Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />the Colorado Rive~. The principle would, in the <br />view of Mr. Udall, be extended to upstate New <br />York, the Pacific Northwest, the Missouri River <br />Basin, and other )areas of the country. 130 Congo <br />Rec. H3327 (May ~, 1984). The House was persuaded <br />by the opponents to the Boxer amendment, as it was <br />defeated in a recorded roll call vote. 130 Congo <br />Rec. H3333 (May 3, 1984). <br /> <br />Two other proposed amendments to the Hoover <br />Powerp1ant Act of 1984 have relevance to the issue <br />of contemporary congressional policy on the <br />preference questions presented by the UP&L <br />application for power. Congressman Bates of <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />California offered an amendment giving preference <br />in the sale of power from the Hoover uprates to <br />entities serving large residential loads "without <br />regard to wheth~r these entities own their own <br />transmission anq distribution facilities." 130 <br />Congo Rec. H3335 (May 3,1984).. The Bates <br />amendment also required that the purchasing entity <br />certify, as a cqndition for receiving the uprated <br />power, that SUC? power be resold at cost. Mr. <br />Bates stated th~t the purpose of his amendment was <br />to avoid the inequity facing the City of San Diego <br />"because of a Catch-22 in the preference clause <br /> <br />28 <br />