Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Jencsok reported that, after a quick review of the <br /> proposed plan and the February forecast 24-month operation study, <br /> • it appeared that during good water years there would be no major <br /> problems in filling the reservoirs; however, during average or <br /> worse water years, the Upper Basin could have problems in meeting <br /> Compact deliveries because of the reduced storage levels (Appendix <br /> F attached) . <br /> Mr. Jencsok informed the Board that a meeting of the Upper <br /> Colorado River Commission and its advisory committees was <br /> scheduled for March 20 to further discuss the plan and express <br /> Colorado's concerns formally. Basically, these concerns will be <br /> related to the 7. 5 maf available space target and the fact that <br /> the operations studies requested of the BR weren't completed prior <br /> to finalizing the plan. Mr. Jenscok further indicated that the <br /> Central Arizona Project water supply will be significantly affected <br /> if the reservoirs aren't full as well. <br /> The next item covered by Mr. Jencsok concerned the study <br /> proposal attached to the Commissioner's letter. This study would <br /> look at the various alternatives for reservoir operations and <br /> help the BR to develop operating strategies while giving them <br /> opportunities to evaluate several critical factors in the deter- <br /> mination of 602 (a) storage. The staff is concerned about the <br /> lack of adequate input to the study and would recommend Colorado <br /> and other basin states be included in developing the scope of <br /> study, technical problems and progress during the study, and in <br /> developing the final recommendations. The way things stand now, <br /> the BR would have a draft prepared by November, 1984, with three <br /> months for review and finalization. Thus, the results could be <br /> useful by January, 1985. It is the staff' s position that this <br /> proposed study plan is just not adequate and the staff would like <br /> more involvement. <br /> Following Board discussion, Chairman Vandemoer suggested <br /> that Mr. McDonald and staff continue their involvement in the <br /> BR' s proposal and that this subject be included as an item for <br /> discussion at the March Board meeting.. <br /> Agenda Item 10 - Proposal Concerning the Use of CRSP Power <br /> ReVenuess 'far Water Project Financing <br /> Mr. McDonald discussed this item along the lines summarized <br /> in his February 14 , 1984, memo to the Board--CRSP Power Revenues <br /> for Water Project Financing (Appendix G attached) . <br /> In his remarks-, Mr. McDonald pointed out that, since the <br /> January 1984 Board meeting, he had met with other Upper Basin <br /> states ' officials, with appropriate water conservation and water <br /> conservancy districts in Colorado, with officials of electric- <br /> power-producing and marketing entities, with Congressman Kogovsek <br /> and his staff, with Senator Armstrong' s and Congressman Brown' s <br /> staffs, and with the Acting Commissioner of Reclamation. He <br /> also indicated that he and Mr. Getches had discussions with <br /> Governor Lamm. <br /> -7- <br />