Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />001346 <br /> <br />MR. DAVIS, Our attorney is here and while he is just new on the <br />job he, porOOps, oould M8Wer that question better. If it is agreeable, <br />I Would like to have him enswer that ques'tion. <br /> <br />CHAIRl4A.N STONE: I am sure that we all want to get acquainted <br />with Judge Shute and we would like to hear from him. <br /> <br />JUDGE G. W. SHllTE: (Attorney, Arizona-Celorado River COIIDllittee) <br />That question is indeod a difficult question for me to answer, Mr. Giles, <br />particularly, in the light of' the int'orlllll.tion that I have obbained sinoe <br />listening to the able papers that have oame :in during the past 1;wc and one <br />half' days. <br /> <br />I am not OElnvenG!l;tat all with the Bridgo Canyon site end it would <br />be almest impossible for me to say now haw leng 'it would -take. Conditions <br />are constantly oreeping in that would ohange one's viewpoint on just how <br />it should be done. I take it from what I have heard here that this brief <br />or paper or any reasons that we might give would be more in the nature of' <br />an economio thing rather than in the nature of e. legal brief on that <br />subjeot. In faot, a legal brief on it seems to me would be rather a <br />useless thing except as it might attaoh to determining whether or not the <br />oondition Arizona m.ight oreate would hurt Colora.do or Utah. As Mr. Davis <br />has explained to you, those things are far from our thoughts. We have <br />talked this matter over many -times and we want to keep away from any <br />trouble but if that is the real basis for the brief, that is. te give a <br />picture of the effeC't and result, I think'I can assure you toot it would <br />not take very long for that sort of' thing. I 'would have to rely on <br />Mr. Scott and the work that he has done there. I am rather interested in <br />knowing why we are expeeted to make a report oonsidering, of oourse, <br />that Uis not being made at this time. <br /> <br />. MR. GILES: As long as you go along with us in getting this <br />extension. we have no reason for hurrying you people up. If we expeoted <br />to make an' answer right away we would expect to have your statement in <br />right away. <br /> <br />JUDGE SHUTE: Is it the Power Commission, or just what is it? <br /> <br />MR. GILES: Fundamentally, it is for our use in making eur <br />an8Wer to the Federal Power Commission. <br /> <br />JUDGE SHllTE: This matter has always been a great question with <br />me. Now you say we should furnish yeu with a brief showing why we sheuld <br />not oppose it. Is that the idea? <br /> <br />MR. GILES: That is right. <br /> <br />CHAIRMAN STONE: I think perhaps I eon olear that up. 'The upper <br />states do not mnt to arbitrarily objeot to matters ef that kind. If' the <br />Compaot had been ratified by all seven states then, the legal question <br />which arose, would not eome into the pieture. As suggested by Mr. Davis, <br />some effert has been made en the part of Arizona. loeking toward the possible <br />ratifioation of the Compaet.' 11: that were done, then the Compact provisions <br />