<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 />
|