Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 45-107 (2026)

Cooperation with the secretary of the interior of the United States

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. The director is authorized, for and on behalf of the state of Arizona, to consult, advise and cooperate with the secretary of the interior of the United States, as follows:

1. In the exercise of any authority conferred upon the secretary of the interior under the provisions of sections 4, 5 and 14 of the act commonly known as the Boulder Canyon project act (43 United States Code sections 617 through 617t), as contemplated and provided in section 16 of the Boulder Canyon project act.

2. In respect to the authority of the secretary of the interior to contract for the delivery of water of the main stream of the Colorado river for use within the state of Arizona.

3. In respect to all powers and duties of the secretary of the interior under the provisions of that certain contract between the United States of America, acting by Harold L. Ickes, secretary of the interior, and the state of Arizona, acting by the Colorado river commission, entered into on the 9th day of February, 1944, pursuant to chapter 46 of the 1939 session laws of Arizona, and approved by chapter 4 of the 1944 session laws of Arizona.

4. In respect to the exercise by the secretary of the interior of any authority relative to the water of the Colorado river conferred upon the secretary of the interior by the provisions of any legislation enacted by the Congress of the United States of America.

5. In respect to the development, negotiation and execution of interstate banking agreements in accordance with chapter 14 of this title.

B. The powers and duties of the director authorized by this section shall be limited and restricted to only that quantity of water which may be available for use in the state of Arizona, after the satisfaction of all existing contracts between the secretary of the interior and users in the state of Arizona for the delivery of water of the main stream of the Colorado river, and shall not extend to any such contracts, any amendments or supplements thereto, or to any federal statute enacted before June 21, 1962 pertaining to any federal reclamation project within the state of Arizona constructed and using water of the main stream of the Colorado river before June 21, 1962. Nothing shall be done under the authority of this section which will impair existing rights in the state of Arizona for the diversion and use of Colorado river water.

C. The privilege and right of individuals, irrigation districts, corporations, state departments, agencies, boards, commissions or political subdivisions of the state of Arizona to negotiate and directly contract with the secretary of the interior for the delivery of water of the main stream of the Colorado river for use within the state of Arizona and to negotiate and subcontract with the secretary of the interior and a multi-county water conservation district for the delivery of Colorado river water through the central Arizona project for use within the state of Arizona, and all rights under such contracts or subcontracts shall not be affected by the provisions of this section, except as provided in subsection D.

D. Individuals, irrigation districts, corporations, state departments, agencies, boards, commissions and political subdivisions of the state shall cooperate, confer with and obtain the advice of the director as to those negotiations, contracts and subcontracts described in subsection C that affect the allocation and use of main stream Colorado river water or the allocation and use of Colorado river water delivered through the central Arizona project. For a proposed contract or subcontract or a proposed amendment of a contract or subcontract that will result in a transfer of an allocation or entitlement of Colorado river water, including central Arizona project water, from a non-Indian Arizona contractor or subcontractor for a term of more than one year, the obligation to cooperate, confer with and obtain the advice of the director shall include the obligation to submit to the director for review the proposed contract or subcontract or the proposed amendment, and all related exhibits and agreements, prior to its execution by the contractor or subcontractor.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2003–2024 · leading case: Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Dep't of Water Resources, 91 P.3d 990 (Ariz. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Dep't of Water Resources, 91 P.3d 990 (Ariz. 2004). · cites it 2× “As such, AWC is subject to various enforcement actions and penalties. See A.R.S. §§ 45-634 to -636. ¶38 AWC contends that ADWR’s counting of CAP water in its “stacking” *157 method is not authorized by the Code and is contrary to the Groundwater Act’s general policy of limiting…”

Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Dep't of Water Resources, 73 P.3d 1267 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “¶ 50 Arizona Water argues that permitting the Department to count CAP water amounts to regulation of the use of such water, a violation of both federal law and A.R.S. § 45-107 which grants the Department an advisory, not a regulatory, role with respect to those who contract for…”

Mohave, Cnty. of v. United States Bureau of Reclamation (D. Ariz. 2023). · cites it 2× “Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 45-107 (D). Initially, ADWR 17 endorsed the Proposed Water Transfer, but only at 1,078.”

Mohave, Cnty. of v. United States Bureau of Reclamation (D. Ariz. 2024). · cites it 2× “) 20 As required under A.R.S. § 45-107(D), GSC Farm and Queen Creek submitted to 21 the Arizona Department of Water Resources (“ADWR”) “a request for consultation for the 22 proposed Water Transfer.”

Az Water Co v. Az Dept of Water Resources (Ariz. 2004). · cites it 2× “As such, AWC is subject to various enforcement actions and penalties. See A.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 45-107(C) — 2 cases

Arizona Water Co. v. Arizona Dep't of Water Resources, 91 P.3d 990 (Ariz. 2004). “As such, AWC is subject to various enforcement actions and penalties. See A.R.S. §§ 45-634 to -636. ¶38 AWC contends that ADWR’s counting of CAP water in its “stacking” *157 method is not authorized by the Code and is contrary to the Groundwater Act’s general policy of limiting…”

Az Water Co v. Az Dept of Water Resources (Ariz. 2004). “As such, AWC is subject to various enforcement actions and penalties. See A.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 45-107(D) — 1 case

Mohave, Cnty. of v. United States Bureau of Reclamation (D. Ariz. 2024). “) 20 As required under A.R.S. § 45-107(D), GSC Farm and Queen Creek submitted to 21 the Arizona Department of Water Resources (“ADWR”) “a request for consultation for the 22 proposed Water Transfer.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.