Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2450 <br /> <br />with them. I have spent many hours with Mr. <br />Kuiper and the staff of this Board, trying to <br />ascertain just what all of these figures have <br />meant in the construction of the participating <br />projects. That's my only interest. The power <br />that has been introduced by the Storage Project <br />is incidental. It can be a great boon to the <br />early construction of the participating projects. <br />In the State of Colorado we have not less than 40 <br />on the western slope that should eventually be <br />constructed. That's going to take a lot of money <br />and the power profits, after paying all of the <br />costs of building the Storage Project, will be <br />available under the law to the construction of <br />these participating projects. We'll get the <br />credit for them and eventually we are going to <br />get those projects, I hope. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />So that has been my interest and I would hope <br />that this Board would make it their interest - <br />the building of the participating projects. We've <br />got the Storage Projects well under way. I have <br />not appreciated seeing the Bureau of Reclamation <br />make the development of power the primary objec- <br />tive. It ought not to be the primary objective <br />of the Bureau of Reclamation; it's not my primary <br />objective and I hope it's not ,the primary objec- <br />tive of this Board. I hope that you will keep <br />your eye on the real issue. The only reason that, <br />this matter can come before you, and keep your <br />eye on what's going to happen to the participat- <br />ing projects under the investor utilities proposat <br />and the federal proposal. I offered testimony to <br />the House committee when they were considering <br />this matter and I endorsed the projects in Colo- <br />rado with the single exception of the project <br />from Poncha Springs to Midway which is referred <br />to on that map as Pueblo. I did not recommend <br />the immediate construction of that line. I sug- <br />gested that that line required more study; that <br />there was not a great time element in there and <br />that there was time to give it study. It should <br />be studied. I have read this statement that Mr. <br />Sparks has made today about that one line and <br />I'll have to admit his figures are very convinc- <br />ing unless there is some kind of an answer to it <br />otherwise. <br /> <br />I <br />