Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OOLdRADO RIVER STORAGE PROJEOT <br /> <br />33 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />purpose. If assumption (1) is rett1ined but the proposed prineiples <br />and critcria are substituted for assumption (2) there would be no <br />adverse effeet On upper bt1sin payout. To the extent that combined <br />system opera.tion of Hoover and Glen Oanyon would increase power <br />production over and 't1bove that resulting from the assumptions of the <br />current repayment analysis the upper basin payout would be bene- <br />fited. <br />Application of even the adverse runoff eyeles of 1930-52 results in <br />storage at Glen Oanyon to minimum power head of 6,500,000 aere'feet <br />in from 2 to 3 years. After power generation is initiated at Glen <br />Oanyon the objective, as spelled out in the proposed prineiples and <br />eriteria, is to produce the greatest praetieal amount of power and <br />energy frOlU cOlnbibed operation. The revenues froln all energy <br />generated from the eombined system in excess of that required to meet <br />the COlllmitments outlined above for the firm power under the Hoover <br />Dam eontraets woulll be eredited to the upper basin project. Thus, <br />it is probablc that with allowances for computed defieieney and under <br />integration, and with 1930-52 runoff eonditions the rate of upper basin <br />project payout would be somewhat slower for a brief period with the <br />possibility of offsetting gains in later operations. <br />The Bureau's prop'osal is an equitable and praetieable approaeh that <br />results in the best uSe of the natural resouree-falling watHr. <br />'1'0 be reeognizHdis the faet that the pr'oposal states only general <br />prieiples t1nd broad operating eriteria. It does not attempt to, and <br />should not in OUr juqgment, spell out all of the details whieh will have <br />to be worked out, many of which would need to be negotiated. <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATI(lN <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />I reeommencl that you approve the Bureau's proposal tentatively, <br />and that we et1rrv out the following program: <br />1. Upon reeeipt 0) your approval, eopies of the tentative proposal <br />be forwarded to the members of the engineering group, both upper and <br />lower basin, whieh performed the operating studies. The transmittal <br />would indieate that'the proposal is tentative and open for diseussion <br />but that it does refleet the prineiples whieh the Department presently <br />believes should be allopted. The group would be asked to study the <br />propost1l, ltnd after a suitable interval, It meeting would be held with <br />the eombined engineering group to diseuss ltnd explttin the details of <br />the proposal. <br />2'. Following the rheeting of the engineers it would be expected that <br />those representing each state would refer the matter to their admin- <br />istrative people an'll discuss the various eonsiderations involved. <br />3. After allowing time for diseussion and review within the States, <br />a generltl meeting would be ealled, preferably in Washington, somewhat <br />similltr to the meetipg held here in Oetobel' 1957. At that meeting it <br />would be expee~ed tlll~t the StatHs w:o?ld present thHir views, both pro <br />and eon, followmg wlneh a finltl deCISIOn would need to be mltde as to <br />the prineiples to be followed. <br />4. Subsequent to the final decision ltnd ltssuming it is substantially <br />in tteeord with the' present proposltl, negotiations on the nHeessary <br />points would be undertaken immediately. <br /> <br />FLOYD E. DOMINY. <br /> <br />Approved: Febrn~ry 9, 1960. <br /> <br />FHED A. SEATON, <br />Secietary oj the Interior. <br /> <br />