| OCR Text |
Show VI-72 UPDATING THE HOOVER DAM DOCUMENTS COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT 67 Colorado River Commission of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nev., October 10, 1960. Mr. Floyd E. Domixy, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Dkar Mr. Dominy: Your letter of August 26 addressed to me as chairman of the Colorado River Lower Basin Engineering Group has been reviewed by representatives of the group, particularly 'with respect to a statement regarding evaporation losses as requested in the third paragraph on page 2. Paragraph 5 of the filling criteria of January 18, 1960, states, in part, that "* * * deficiency in firm energy shall be computed as the difference between firm energy which, assuming an overall efficiency of 83 percent, would have been generated * * * at Hoover power-plant in that year if Glen Canyon had not been on the river and the energy actually generated • • * during that year adjusted to reflect an overall efficiency of 83 percent." [italics added.] The memorandum of January 18, accompanying the proposed criteria (p. 4), allows for computing deficiencies in Hoover generation which might be caused "* * * by Glen Canyon being on the river." Page 6 refers to Hoovor basic firm as that generation which would be produced "without Glen Canyon on the river." It is the position of the lower basin engineering group that the actual reduction in water supply available for energy generation at Hoover, during the filling period, will amount to the quantity withheld in the Colorado River storage project reservoirs regardless of whether the total quantity remains in storage or is in part lost by evaporation. The evaporation is part and parcel of such total reduction. It is our understanding that evaporation losses are a part of the formula upon which the Secretar}7 would compute these deficiencies. Very truly yours, A. J. Shaver, Chairman, Lower Basin Engineering Committee. |
