Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Under this method the revenues resuiting from Seedskadee and CUP power sales <br />and credited to Wyoming and Utah during the repayment period would be <br />substantially greater than the revenues credited under the initial method, or $12.5 <br />million and $96.2 million, respectively. The basic change in this latter and current <br />method provides for storage project power revenues to repay not only storage <br />project investment costs but also CUP and Seedskadee participating project power <br />investment costs. These revenues, which under the Service's initial treatment <br />would have been apportioned to all states are,under the latter method, apportioned <br />exclusively to Utah and Wyoming. The net result is that Wyoming and Utah are <br />credited with additional revenues of $2.5 million and $64.0 million, respectively, at <br />the expense of Colorado and New Mexico. In our opinion, the effect of the <br />Service's revised method circumvents requirements for the apportionment of <br />storage project revenues prescribed by the Act. <br /> <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />We recommend that the Department obtain from the Solicitor an opinion to <br />determine if the Service's method of apportioning storage project revenues <br />complies with the requirements of P.L. 84-485. If it is determined that this <br />method is improper, we recommend that the Service take the action necessary for <br />the Department of Energy to implement po",:,er rates which will produce sufficient <br />revenues to repay participating project costs within the time period established by <br />law. <br /> <br />i9 <br />