Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~OJU <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: <br /> <br />MR. JOHNSON: <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />MR. JOHNSON: <br /> <br />objection to the San Juan being included <br />as the last priority on this schedule as ~tr. <br />Kroeger suggests?" <br /> <br />"We have no objection at all. We tried <br />to state in our analyses that this was a guide <br />only. There is no action of this Board that <br />can bind the actions of the Board a year from <br />now. For planning purposes we must have some <br />type of priority, because generally we have <br />to have at least three years leeway. It is <br />desirable to have at least three years in <br />our planning. ~fuat we are talking about <br />today on a project, it is going to be at least <br />two years before money - a minimum of two <br />years - can be made available from the federal <br />government. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />It is conceivable that conditions will <br />change. The shale oil industry may occur. <br />So certainly this Board cannot take the posi- <br />tion because it ratified something today that <br />it is going to preclude an important develop- <br />ment a year from now. <br /> <br />I wish to emphasize that flexibility <br />must be retained when we are talking about the <br />future. All this would do would be to serve <br />as the guide as of this moment which we would <br />hope to follow unless other events occur which <br />would make it necessary to change this prior- <br />i ty schedule." <br /> <br />"Mr. Chairman, may I ask Larry a ques- <br />tion?" <br /> <br />"Go right ahead, Senator." <br /> <br />"~fuen this Board takes an action it is not <br />binding on the future but when it is changed, <br />when this Board changes its position don't <br />you think they ought to repeal the action <br />that they took before and amend it and change <br />it? Unless you do that, unless you formally <br />change your action, then the action of this <br />Board isn' t worth very much." <br /> <br />I <br />