|
<br />
<br />NOY-1S-94 FR:I 16:06 B. 0_ R. UC REG:ION
<br />
<br />P_07
<br />
<br />in Table 1, demonstrates that the elimination of apportionment would
<br />cause a loss to the Treasury of over $184 million (present value) by
<br />shifting the repayment of capital costs. However, this loss is
<br />significantly compensated by added revenue from the increased payments
<br />to interest under Section 5(d) (3). The net difference of $92,957,000
<br />in present value dollars reflects the loss to the Treasury with the
<br />elimination of the apportionment requirement. In addition, Table 1
<br />illustrates that if payments were made for a 20-year period to
<br />compensate the Treasury for the loss in present value revenue with the
<br />elimination of apportionment language from the current legislation,
<br />those payment would be $9,264,477 annually.
<br />
<br />TABLE 1
<br />:?:!:.:ir:J:iJ(:';;;!~:i:!::;d~M~:~i',:i::jf:';:::::;:':'5::::;? '; :if?!:tht~;::;;:::~:1;:::;:'::~:::::':::':"';ii~';:;!:~ij,?::::~::"::~::,::,::;;;:;:~,;:~;,:,,..::,:,..:,:: . .
<br />.,,,.,..,.; "';';,,.'.',,' "~"...".,.,,,., '.t'".J;~." fSQ ",Q "',. .:,."",..,;"~.:tf~,s.~"..,~,,,,,,, ,~".:~~1t;;,~. """'" ....,.....
<br />:H~}!; ;::;! ;: !:~~il',:~ ::'i:,:'~ ;:i!: ~i'i:l'l': (;~; ;,;;. :!~l: ;f,',',' :,' t. :":'~:" ;:,:: ~':::.: ';',:;' I "::', ,':,',',',:, :::';:::',:;J.::,1:'.1,',:; : :'i','''.' ',':" :','r,'::::!::;::,:I',:;-;: ::: :',W,~:,',:"~:':' .J' I'!' :j~!,~!ihll'i":~'!~!;
<br />':::;: !':: :;: ::( J;la$:$.,Q:i'<:;(:)~~::;:1'9,'~ ~':;~:~:P:~9'qlj4:~'~;::;;~:~g:9:y. :~::,:::,:..t:1ll*;':~:~~$.~:~;:::iQ'
<br />
<br />.!}:r;,:':.;::( (\~::);'(:\,::~:!:::i:i;;i::r:::t';;'i)::;;:?j;:(i):\;:?iI:j\!;\:::;:::t:~W:::);;\\1{;:::!\!;\' ,::\;}:::;:;i:?:::::::/):::~~::~:~:::::?:jj:~l:(,:r:~j~::' " .
<br />
<br />'.":' ,':. ;.'''''';' ".,,,',,' """.:.;,,,;.~;..,:.,,:., );J;,t; ~m, " "",; ',,',,"." :,:,'".":;,::""",,, ",~~p.9.,~,t,d;:~~~n~",>:, "~""'."'" .'
<br />
<br />
<br />Electric Plant 66,836 34,400 32,436
<br />Replacements 118,287 97,229 21,058
<br />Additions 189,203 147,481 41,722
<br />Interest 2/ 375,344 466,659 -91,315
<br />Mainstem Irrigation 37,939 34,314 3,625
<br />participating Project
<br />Assistance 162,491 77,060 85,431
<br />TOTAL 950,100 857,143 92,957
<br />
<br />20-year Annual Payments to Treasury for Compensation
<br />from the Elimination of Apportionment $9,264,477
<br />1 Current 30-year Treasury constant maturlt es
<br />2/ Interest payments on electric plant, replacements, and additions
<br />
<br />
<br />Although the present value comparison presents an economic assessment
<br />of the cost to the Treasury with the elimination of apportionment, the
<br />basis for this assessment may alter significantly with changes in
<br />participating project cost allocations, especially for those projects
<br />located in the state of Utah. For example, it is currently not known
<br />what the irrigation costs (and thus the mainstem assistance to repay
<br />those costs) will be for the Bonneville Unit until a reallocation has
<br />been approved by the comptroller General, as specified in the Central
<br />Utah Completion Act of 1992. Due to the apportionment fo~ula, any
<br />additional costs allocated to irrigation, will greatly ~plify the
<br />
<br />4
<br />
|