OCR Text |
Show Page 8b The Utah Enterprise Review , January 19, 1977 UP&L Rights COMPLETE PRINTING SERVICE Creative Layout Design Letterpress Phototypesetting Intertypesetting Business Industry Commercial Lithography Given Consideration by Bear River Group A study committee of FULL COLOR PRINTING Stationery Pamphlets Brochures Forms WE HAVE THE KNOW-HOAND EOUIPMENT FOR YOUR PRINTING REQUIREMENTS W Phone (801 ) 487-065- 1 1952 West 1500 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 the Bear River Commission is trying to protect the rights of Utah Power & Light to generate electricity from Bear River water, yet not prevent agricultural or municipal water users from developing the resource. To assist them in the taks, the committee has invited John Anderson, UP&L senior vice president, to join them. Wallace Jibson, committee chairman, said the group must find final solutions to the conflict by Jan. 21, in order to prevent a possible two-yedelay. The agreement reached by the committee must be approved by the Commission, passed to the legislatures of three states (Utah, Idaho and ar Wyoming), sent onto Con- - gress and then signed by the President. Since Wyomings legislature is meeting this year, and meets only once every two years, approval of pro- posed changes in the Bear River Compact would be delayed until Wyomings lawmakers meet again in 1979. After public hearings in all three states, the Commission asked the committee to consider all objections The major ones raised. centered on a conflict between UP&Ls water rights and the rights of water users located above Bear Lake. John Anderson said the utilitys major concern is protecting customers against a possible increase in costs. It would cost much more to replace the five hydroelectric generating plants along the river, he said, than it would be to continue operIf we have to ating them. we should be replace them, compensated, he added. The utility has estimated customers would need to be assessed up to $8 million per year to pay for plant replacement, since coal would be substituted for water, and the cost of construction is skyrocketing. If water is allocated for agriculture, less water is available for electricity generation. The power company attorneys claim the proposed compact amendments infringe on water rights granted the company in the Dietrich Decree of 1920. But many Commission members believe priorities have Does changed since then. the companys right to generate power prohibit the up- stream development of water? Does it mean water should dump into the Great Salt Lake when it could be used for recreation? asked Daniel Lawrence, chairman of Utahs delegation to the Commission, in an earlier Review interview. We're Winborg and Winborg. And we do it all: logos, brochures, point of purchase materials1, annual reports, catalogs, company magazines, posters, billboards, newspaper ads, calendars, magazine ads, t.v. commercials and package designs. Governors of the three states have been working on the proposed changes for close to ten years. The amendments would grant Idaho 125,000 acre-feand Utah 275,000 acre-feof water. The Federal Bear Riber Migratory Bird Refuge is allocated 120,000 acre-fee- t. The remaining 150,000 acre-fewould be divided equally between Utah and Idaho. Excess water would be split between the two states, with Idaho receiving 30 percent and Utah 70 percent. In addition, storage rights are granted for development above Bear Lake. et et et More than an advertising agency 141 Pierpont Avenue Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 (801) 364-770- 1 |