WSP12154 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

of retaining or eliminating use of the ultimate development concept. For example, the energy task force of the President's Private Sector Survey on Cost Control made the following statements regarding the fiscal impacts of the ultimate development concept and power repayment studies: The federal government has invested through congressional appropriations a total of $11.4 billion allocated to the power features of wa te r projects and transmission systems. Another $1.4 billion in investment in irrigation features has been designated for repayment from net power revenues for a total investment of $12.8 billion. Over the 75 years since the program began, cumulative total repayments of this investment have amounted to $2.0 billion and cumulative total interest payments to Treasury have amounted to $3.2 billion (PPSSCC, 1983, p.3). . . . total repayment of capital invested through 1980 by PMA's is seriously delinquent with less than 16 percent being repaid over the past 75 years since the program began. Individual performance of the PMA's is shown to be Alaska: II percent in 14 years; Bonneville: 10 percent in 45 years; Southeastern: 24 percent in 32 years; Southwestern: 7 percent in 39 years; and Western: 24 percent in 75 years (PPSSCC, 1983, p. 19). Through a series of recommended actions, including the abolishment of repayment studies in favor of annual current revenue requirement studies, the PPSSCC says the Secretary of Energy (through his PMA's) could: . . . (enhance) recovery (of the reimbursable features of multi-purpose water projects) . . . at least $390 million per year beginning with Fiscal Year 1984 . . . with an average rate increase impact of 19% (PPSSCC, 1983, p. i). Such a rate increase, according to the PPSSCC, would still leave the average PMA power rate at 42 percent of the estimated average national wholesale cost of power. In an address to the annual meeting of the Mid-West Electric Consumers -16-