Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> RECE'VED <br /> , / <br /> i,; OC11 7 '88 DIR <br />. <br />r sc <br /> 0 COLORADO'lolATER ASC <br />"..; CONSER\lATION F <br /> BOARD I <br /> CREDA L <br /> E <br /> COLORADO RIVER ENER <br /> <br /> <br />Joe Falbo, Presldeut <br />c/o Maricopa Wsw Dislrict <br />P.o. 801( 260 <br />WaddcIJ. AZ ssm <br />: 602-975-2151 <br />BillORS ASSOCIATIOrR EC E IVE D <br /> <br />OCT 12 1988 <br /> <br />UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION . <br />~ftl T I _KE rlTY UTAH <br /> <br />FEDERAL EXPRESS October 10, 1988 <br /> <br />Mr. David L. Wegner, Grand Canyon Study Manager <br />Upper Colorado River Region <br />Bureau of Reclamation <br />P.O. Box 11568 <br />Salt Lake City, Utah 84147 <br /> <br />Re: Comments on the Draft Program for Implementation of Phase II <br />of the Glen Canyon Environmental studies, dated August 30, <br />1988 <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Wegner: <br /> <br />CREDA representatives attended the meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada <br />on September 20, 1988 that was announced'in the USBR memorandum <br />of August 17, 1988 concerning phase II activities of the Glen <br />Canyon'Environmental Studies. The CREDA Marketing Committee has <br />reviewed the draft of the program document that you distributed <br />at the meeting that afternoon. <br /> <br />During the meeting, we asked for the opportunity to review this <br />draft and submit written comments on it. In this we were joined <br />by representatives of the water agencies of at least six of the <br />basin states and other interests at the meeting. The following <br />are the comments collected from members of the Marketing <br />Committee of CREDA. We have not had the opportunity to present <br />these comments to the full Board of Directors but we feel <br />confident that these views are consistent with the positions that <br />our Board has taken on this subject in the past. <br /> <br />ORGANIZATION <br /> <br />First, it seemed obvious from the discussion at the meeting that <br />references to membership in the economic, environmental and <br />integration teams on page 2 of the draft should be speCific. <br />That way everyone would know who was on each group, at least <br />initially, without attempting to interpret the language as to <br />whether it was inclusive or exclusive of certain interests. <br />