Laserfiche WebLink
<br />11 <br /> <br /> <br />FINDINGS <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PICK-SLOAN <br />PRS POLICIES AND METHODS AND CURRENT <br />DEPARTMENTAL POLICY UNDER 730 DM 4 <br /> <br />Ultimate vs. current development concepts <br /> <br />The 1974 and 1976 Pick-Sloan PRS's were based on the ultimate antic- <br /> <br />ipated development of Pick-Sloan and included a large amount of future <br /> <br />project additions extending well into the next century. Current <br /> <br />Department policy requires that repayment studies beginning with <br /> <br />those prepared after completion of fiscal year 1977 shall be based on <br /> <br />a more restrictive concept of facility development to be included in <br /> <br />the study which, for purposes of this report, will be entitled the <br /> <br />current development concept, unless deviations from this policy are <br /> <br />specifically justified and approved, or authorized by statute. <br /> <br />Because of allocation methods and the timing of repayment requirements, <br /> <br />discussed in this section of the report, adoption of the current devel- <br /> <br />opment policy, or other conservative alternatives to the ultimate <br /> <br />development. approach, would undoubtedly lead to changes in Pick-Sloan <br /> <br />power rates. Ultimate development as employed for Pick-Sloan is not <br /> <br />defensible as a realistic or business-like concept for future manage- <br /> <br />ment of Pick-Sloan for reasons to be discussed, <br /> <br />Under current Departmental policy a PRS is to include, among other <br /> <br />items: <br /> <br />(1) Estimated revenues and expenses year by year over the remain- <br /> <br />der of the power system's repayment period, based on conditions <br />