My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP10784
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
10001-10999
>
WSP10784
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:14:41 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:31:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.200.05.R
Description
Hoover Dam/Lake Mead/Boulder Canyon Project
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
7/1/1939
Title
Statement Concerning Negotiations Regarding Boulder Dam Energy Rates
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />...-4 <br />r- <br />C'.! <br />C\1 <br /> <br />-9- <br /> <br />terms before 1945, end thr,t eny lIUch f!lterat1ons muet be made by the <br /> <br />Con~re8S. 'l'his contention ha~ prevlfLed and 8.8 will be detailed later <br /> <br />c <br /> <br />on contracts hfve been executed by the Secretary ooncern1n!, certain of <br /> <br />the matters under discussion, but the matter of reduotion of int"lreBt <br /> <br />rete end of the rates for energy now WJ'lits upon the drn:!"tinp; of "))p- <br /> <br />ropriate legisletion flno its peRl!lage by the Congrells. <br /> <br />A con:f'erence in Denver. Colorado, on June 10 end 11, 19:3<9. <br />did Ii ttl~ to adv"nce e oolution. l'he meeting at Yellor;etone Park <br />on AUgust 1 and 2, 19:38. resulted in t< counter-))roposal by the Upper <br />Bssin Statee that the 80-0811ed Basin Fund be paid one million doll ere <br /> <br />per year. lmioh proposal wea rejected by the Bureeu. Here it WflS <br /> <br />detemned thet engineers working for the CO!1Il1l1ttee of the statlll! could <br /> <br />not 8~ree nth t'ls engineers of the Bureau 01' Power and Li~ht on the <br /> <br />fundamental !lSBUlllpt1ons necessery for a oomparison of coets between <br /> <br />energy generated at Boulder DlJlI end .ergy generated in en 011 or gae- <br />fired plant at tidewater near Los ilngeles. Such a plant 1'IOuld be located <br />about 25 miles from the point where energy from Boulder is 8'Teilable to <br />the power belt or ring. which is :t'1nally to se:rvethe City. l'he comperhon <br />of rates should in the opinion 01' enr,ineere for the states be made At the <br />point wh~re Boulder energy enters the ring, The BurellU cOl'_tends thpt no <br /> <br />"back tranl!lllission" to thi e point should be oharged ag"inet the 80et of <br /> <br />stem power. <br /> <br />The coet of 1'lUch "back tran~ission" is t'le principal difference <br /> <br />in cost between the two sources of energy, and if G.S the states contend it <br /> <br />is 8 chnrge ,,_gnlust stern! p1p,nt energy, then energy generated et Boulder <br /> <br />is probabl.y sl1r;htly cheaper at the entranoe to tlH' rill('; than energy from <br /> <br />the steam pll'nt would be. If no costt'or S\lc..l1 tr!'Jl511lssion is allo":ed. <br /> <br />steam plf'.nt energy '''ould be oheaper U' the cost is figures on the besis <br /> <br />of the most modern llteBIll plent which could now be designed. It 13 not <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.