| OCR Text |
Show VI-60 UPDATING THE HOOVER DAM DOCUMENTS COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT 55 fine, but in view of the upper basin's interest in the overall operation of tne entire Colorado River, the idea does not go far enough. First, the upper basin is interested far beyond the theoretical annual operation of Lake Mead which is largely determined by the application of the filling criteria anyhow. Second, as Mr. Dominy points out, the integration committee for Hoover Dam operations is a contractual, body, and representatives of the upper basin are precluded from participation thereon. An informal group consisting of the Hoover integration committee plus upper basin representatives would leave the upper basin without formal, effective status. The upper basin as well as the lower basin is entitled to formal contractual membership on a river operations committee. Amendatory legislation probably would be necessary to accomplish this objective. Other items about the proposed criteria to which I wish to call your attention are: (a) Mention has been made that the low operating efficiency at Hoover Dam should be corrected or that water released from Hoover should be on the basis of an efficiency ot 83 percent as originally planned when the contracts were made. However, if the Hoover power diminutions are paid from some other source than upper basin energy and/or revenues, or if reimbursement is guaranteed to the upper basin fund, the matter of efficiency at Hoover becomes relatively unimportant insofar as the upper basin is concerned as long as downstream releases of water are controlled. (6) The use of 5 mills for replacement energy has been subject to some question. It is suggested that, if possible, the Bureau of Reclamation should make a firm predetermination of the rate to be paid for replacement energy and explain what it would include. (c) In principle No. 3 the terms "net river losses," "regulator}* wastes," and "diversion requirements of mainstream projects" should be defined in terms of legality and limitation. For instances, deliveries of water for these purposes should not include uses for which there are not contracts or water rights, or that are unreasonable, or unaccounted for. In general, I would say that the Bureau of Reclamation has done as well as can be expected under the circumstances with the current draft of criteria. The fact remains, however, that the criteria provide a guarantee to the lower basin and only an intent to partially reimburse the upper basin, which on the basis of the various compacts, disclaims any responsibility for deficiencies that may occur in power contracts between the Secretary and third parties. It appears that the Bureau has produced a set of criteria within the framework of which there might be involved a choice of important concepts; i.e., payment for Hoover power diminutions without resort to use of the upper basin fund or reimbursement to the upper basin fund if it is used. The fundamental weakness lies in the fact that the means of implementing either of these choices is lacking because they would require amendatory legislation by the Congress. tinder average streamflow conditions it appears that the criteria might be used by the Secretary as an interim means of planning and initiating the filling of upper basin reservoirs, but should not be regarded as final. Due to the need for legislation to implement certain |
