Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Thus, of the $234 million reduction in total surplus, the states of Colorado, New <br /> <br />Mexico, and Wyoming absorbed 99.73 percent and Utah absorbs only .27 percent. <br /> <br />Our understanding of P,L. 811-485 is that: <br /> <br />(1) revenues from participating projects must be used for repayment of <br />participating project costs, and <br /> <br />(2) revenues from the storage projects must be first used for repayment of <br /> <br />storage project investment costs, and after such costs have been repaid, <br /> <br />apportioned to each state in accord with the percentages set forth in the <br /> <br />Act. <br /> <br />The March 1979 draft brochure on "Proposed Power Rate Adjustment" for CRSP <br /> <br />followed the above concepts as indicated by the following explanation on appor- <br /> <br />tioned revenue included in the brochure: <br /> <br />"5. Participatin!1: Projects Irrigation Investments. In determining the <br />power and M&:l revenues required for repayment of the participating projects, <br />the remaining revenues after repayment of the power, Mal and storage units <br />irrigation allocation are handled in the following fashion: <br /> <br />(1) Each state is first apportioned the net power revenues from <br />participating projects within the state plus the revenues from <br />sale of the State's Mal water. <br /> <br />(2) The remaining storage unit net power and M&:l revenues are <br />apportioned among the states according to the percentage <br />formula contained in the authorizing legislation, which is as <br />follows: Colorado - 4-6 percent, New Mexico - 17 percent, Utah <br />- 21.5 percent, and Wyoming - 15.5 percent. <br /> <br />17 <br />