findings as to the deliveries of water at the New Mexico-Texas state line;
7. make findings as to the quantities of water salvaged and the amount thereof delivered at the New Mexico-Texas state line;
8. make findings as to quantities of water nonbeneficially consumed in New Mexico;
9. make findings as to quantities of unappropriated flood waters;
10. make findings as to the quantities of reservoir losses from reservoirs constructed in New Mexico which may be used for the benefit of both states, and as to the share thereof charged under Article VI hereof to each of the states;
11. acquire and hold such personal and real property as may be necessary for the performance of its duties hereunder and to dispose of the same when no longer required;
12. perform all functions required of it by this compact and do all things necessary, proper or convenient in the performance of its duties hereunder, independently or in cooperation with appropriate governmental agencies;
13. make and transmit annually to the governors of the signatory states and to the president of the United States on or before the last day of February of each year, a report covering the activities of the commission for the preceding year.
(g) The organization meeting of the commission shall be held within four months from the effective date of this compact.
ARTICLE VI
The following principles shall govern in regard to the apportionment made by Article III of this compact:
(c) unless and until a more feasible method is devised and adopted by the commission the inflow-outflow method, as described in the report of the engineering advisory committee, shall be used to:
(d) if unappropriated flood waters apportioned to Texas are stored in facilities constructed in New Mexico, the following principles shall apply:
(f) beneficial use shall be the basis, the measure and the limit of the right to use water.
ARTICLE VII
In the event of importation of water by man's activities to the Pecos river basin from any other river basin the state making the importation shall have the exclusive use of such imported water.
ARTICLE VIII
The provisions of this compact [this section] shall not apply to, or interfere with, the right or power of either signatory state to regulate within its boundaries the appropriation, use and control of water, not inconsistent with its obligations under this compact.
ARTICLE IX
In maintaining the flows at the New Mexico-Texas state line required by this compact, New Mexico shall in all instances apply the principle of prior appropriation within New Mexico.
ARTICLE X
The failure of either state to use the water, or any part thereof, the use of which is apportioned to it under the terms of this compact, shall not constitute a relinquishment of the right to such use, nor shall it constitute a forfeiture or abandonment of the right to such use.
ARTICLE XI
Nothing in this compact shall be construed as:
(d) subjecting any property of the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, to the laws of any state to an extent other than the extent to which such laws would apply without regard to this compact.
ARTICLE XII
The consumptive use of water by the United States or any of its agencies, instrumentalities or wards shall be charged as a use by the state in which the use is made; provided, that such consumptive use incident to the diversion, impounding or conveyance of water in one state for use in the other state shall be charged to such latter state.
ARTICLE XIII
This compact shall not be construed as establishing any general principle or precedent applicable to other interstate streams.
ARTICLE XIV
This compact may be terminated at any time by appropriate action of the legislatures of both of the signatory states. In the event of such termination, all rights established under it shall continue unimpaired.
ARTICLE XV
This compact shall become binding and obligatory when it shall have been ratified by the legislature of each state and approved by the congress of the United States. Notice of ratification by the legislature of each state shall be given by the governor of that state to the governor of the other state and to the president of the United States, and the president is hereby requested to give notice to the governor of each state of approval by the congress of the United States.
In witness whereof, the commissioners have executed three counterparts hereof each of which shall be and constitute an original, one of which shall be deposited in the archives of the department of state of the United States, and one of which shall be forwarded to the governor of each state.
Done at the city of Santa Fe, state of New Mexico, this 3rd day of December, 1948.
................................................................ JOHN H. BLISS Commissioner for the state of New Mexico ................................................................ CHARLES H. MILLER Commissioner for the state of Texas APPROVED ............ BERKELEY JOHNSON Representative of the United States of America
History: 1978 Comp., § 72-15-19, enacted by Laws 1949, ch. 6, § 1.
Compiler's notes. — The first Pecos River Compact was ratified and approved, with reservations, by Laws 1933, ch. 166.
In Subparagraph (ii) of Paragraph (c) of Article IV of this compact, the words " . . . water salvaged and appropriated floodwater . . . ' do not conform to the printed session laws of 1949. However, an error was made in the printing of the 1949 session laws. The word "appropriated" appears in the enrolled and engrossed bill which ratified this compact and should have appeared in the printed session laws instead of "unappropriated." Thus, the language appearing in this section is correct.
Settlement agreement is valid. — The settlement agreement among the United States, Carlsbad irrigation district, Pecos Valley artesian conservancy district, and the state of New Mexico, the governmental entities charged with responsibilities to administer and protect the valuable water resource provided by the Pecos river and its stream system, which establishes a managed water plan for the Pecos river, recognizes prior appropriation rights but subsumes individual interests to collective and representative bodies, and does not require a priority call, does not violate Article XVI, Section 2 of the New Mexico constitution or Article X of the Pecos River Compact. State ex rel. Office of the State Eng'r v. Lewis, 2007-NMCA-015, 141 N.M. 1, 150 P.3d 375.
Supreme court's jurisdiction to resolve controversies between two states, U.S. Const., art. III, § 2, cl. 1, extends to a properly framed suit to apportion the waters of an interstate stream between states through which it flows, to a suit to enforce a prior apportionment, and to a suit by one state to enforce its compact with another state or to declare rights under a compact, such as the Pecos River Compact. Tex. v. N.M., 462 U.S. 554, 103 S. Ct. 2558, 77 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1983).
Reformation of compact is not within supreme court's equitable powers: It cannot appoint a tie-breaker or master to control the diversion of interstate waters on a day-to-day basis, even with the consent of the states involved. Tex. v. N.M., 462 U.S. 554, 103 S. Ct. 2558, 77 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1983).
Remedying past failures to perform. — There is nothing in the nature of compacts generally or of this compact in particular that counsels against rectifying a failure to perform in the past as well as ordering future performance called for by the compact. Tex. v. N.M., 482 U.S. 124, 107 S. Ct. 2279, 96 L. Ed. 2d 105 (1987).
The matter of remedying past water shortages caused by New Mexico's underdeliveries was returned to a special master for such further proceedings as he deemed necessary and for his ensuing recommendation as to whether New Mexico should be allowed to elect a monetary remedy and, if so, to suggest the size of the payment and other terms that the state must satisfy. Tex. v. N.M., 482 U.S. 124, 107 S. Ct. 2279, 96 L. Ed. 2d 105 (1987).
Good faith belief in compliance. — New Mexico's good faith belief that it was complying with this compact would not permit the state to escape liability for what had been adjudicated to be past failures to perform its duties under the compact. Tex. v. N.M., 482 U.S. 124, 107 S. Ct. 2279, 96 L. Ed. 2d 105 (1987).
Decree ordering state to comply with compact and appointing river master. Tex. v. N.M., 485 U.S. 388, 108 S. Ct. 1201, 99 L. Ed. 2d 450 (1988).
Law reviews. — For article, "A Survey of the Evolution of Western Water Law in Response to Changing Economic and Public Interest Demands," see 29 Nat. Resources J. 347 (1989).
For article, "Equitable Apportionment after Vermejo: The Demise of a Doctrine," see 29 Nat. Resources J. 565 (1989).
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 78 Am. Jur. 2d Waters §§ 87, 310.
93 C.J.S. Waters §§ 170, 183, 188.