Laserfiche WebLink
<br />'. ~ .' <br /> <br />". <br /> <br />. 'Ci <br />:,.,........'.~..... <br /> <br />'1' <br />...' <br />.0 <br /> <br />.''. <br /> <br />,.... <br />\,-': <br /> <br />;'. <br /> <br />'.".' <br /> <br /> <br />l.... <br />,.'.,.} <br />,. , <br /> <br />",.' <br /> <br />. ,", <br /> <br />.,-.' <br /> <br />~.. <br /> <br />:' . <br /> <br />'. <br />... .' <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />" <br />", . <br />~ ;,' ~ :,;,: ....: <br /> <br />"'... " <br />" ,'....~ <br /> <br />-,."" <br /> <br />.', ,.:~:> <br /> <br />. ,',~ " ,.., <br /> <br />.,'.. <br /> <br />-..; <br /> <br />.,' <br /> <br />. ~.' <br /> <br />",.r <br /> <br />", <br /> <br /> <br />. ...-. <br />-"-':- <br /> <br />.'," . <br /> <br /> <br />RECORD OF PROCEEDING <br /> <br />approved a$ amended. <br />March 23, which were <br /> <br />Mr. Thomson then read Ihe minutes of the Special Meeting 01 <br />approved as read. <br /> <br />President Nichols asked Manager Thomson 10 read the Financial Reporlin the absence <br />o! Treasurer James Shoun. The Financial Statement was read in detall and Wagner, <br />moved, seconded by Everett, that the Financial Statement be approved as read and <br />recorded h1. the minutes. Motion unanimously carried. <br /> <br />FRYINGPAN PROJECT REPORT: <br /> <br />James Ogilvie, Project Manager for Ihe Frylngpan-Arkansas Project presented a <br />series of sUdes identifying the cost comparisons between the original authorization <br />for Ihe Fryingpan Project, the 1967 cost if all seven hydroelectric plants were in- <br />cluded, and the revised costs with cnly two pump- back storage plants. He also <br />presented slides identifying the increased financial obligations imposed upon the <br />Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District as a result of the increased cost <br />of acquisition and construction. Copies of these slides are a part of these minutes. <br /> <br />Christy as\<.ed about the modification in the funds charged to recreation, and Mr. <br />OgilVie responded that the increase was brought about by increased cost of rights- <br />of-way. land acquisition due to changes of use of land. and increased projections by <br />the Fish and Wild Life Service and other agencies involved in the recreational activities. <br />Nichols reported that the City of Colorado Springs experienced the same increase <br />when acqyiring right-of-way for their municipal projects. Attorney BeiBe asked about <br />the differer>ce in the amount aJ.located to M&l and irrigation. Mr. Ogilvie responded <br />that the law requires the repayment to be based upon cost benefit and alternate costs, <br />and that under the new program M&l is considered to be a greater beneficiary. <br /> <br />Mr. Werme asked if the increased cost of construction would change the cost of pro- <br />ject water. Mr. Ogilvie stated that it would not and that the same amount of water and <br />electric power would be available as under the original plan. Young asked whether <br />the District: will have to negotiate a new contract in light of the increased cost, and <br />Mr. Ogilvie advised that it will not be necessary due to the fact that the revised figure <br />is still wlthln the authorized amount. A general discussion was then had as 10 logic <br />behind cutting the size of the Pueblo Reservoir and Mr.' Ogilvie stated that detalled <br />research indicated it was not necessary to construct Pueblo Reservoir as large as pre- <br />viously estimated. He also stated that Ute Ilsurcharge" program would make the re- <br />servoir more workable during times of heavy water now. <br /> <br />Nichols noted that during the years of exhaustive testimony in favor of construction of <br />tilis Project. reference was made many times to the required engineering modifications <br />which may occur as .specific elements are brought up for actual construction. Such a <br />reference D'lay be noted as early as 1953 where on Page 73, House Document 187. <br />"Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Letter from Acting Secretary of Interior", it states <br />in part, "Although the present plan for powerplanl installation is entirely feasible, <br />incomplete, reconnaissance studies indicate that greater economy may be effected by <br />dividing the Elbert powerplant into 2 plants and each utilizing about one-half the 515 <br />feet or head indicated. Furthermore, additional studies may show that greater economy <br />could be obtained by inslallation of a large portion of the required peaking capacity at <br />Granite power plant rather than at plants downstream. Detalled surveys beyond the <br />scope of present investigations will establish the most efficient installations. If more <br />efficient power system operation would result, modifications to present plans would be <br />made to take advantage of this energy. This mighl require a pumping plant at Granite <br />powerplant for pumped storage hydroelectric power". <br /> <br />After further discussion McCurdy moved, seconded hy YOnDg; that the Board approve <br />the modifications outlined in the letter from Commissioner Floyd Dominy to Congress- <br /> <br />-2- <br />