Bridge and Marble Canyon Dams

Document: Bridge and Marble Canyon Dams, Anthony Wayne Smith, August 30, 1965 (mimograph), page 15-15- water will be available, and abundant power can be tapped. The notion that more and more water should be brought south from northern California into southern California and even exported to Arizona becomes less and less attractive as these potentialities unfold. There has even been a threat to the Columbia River Basin with covetous eyes appraising the enormous water resources of the Pacific Northwest; such notions are also probably unrealistic in the long perspective. In our judgment, the questions raised by the Bureau of the Budget with respect to Bridge Canyon are equally applicable to Marble Canyon dam. Both structures would contribute energy to the network, and it would be difficult to identify and earmark separate supplies. Neither project can be justified for base load purposes; it is highly questionable whether they are needed or can be justified for peaking power. This last question is the most important one for this Subcommittee, as for the Bureau of the Budget, and it needs much more thorough investigation than it has had thus far. The 4-to 5-year moratorium suggested by the Bureau for Bridge Canyon should be imposed on Marble Canyon as well, because the situations are similar. Bridge Canyon could not be built without Congressional authorization, in view of the strictures of the Federal Power Act prohibiting the Federal Power Commission from licensing projects constructed for reservoirs in national parks; this restriction applies to Grand Canyon National Monument. In the case of Marble Canyon, however, there is no such protection; Congress has properly imposed a moratorium on the issuance of licenses at these points by the Federal Power Commission pending a preliminary examination of the problem; this safeguard should be continued pending decision byEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 24 bit, 1,439,497 byte