My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01799
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
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 />and the second brief which we submitted in <br />August of 1961 was the comparison of the com- <br />bination system and the modified all-federal <br />system. Copies of this information have also <br />been supplied to the staff of this Board. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I will say this, though, that as of the <br />time the Colorado Water Board met August 2nd, <br />they had not had the full benefit of our studies. <br />I attempted to present them to this Board orally. <br />Subsequent to that we actually did submit a <br />brief to the Upper Colorado River Commission <br />and Mr. Sparks received a copy. Much of the <br />figures, though, that Mr. Sparks gave to you <br />at the time of your original resolution were <br />based on out-dated figures. This situation has <br />changed rapidly. I have not seen any figures, <br />though, which have been prepared by the Bureau <br />or which have been prepared by this staff which <br />would reflect the reduced irrigation assistance <br />from the recommendations of the Board of addi- <br />tional transmission investment in the State of <br />Utah. I think as a rule of thumb you can <br />pretty well assume that a dollar of increased <br />transmission investment will result in approxi- <br />mately $4.50 to $5.00 of decreased irrigation <br />assistance over a fifty or seventy year payout <br />period. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />My point is that as of right now, I would <br />say that this Board and the Upper Colorado River <br />Commission are probably as thoroughly advised <br />of the background data that has been prepared <br />by our company as any other agency including <br />members of the congressional committees in Con- <br />gress. And I know of no other state board that <br />is as thoroughly advised, that has been kept as <br />thoroughly posted, with developments as they <br />have changed in this matter. <br /> <br />Now with respect to the Upper colorado <br />River Commission action, I resent very much the <br />implication that our company has acted in any <br />way improperly in connection with that. I <br />resent very much the statement by your Director <br />that our company has duped the staff of the <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board. I simply <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.