My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PowerPurchaseNegotiations
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1001-2000
>
PowerPurchaseNegotiations
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:35:02 PM
Creation date
11/3/2008 3:01:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8040.100
Description
Section D General Studies - Power
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
2/1/1982
Author
CWCB & Office of Energy Conservation
Title
Guide to Negotiations between Small Power Producers and Utilities
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
(4) If the rules remain vacated, FE RC will likely set <br />about rewriting both the interconnect and the.' <br />avoided cost rules, and proceed with the official <br />ruiemakinq process.. This could take approximately <br />one- to two- years:, <br />State Proceedings. _ <br />i <br />On January 12, 1982 ,the Colorado Public Utilities~Commissie~n <br />(PUC) issued. Decision'No. C82-73 regarding the PURPA requirements <br />as they .apply to o-ora-o. t required, amore other things,_ h$t <br />utilities interconnect and gay avoided cost rates. The utiiti:es <br />were required to submit tariffs reflecting standard: aw ided:cost <br />rates for units under .100. kW. <br />Due to the District of Columbia decision, ..the PUC i~sau+ed <br />Decision No. C82-138 on January 26, sta in Decision No ., C~3.2-73 <br />pending further order of the Commission, an exten ~. g `t a ~~ , <br />line for requests for rehearing-and reconsideration of 'that deci-; <br />Sion to March 1, 1.982. <br />On March 23, 1982, '.the Commission entered Decision No. C82-~~_ <br />436, which indefinitely pontinued the :stay entered in Decision <br />No. C82-138--.thus Decision No. C82-73 will not become effeetitze -: <br />until the .PUC-order to stay- is i to <br />Under Decision No. C82-436, the PUC. will initiate new -rule's <br />making roceedings for Colorado ase on o ora o aw, nr~t: <br />ase on PUP or the FERC Ruies. This procedure could take <br />several years to complete. <br />A brief polling of developers .presently holding multiple. <br />small scale hydro permits in Colorado indicates that; the federal <br />'court decision will not have a major effect on marketirx~ power <br />from- the bulk of their sites. It is not known what the effect <br />will be on other small scaYe technologies. It is our belief that <br />many hydro sites in Colorado have power-that. will. be attratctiue, <br />to the utilities in any case <br />It is the decision of the editor of this. ,document to prdceec'~ <br />with publication, even though portions of the document are writ- <br />ten as if the federal court decision had not been rendered. The <br />bulk o t e gui ante in t e ocument is sou in any case. The <br />reader will have to make ad'ustments in usin the enclosed inf r <br />matron, de endin on t e outcome 'o t e procee ings LscUSSe~ <br />ere. <br />r <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.