Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1702 <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: <br /> <br />MR. PETERSON: <br /> <br />MR. BARKLEY: <br /> <br />Commission has made a division of water <br />volume between the states and also the <br />revenue derived from the power projects <br />within the basin, therefore I am wondering <br />if it wouldn't be the perogative of the <br />Compact Commission to make a division of <br />the power between the states. I think <br />that should be done unless there is some <br />reason why it couldn't be done." <br />, <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"Certainly the Upper Colorado River <br />Commission can take that action, however, <br />the power allocation as such, is not covered <br />in the Compact to which the United States is <br />a party so I do not believe the United States <br />would be 'bound by any allocation that would <br />be made by the Commission. Nevertheless I <br />feel they have a strong moral obligation to <br />follow that recommendation since the entire <br />purpose of the Colorado River Storage Proj- <br />ect, as expressed in its Bill, was for the <br />development of the upper basin states. In <br />order to follow out that purpose, the power <br />should be allocated to the upper basin <br />states." . <br /> <br />"The Public Law 485 did not also include <br />the right to the Compact Commission to allo- <br />cate power ,revenues did it? Which they did <br />do and therefore I think they have set a <br />precedent which could be carried out in <br />division of power allocation." <br /> <br />"Mr. Chairman, I think I might give you <br />the benefit of the thinking of the Investi- <br />gation Commission and the Committee on the <br />language contained in the letter report which <br />we sent to you, in which it was recommended <br />that this request be forwarded to the Secre- <br />tary of the Interior but notice, in conjunc- <br />tion with the other states of the upper divi- <br />sion. I think we ought to be very cautious <br />at this point that this Board and the State <br />of Colorado does not get its neck in a lone- <br />some position in this thing, because after <br />all, Mr. Scott has pointed out to you here, <br />a very important thing and that is, that the <br />State of Arizona, through an entity in the <br />state, has already made a request, not to <br />the Secretary as I understand it, but to <br />Region 4 for the designation of the State <br />of Arizona as the primary marketing area <br />for the project power. <br /> <br />I <br />