Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />statutory construction, there is only one conclusion, i. e., that <br /> <br />Congress intended that such deficiency allowances should continue <br /> <br />during said filling period. <br /> <br />(b) "To the extent that any deficiency in such reimburse- <br /> <br />ment remains as of June 1,1987, etc." If Congress did not intend <br /> <br />that the Filling Criteria and the Hoover power defiCiency allowances <br /> <br />continue after the enactment of P .L. 90-537, why was this provision <br /> <br />included? It would clearly be unnecessary, because at the rate of <br /> <br />$500,000 per year reimbursement, the deficiency in the Upper Colorado <br /> <br />River Basin Fund of $4,047,901 as of May 31,1969,1]/ could have been <br /> <br />reimbursed completely within nine years. <br /> <br />II. <br /> <br />REPUDIATION OF THE SEVEN-STATE AGREEMENT <br />ENDANGERS PEACE ON THE COLORADO RIVER <br /> <br />A. Upper Division Repudiates <br />Seven-State AGreement <br /> <br />On the basis of the Seven-State Agreement outlined <br /> <br />above the Lower Division believed that the Filling Criteria and <br /> <br />the Hoover power deficiency allowances would continue during the <br /> <br />filling period of the storage units of the Colorado River Storage <br /> <br />ill Report of Engineering Committee of Upper Colorado <br />River Commission, dated November 19,1969, Attachment II. <br /> <br />-16- <br />