WSP03469

• File Number: 8220.200.05.P
• Description: Hoover Dam/Lake Mead/Boulder Canyon Project
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Date: 5/10/1979
• Author: USACOE
• Title: Transcript of a Public Hearing for Re-evaluation of A Flood Control Operation Plan for Hoover Dam: Los Angeles CA
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

CIe'l
l:I) 1
er-
N 2
--c:
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

-

.
~

.
.
~

~
.

z

.
.
.
~
~

"
u
.
.
.
~
.

.....

.

.

of flood control space in anticipation of floods.

The considerable beneifts that would result fr~

increasing the conservation storage capacity of lake Mead, tha

is to say, reducing the flood control reservation of lake Mead

would justify a large amount of channel improvements. That is

based on the $150 per acre-foot cost.

.

Alternatively, flood plain zoning and the relocatio

<

of existing developments in the flood plain would also be just

~ ;
f

ified by these considerable benefits that could be realized

10 fr an additional conservation of storage in lake Mead.

11 The'brochure, which accompanied the Notice of this

12

jo:

meeting tonight, indicates that damages occur when river flows

13 exceed 28,000 cubic feet per second. Again this is based on

14. Colonel Keys'-- what he explained to us earlier.

15 As a minimum the channel capacity should be improve

16 or flood plain zoning should be impemented to permit a dis-

17

charge of 35,000 cubic feet per second, which is, as was

,

18

explained to us, the hydraulic capacity of the generating unit

19

at Hoover Dam. As Hoover approaches its maximum ~evel and spi 1

20

is threatened, there should be no impediments to operating the

i

21

generating station at its full capacity.

22

In a moment, I'll ta~k about the considerable

n counter-benefits that could be realized fran this source.

24 An increase in the channel capacity downstream fr~

25

Hoover Dam from 28,000 cubic feet per seDnd to 35,000 cubic