WSP12154 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

on3:'~S 1.77 mills per kw to pay these added costs. There are O&M costs associated with joint-use facilities. Because of the ultimate development concept, they have been allocated to the several functions on the same basis as the investments. Under the current-use basis they would be allocated according to current use. Irrigation would bear very Ii ttle of the costs -- most joint O&M costs presently assigned to irrigation would be shifted to power. This would cost about $3.15 million per year, or about 0.31 mill per kwh. Retroactive costs would be about $1.5 million per year, or about 0.15 mill per kwh. The total added costs cited above would amount to an increase in power charges of 3.59 mills per kwh. However, without future aid to irrigation, power repayment could be stretched out in time and some savings could be realized. I estimate them to be about 0.7 mill per kw. This would result in the net increase of 2.89 mills per kwh I mentioned earlier. Once power costs are repaid, there could be some reductions in charges. If made, they could be about 3.4 mills per kwh by 2010. This would bring the average charge down to 5.59 mills per kwh. In summary, it appears the current-use method would result in an immediate increase in rates with a possibility of a decrease 20 to 30 years later (Speare, 1982, pp. 12-16). In summary, and in support of the ultimate development concept in power repayment studies, Speare closed by stating: If I were a Pick-Sloan power customer, I would be afraid of the current-use method for this project. The change would probably prompt a review of the project by Congress. No one here could predict the results of such a review. However, with the deficits being experienced now and with the desire to increase revenues, 1 would expect that power costs would go up. I believe Pick-Sloan power customers would be ill advised to seek such a change at this time (Speare, 1982, p. 16). -19-