My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00343
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00343
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:49:10 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:36:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
10/27/1959
Description
Minutes
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />J.O::lO <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />MR. NELSON: <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: <br /> <br />MR. NELSON: ' <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />MR. SCOTT: <br /> <br />That is after the project power becomes <br />available and as the increase takes place. <br />Certainly Colorado would not stand still <br />for any plan that did not contemplate the <br />immediate construction of transmission <br />lines into the State of Colorado as the <br />first activity which the Bureau will under- <br />take. And as I say, that has to get under- <br />way in the preconstruct ion stage next year." <br /> <br />"I was confused as to just when these <br />lines would be constructed in these phases." <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"Ralph, you were right when you said <br />your plan was confusing. The first phase <br />was that certain lines would be already <br />constructed by the private power companies <br />without reference to the project power." <br /> <br />"I was confused as to that." <br /> <br />"Mr. Scott, would you like to take the <br />microphone, please?" <br /> <br />"Gentlemen, I'm not sure that I can add <br />a great deal to this but reference has been <br />made to the preference users and the inter- <br />state grouping of them. I am chairman of <br />that particular grouping, the Upper Basin <br />Preference Users' Committee for the states <br />in the Upper Division. We have had contact <br />with Arizona but have advised them that we <br />are concerned with the upper division states. <br /> <br />We might put some of this into a differ- <br />ent context. The first plan was a transmis- <br />sion system contained in the project report <br />but it has been completely ignored and forgot- <br />ten. The next one that was circulated or <br />given any publicity at all, came from the <br />preference users which was an all Bureau <br />system, a naked backbone system, in which <br />we tried to get these power plants intercon- <br />nected leaving a considerable problem of I <br />delivery of power from the plants to the <br />users. Now that's a point that has not been <br />brought up_ here and it is of considerable <br />importance. Incidentally, the Rural Elec- <br />tries are private companies too. We always <br />like to have it remembered that when you <br />talk about private companies, we are also <br />private eVen though we are preference. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.