Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />285 <br /> <br />it was up to the Board to weigh the evidence and come <br />out with something. <br /> <br />Mr. Uutcher then said that the Western Slopew~s <br />concerned that the Board should take affirmative <br />action in order to bring about the realization of the <br />Curecanti dam. If the Board could give assurance <br />, that this would be done, they will be sat'isfied. <br /> <br />\ Mr. Roberts said that the Board would assign its <br />engineering staff to work with Western Slope engineers <br />in an effort to substantiate the feasibility of the <br />urecanti project and to report at a meeting of the <br />Board early in December. <br /> <br />~~Mr. Dutcher moved that the Colorado Water Conser- <br />vation Board go on record that it will favorabl~ re- <br />commend the Curecanti project for the first phase of <br />development under the Colorado River Storage Project <br />and Participating Projects when final action is taken <br />on the project report by this Board, and that the Board <br />work energetically to bring about the feasibility of <br />the Curecanti (940,000 acre-feet) under the present <br />order A-47, or if that is impossible to achieve, the <br />Board will work actively to the end that the order <br />A-47 be changed or modified so that Curecanti (940,000 <br />acre-feet) be determined as a feasible project. (The <br />940,000 acre-feet reservoir 'has a maximum water sur- <br />face elevation of 7,520 feet). <br /> <br />Mr. Hunter seconded the motion. The motion passed, <br />six in favor and 3 opposed. <br /> <br />Meeting adjourned at 6:00 P.M. and a Water Gonser- <br />vation Board meeting was set for December lIth. <br /> <br /> <br /><j~~ <br />Secretary <br /> <br />Asst. Secretary <br />