| OCR Text |
Show VI-48 UPDATING THE HOOVER DAM DOCUMENTS COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT 43 fund be used to make up deficiencies in basic firm energy generation at Hoover powerplants. It proposes further that anv 'money used from the upper basin fund for this purpose would he reimbursed without interest from Hoover power revenues after 1987. It also plainly states that there would be no compensation for upper basin energy used to meet the deficiencies in Hoover generation. No explanation is given for the reasons behind the proposal to reimburse the dollars advanced and the denial of reimbursement for the energy used. As far as I have been able to ascertain there is nothing in any of the compacts or congressional acts that constitute the "law of the river" that would direct the Secretary of the Interior, or even authorize him, to take either money or energy derived from a subsequent development on the Colorado River, such as that at Glen Canyon, for the benefit, of a prior established facility, such as, Hoover Dam and Reservoir. Also, under the Colorado River Storage Project Act, all of the revenues of the basin fund are allocated to specific purposes, and these purposes do not include paying for deficiencies in generation at Hoover as a part of the operation and maintenance at Glen Canyon. Diminutions in generation at Hoover were contemplated at the time of signing the Hoover power contracts. In fact, those Hoover power contracts are between the Secretary and the Hoover power allottees, and the upper basin as a third party has no responsibility under the contracts. As you can see, I am very much opposed to the concept expressed in principle 5 of yourproposed "general principles" that would iequire the use of upper basin revenues or energy for the purpose of paying for deficiencies in generation at Hoover Dam that might be caused by the operation of Glen Canyon Dam and other upper basin powerplants. As a result of inquiries made by my office to your solicitor, I understand that the terms of the Boulder Canyon Project Act and the Boulder Canyon Project Adjustment Act and the general regulations promulgated thereunder are not adequate to provide for meeting the so-called deficiency-in-generation problems that might be created at Hoover Dam. It is therefore apparent that if this problem is to be resolved through the use of existing legislation, amendments to these acts may be necessary in order to give the Secretary authority to meet the situation that exists between himself and the Hoover power allottees with respect to fulfilling the Hoover power contracts. If you can propose remedial legislation I would be very happy to examine it and the possibilities of its enactment by the Congress. If you, as Secretary, find that it is absolutely necessary, due to conditions beyond your control, that revenues of the upper basin fund or energy generated at upper basin powerplants must be used for the purpose of making up deficiencies in basic firm energy generation at Hoover Dam during the filling period of upper basin reservoirs, I feel that it is mandatory that your proposed filling criteria be modified in certain respects. Several suggestions for modification of your proposed criteria have emanated from technicians representing the upper division States, including New Mexico. I feel that these proposals should be given serious consideration by your office as well as by all interested parties in the Colorado River Basin. |
