Laserfiche WebLink
30 <br /> m <br /> v <br /> 0 <br /> O <br /> c <br /> 0 <br /> m <br /> 0 <br /> is to remove any apparent flaws, and that is one that I <br /> would like to suggest the Legal Affairs Committee give a <br /> little further oonsideration to in the light of the whole o <br /> law. An act of Congress does not affect the purpose and <br /> the general structure and the approach that you have at all, <br /> just the technicality of whether the acts of Congress on N. <br /> which you rely are applicable and effective to a project <br /> whioh was authorized before these laws were passed. <br /> MR. VIDAL: My attention is called to this. I think <br /> the Power Commission' s letter implies that they do, and I <br /> think certainly that was Judge Stone' s view, that was one of <br /> the purposes of the adoption of these things, was to Dover <br /> that situation. <br /> CHAIRMAN KRAMER: It might well have been. I grant <br /> that was Judge Stone' s view, and the implication is in the <br /> Federal Power Commission' s letter. Nevertheless, I apprehend <br /> the technical question here which I am not competent to an- <br /> swer, and I would not rely upon the implication for an author, <br /> tative answer. <br /> MR. VIDAL: Now, just let me make this suggestion. One <br /> of our problems which is not solved yet is the application of <br /> the so-called recreational uISO policy lately declared long <br /> after the authorization of the construction of the paddoa <br /> Reservoir. The situation works both ways. <br /> CHAIRMAN KRAMER: Fair enough. I think that merely <br />