BOARD01326

• Board Meeting Date: 12/13/1967
• Description: Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

JO.LO

MR. STAPLETON:

capacity in a plant t'O be c'Onstructed by non-
federal entities. Previously this section (b)
had a clause in there which specified that the
plant ta be built by nanfederal entities, must
be built by the State 'Of Ariz'Ona. I pers'Onally I
took same exception t'O that language. I felt
that if a fair and impartial study of a p'Ower-
plant is going to be made it shauld nat be
restricted to a certain area. Sa with the
censent 'Of the State of Ariz'Ona, 'Of the pe'Ople
that I talked to at least, that clause was
omitted. There is na longer a requirement that
this thermal plant be constructed in the State
of Arizana.

The 'Other change is contained in section
60S an page 39. The previous draft read that
the Federal Power Act sh'Ould n'Ot be applicable
to the stretch 'Of the main stream of the Colo-
rad'O River between Lake Mead and the western
beundary of Grand Cany'On. In our original draft
we eliminated the Hualapai and Marble Dams by
preventing the Secretary frem making a study
or recommending the construction of a dam between
Hoover Dam and Lee Ferry. Se we changed section
60S t'O be consistent with that. Section 605
previausly eliminated Hualapai. It n'Ow elimi-
nates Hualapai and Marble. It has l'Ong been
'Our apini'On that Marble was n'Ot necessary in
the first place and Marble is the 'One that gives
us some tr'Ouble with the tailrace at Glen Canyon
Dam. It wauld curtail the pawer praductian
there if it we~e constructed.

The Arizona Power Auth'Ority has an applica-
tion pending ta build Marble Dam. The real
revenue pr'Oducer as far as the Basin Fund was
c'Oncerned was Hualapai. If we take 'Out Hualapai
we thought we should take out Marble als'O. So
that was the change made in section 605.

I

Other than that, there may be a few words
changed but thase are the only changes 'Of
significance."

"What's the pleasure 'Of the Board. to go