Laserfiche WebLink
• Agenda Item 22 - CRSP Power Revenue Issues <br /> 22a. Proposal for project financing with CRSP Power <br /> Revenues <br /> Before discussing this item, Mr. McDonald introduced several <br /> representatives of electric power generating, marketing and <br /> transmission companies including: <br /> Linda Lazarrino - Platte River Power Authority <br /> George Sheldon - Plains Electric G&T <br /> Russ Bovaird - Tri-State G&T <br /> Fred Kuhlemeier - Colorado-Ute <br /> Howard Bjelland - Colorado-Ute <br /> Mr. McDonald then proceeded to summarize the January 4, 1984 <br /> memorandum to the Board wherein he, pursuant to a directive from <br /> the Board members in the November 3-4, 1983 meeting, pursued the <br /> proposal to make CRSP power revenues available for water project <br /> financing as presented by the Governor and discussed by the <br /> Board. He also stated that he had met with five of the six other <br /> Colorado River Basin States, several energy distributor entities <br /> • and CRSP power customers . David Getches participated in some <br /> meetings and Duane Woodard joined Messrs . McDonald and Getches in <br /> a meeting with Senator Armstrong. At the request of Messrs . <br /> Getches and McDonald, Governor Lamm met with Utah Governor <br /> Matheson. (Appendix Q attached) <br /> Other contacts made by Mr. McDonald and responses to the <br /> proposal received from some of the individuals, states and enti- <br /> ties are summarized in the January 4, 1984 memorandum which is <br /> attached as Appendix P. <br /> Mr. McDonald summarized four alternative ways in which the <br /> use of power revenues could be handled as follows: <br /> 1 . Revenues could be paid directly to the four Upper <br /> Basin states year in and year out up to a total, cumu- <br /> lative dollar limit (after which the payments would <br /> permanently cease) to finance in whole or in part any <br /> federal or non-federal project developing the waters <br /> of the Colorado River system. This would amount to an <br /> "open-ended" fund. <br /> 2. Revenues could be paid directly to the four Upper <br /> Basin states to finance in whole or in part any <br /> federal or non-federal project developing the waters <br /> • of the Colorado River system, but subject to limita- <br /> tions which would prevent a surplus fund from building <br /> -25- <br />