Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT <br /> <br />and its customers are outside the realm of secretarial responsibilities, <br />and hence this question is not pertinent to the general principles and <br />eri teria. <br />Principle 2,-It was suggested that the filling criteria should not <br />end automatically when Lake Powell reaches elevatiou 3,700 unless <br />at the same time Lake Mead is at or above elevation 1,146, We believe <br />this suggestion has merit, and principle 2 had been revised accordingly. <br />It was suggested also that the Secretary should give prior notice <br />before terminating the filling criteria previous to the attaining of eleva- <br />tion 3,700 at Lake P<;>welL Periods of 2 and 5 years were proposed, <br />We agree that in the event of such an action by the Secretary he might <br />well give notice a reasonable time in advance. The measure of reason- <br />ableness here, we believe, is the time required by the Hoover power <br />allottees to make such arrangements as might be necessary to accom- <br />modate any effects on their operations a change in filling criteria might <br />entail, While this obviously would vary, dependent upon the nature <br />of the revision in filling criteria contemplated, we believe that generally <br />1 ;year would suffice, We have thus revised principle 2 to provide a <br />mmimum of 1 year's notice, The Secretary could give such notice a <br />longer period in advance if he felt the circumstances so justified. <br />The point was made that the filling criteria are silent as to operating <br />rules after the filling period, This, of course, is correct. The filling <br />criteria could remain m effect from a minimum of 3 or 4 years up to <br />as many as 24 years, . Significant changes in power marketing and in <br />the use of Colorado River water may well occur during the filling period <br />which would influence postfilling operations, Further, the operating <br />experience gained during the filling period is certain to provide valuable <br />bases for developing postfilling operating rules, We believe it pre- <br />mature, therefore, to attempt to prescribe postfilling operating criteria <br />at this time, We do believe, however, that this aspect of future river <br />operation should be constantly kept in mind and that postfilling criteria <br />be formulated as far in advance of the termination of the filling period <br />as possible, . <br />The suggestion was 'advanced that the filling period and the appli- <br />cation of the principles should begin on the date when anyone of the <br />Colorado River storage project reservoirs is first capable of storing <br />water, The effect of storage in any of the storage project reservoirs <br />other than Lake Powell on lower river flows would be very nominal. <br />For this reason we prHer that the application of the filling criteria <br />begin on the date whel> Lake Powell is first capable of storing water. <br />Principle S.-It was suggested that the terms "net river losses," <br />"r~ulatory wastes," :and "diversion requirements of mainstream <br />proJects" should be defined in terms of legality and limitation, We <br />believe that these ter~s are commonly understood and, in line with <br />our basic pattern of procedure as previously stated, we would be <br />reluctant to attempt legal definition of these terms. <br />A suggested c1arifyipg editorial change was adopted as follows: <br />After the word "eithef' insert the words "01' both," and following <br />the words "Lake Mead" substitute the word "and" for the word "or", <br />Principle 4,-The words "Hoover Dam" were suggested as sub- <br />stitutes for the words "Lake Mead" in the first sentence of principle <br />4, We believe, however, that the second sentence of principle 4 <br />adequately covers diversions from Lake Mead, <br />The proposal to insert the words "or losses" after the word "uses" <br />was made presumably to cover evaporation from Lake Mead. We <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />