Laserfiche WebLink
<br />UG~"i5 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. . <br /> <br />and August 24, 1984, on Colorado River management issues, <br /> <br />which were presented to the Commissioner of Reclamation. <br /> <br />Several issues regarding river management and operations <br /> <br />were covered in those statements. <br /> <br />with respect to flood <br /> <br />control operations, the state representatives considered that <br /> <br />the technical changes made in data collection and in pr:oce- <br /> <br />dur:es for making the maximum forecasts of runoff and inflows <br /> <br />to Lake Powell and Lake Mead, which increased the margin for <br /> <br />error, offered sufficient levels of flood protection con- <br /> <br />sidering the fact that the 1983 high flows were a rare event. <br /> <br />We concluded that it would not be desirable to reduce the <br /> <br />floodway capacity and that there was no need to increase the <br /> <br />vacant flood control storage space. We also concluded that <br /> <br />the 1982 Hoover Dam Flood Control Regulations are based on <br /> <br />the most acceptable mix of the purposes of flood control, <br /> <br />water conservation, and power generation, and should continue <br /> <br />to govern future operations. <br /> <br />We fur:ther recommended that a <br /> <br />floodway capable of containing a flood control release of <br /> <br />40,000 cfs from Hoover Dam should be reestablished. <br /> <br />proposed Colorado River <br />Floodwav Protection Act <br />~ <br /> <br />On March 7, 1984, Congressmen Richard Cheney and Morris <br /> <br />Udall introduced House-Bill H.R. 5055, which would establish <br /> <br />a Colorado River Floodway below Hoover Dam, and would <br /> <br />severely limit federal expenditures within the floodway. <br /> <br />The Colorado River Board of California, representing one of <br /> <br />the three states that would be directly affected by teDms <br /> <br />-11- <br />