My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01799
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01799
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:07:09 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:02:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/8/1961
Description
Minutes and Resolution
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.
/
104
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 />I go along with Mr. Goslin on this. It <br />does not seem realistic to me for the all-federal <br />people to expect the utilities to pull the all- <br />federal system out of the fire with their new <br />thermal plant at Farmington. I have no idea <br />what the utilities may do. However, I do know <br />that without interconnections at Farmington the <br />all-federal will be in serious trouble and the, <br />Basin Fund will be impaired. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />This is what Mr. Goslin said with respect <br />to this matter: 'The Bureau of Reclamation is <br />currently making an analysis of the "modified" <br />transmission system interconnected at 4-Corner~. <br />If and when we receive the results of this <br />analysis we will forward a copy to you. I will <br />predict, however, that the Bureau and the utili- <br />ties will not be able to agree on an analysis <br />of the interconnection at 4-Corners due to being <br />unable to agree on an assignment of the benefits <br />derived from the interconnection'. <br /> <br />Governor McNichols feels very strongly that <br />he should have been informed of the meeting of' <br />the commission held in Denver September 1, 1961. <br />The error is mine and mine alone. However, I <br />had no idea the Governor felt as he does about: <br />this controversy. He had never mentioned it tq <br />me. I thought that it was not in his best in- <br />terest to involve him in this vicious contro- <br />versy. At 2:10 P. M., September 1, 1961 (that <br />was the day of the special Commission meeting <br />in Denver), I was handed a copy of a letter the <br />Governor had written some days previously to . <br />each of the Governors of the four states. Now <br />that was my understanding at the time, that it <br />was a letter that had been written to each of <br />the Governors of the four states because some <br />question had been raised about the meeting of <br />August 2nd of this Board and the action that <br />they took. I returned the letter unread. I <br />stated then, as Mr. Sparks has indicated today, <br />that I didn't like to read other people's mail. <br />It wasn't addressed to me and I just didn't like <br />to be handed a carbon copy of a letter, feeling <br />that that was putting me on notice of the Gover- <br />nor's position and I returned the letter. Mr. <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.