Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />generation of firm energy at Hoover Dam during the filling period <br /> <br />of those reservoirs. Since Metropolitan's Energy Contract is a <br /> <br />typical Hoover power allottee contract, all of which are subject to <br /> <br />the Colorado River Compact, the above arguments, if valid, are <br /> <br />equally applicable to Metropolitan. <br /> <br />Metropolitan contends that nothing in the Boulder Canyon <br /> <br />Project Act or the Colorado River Compact excuses the United States <br /> <br />from performing its contract with Metropolitan to deliver energy <br /> <br />in accordance with the terms thereof 0 <br /> <br />If the Upper Division's contention is correct, United <br /> <br />States is excused from delivering water to Hoover powerplant for <br /> <br />the generation of energy in accordance with Metropolitan's Energy <br /> <br />Contract and is not required to compensate Metropolitan for any <br /> <br />deficiency in generation. However, if Metropolitan's contention is <br /> <br />correct, then the United States acting through the Secretary, is <br /> <br />required to carry out the Section 602 (a) directive because it is <br /> <br />a mandate of Congress, but United States is required to furnish <br /> <br />Metropolitan either substitute energy or money compensation to carry <br /> <br />out its obligation to Metropolitan under the Energy Contract. <br /> <br />A., Effect of Metropolitan's Energy Contract <br />BeinG Subject to the Compact <br /> <br />Metropolitan's Energy Contract incorporates the United <br /> <br />States-City of Los Angeles-Southern California Edison Company <br /> <br />-21- <br />