Laserfiche WebLink
<br />""":'1' <br />,,'- <br />0;-.':- ~ <br /> <br />scope of the EIS or the range of alternatives to be examined <br />would be inappropriate. <br /> <br />pection 4--Interim Power Operatinq Criteria <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />In an April 23. 1990. letter to Secretary Lujan. the Basin <br />States' representatives and the Commission recommended that <br />interim power operations be implemented within 90 days after <br />completion of the test flow program based upon the best <br />scientific information available at that time. We have <br />recommended that such interim power operations remain in effect <br />pending the completion of the EIS and the implementation of <br />such permanent changes in power operations as are found to be <br />justified. <br /> <br />Given that the Secretary has announced that he will proceed <br />in this manner. we believe that section 4 of the bill is <br />unnecessary for several reasons. First. the Secretary should <br />be given the opportunity to complete the test flow program and <br />implement interim power operations thereafter. Second. we are <br />concerned that the effort required to make and document the <br />determinations required by section 4(a) and to develop sound <br />interim power operating criteria could divert scientists and <br />other personnel from the immediate tasks at hand. Third. <br />because of the test flow program. releases from the Glen Ganyon <br />Dam power plant between now and September 1. 1991. will bi at <br />rates prescribed by that program a majority of the time. Given <br />that this legislation could not now become law any sooner than <br />October of 1990. the few remaining intervals of time are <br />inconsequential at this late date. Finally. the test flow <br />program itself constitutes the first phase of interim power <br />operations. Further changes should await the completion of the <br />test flow program. <br /> <br />If section 4 is to remain in the bill. we would offer the <br />following comments about subsection (b): <br /> <br />(1) Strike the words "be designed to" in the preamble to <br />subsection (b). <br /> <br />(2) Reword paragraph (1) to read as follows: <br /> <br />(1) be subject to and consistent with <br />the Colorado River Compact. the Upper <br />Colorado River Basin Compact. the decree of <br />the U.S. Supreme Court in Arizona v. <br />California. the Colorado River Storage <br />Project Act of 1956. the Colorado River <br />Basin Project Act of 1968. and the other <br />laws governing regulation of the Colorado <br />River:". <br /> <br />-5- <br />