Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />, <br />what rates to charge power users and M&I ~ater users to repay Pick- <br /> <br />Sloan costs. To remedy this condition, the entire Pick-Sloan needs <br /> <br />to be reassessed in terms of what facilities will be built and in what <br /> <br />time frames. This may be costly and tilDe consuming and it will require <br /> <br />input and cooperation from the Co~s of Engineers and DOE, <br /> <br />We have made no attempt to estimate the financial impact of any assump- <br /> <br />tion concerning future development. But, in general, among the impacts <br /> <br />would be the following: <br /> <br />1. Any asstlJllptions that eliDlinated future irrigation construction <br />features or any assumption that r~duced the time frame for Pick-Sloan <br />j <br />development would make the alloca~ions and suballocations of existing <br />facility costs to these future fa~ilities (those not to be constructed <br /> <br />or those outside <br /> <br />, <br />, <br />the time frame) 1nappropriate. These existing facility <br />to be reallocated to other Pick-Sloan features, <br /> <br />costs would have <br /> <br />principally power, and thus would 'increase the construction and O&M <br /> <br />obligation of power and M&I water users, <br /> <br />2. On the other hand, elimi~ation of irrigation facilities from <br /> <br />, <br />Pick-Sloan assumptions would el~ate any direct irrigation subsidy <br /> <br />related to these features and WOUld increase the amount of commercial <br /> <br />power available for sale (because less power would be needed for <br /> <br />irrigation pumping). <br /> <br />We see one other pertinent consid~ration. The perceptions of the early <br /> <br />sixties were based on the power r~tes and power demands then existing. <br /> <br />However, conditions have changed drastically. All available power can <br /> <br />8 <br />