My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01706
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:06:07 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:01:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
8/2/1961
Description
Table of Contents, Agenda and 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.
/
123
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 />2460 <br /> <br />participating projects, is $426 millibn so this <br />gives an exceSs' of $526 million against which new <br />participating projects can be authorized in the <br />entire Upper Basin area. <br /> <br />All right. The first question that you have <br />is what are the effects then on irrigation assist- <br />ance from the'modifications made by the Bureau <br />presented to Congress in June of 1961? Before I <br />describe that, let me first say this. That the <br />Bureau has extended the total mileage of the trans- <br />mission lines approximately 500 miles. They've <br />changed the marketing of power; instead of mar- <br />keting 600,000 kilowatts in Arizona they have now <br />reduced that to 450,000 approximately. They've <br />changed the timing of construction of certain <br />transmission facilities. The data as to all the <br />detail behind this has been made available to our <br />companies at the direction of Congress by the <br />Bureau. So we have taken the data presented to <br />us by the Bureau and have calculated our own pay- <br />out analysis of the modified system. I want to <br />go through this with you and then I want to tell <br />you where the differences are and I want you to <br />know that our company has had the opportunity of <br />sitting down with Mr. Dominy and Mr. Bennett be- <br />fore the Senators of this whole state area whereby <br />we have been able to resolve differences between <br />us on the figures which I am now discussing. In- <br />cidentally the transcript of that proceeding, <br />which was held by Senator Anderson, will be <br />available. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />You will notice under the modified system <br />there is no change in the power allocation. The <br />federal transmission investment, though, is in- <br />creased $11 million, the difference between $187 <br />million and $176 million. Let's talk about that <br />difference of $11 million. The Bureau concedes <br />that the transmission investment has been in- <br />creased approximately $6 million but they deny <br />the additional $5 million. Now we've put the <br />additional $5 million in there because we say, <br />because they have increased the voltage of the <br />line going from Glen Canyon into the Phoenix area <br />from 230 to 345 kv, they need additional switch- <br />ing facilities and that's approximately $5 million <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.