Laserfiche WebLink
<br />COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />stand have been made available to the lower basin interests, In <br />addition, there bave been many discussions with interested indi- <br />viduals, correspondence from various Senators and Congressmen, and <br />further meetings as follows: <br />January 9, 1961, iu Salt Lake City, Utah, with the Upper Basin <br />Engineering Committee. <br />April 20, 1961, in Los Angeles, Calif" with the Hoover power <br />contractors and, other lower basin interests, <br />May 8, 1961,in Denver, Colo., with the Upper Colorado River <br />Commission and advisers. <br />Out of these me~tings, letters, and discussions have come many <br />suggestions for changes in the proposed general principles and criteria, <br />Our own views have:a1so changed on some aspects in light of informa- <br />tion developed subsequent to their issuance, <br />The proposed general principles and criteria have been reviewed by <br />the Bureau taking into account the various comments of the basin <br />interests as well as lour own views, The revised general principles <br />and operating criteria transmitted herewith reflect the Bureau's <br />recommendations, <br />We have proceeded on the basis of securing a practical approach to <br />the problems of filling, as distinguished from what might be considered <br />a leg~listic approach. involyin~ an attempt. on our par~ to establish <br />prmclp1es and operatmg cnterla on the baSIS of conclUSIOns as to the <br />perimeters of legal rights and obligations, with the consequent hazards <br />which would attend! such an approach, Consequently, our feeling is <br />that irrespective of :what might or might not be conceived by any <br />party as the outer measure of its rights or obligations, and with no <br />attempt to establish those limits as a basis for these principles and <br />criteria, we propose action purely within a reasonable exercise of <br />secretarial discretion. <br />In general, the draft of the proposed general principles and criteria <br />was well received and many of the comments involve editorial perfec- <br />tion and clarification rather than change in substance, The most <br />substantive of comments, and the most difficult to reconcile, go to <br />principle 5 which deals with the proposal to make an allowance for <br />a portion of the dilninution in power generation at Hoover Dam, <br />Because of the extent of comments on this principle, this memorandwn <br />will deal with that principle first, <br />One of the comments received was that it should be made clear that <br />the general principles and criteria will apply to all of the authorized <br />storage units of the Colorado River storage project and not to the <br />Glen Canyon unit alone, Since the proposed general principles and <br />criteria are framed around the operations of Glen Canyon Reservoir <br />(Lake Powell), it was decided, in the interest of minimizing the extent <br />of revision, to retain the pr.,sent format. However, principle 5 of <br />the general principles and criteria has been expanded to make it clear <br />that in computing the allowance for deficienc{ in firm energy genera- <br />tion at Hoover powerplant the formula wil take into account the <br />effect on the stream by impoundment of water in all of the storage <br />units (Glen Canyon, Flaming Gorge, Navajo, and Curecanti) but <br />excluding the effectsiof evaporation from the surface of such reservoirs. <br />Consistent with principle 2, the computation of and provision for <br />allowance would nO:t apply to Navajo and Flaming Gorge until the <br />filling operation starts at Glen Canyon, Lake Powell will probably' <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />