Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2438 <br /> <br />Public Service Company made the most bare-faced <br />proposal of all these investor utility companies. <br />They not only proposed to wheel power but they <br />proposed to charge more for power that they would <br />not wheel than what they do wheel, believe it or <br />not. They were completely silent as to this <br />great advantage which would accrue by displace- <br />ment of power and obviously intended to pocket <br />all of that advantage themselves. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />As a matter of fact, all of these utility <br />proposals were completely silent upon how every- <br />one could benefit from this displacement of power. <br />Yet this is the type of arrangement which is being <br />carried on today between the federal government <br />and these investor utilities. Up here at Ster- <br />ling, Colorado, the Public Service Company is <br />getting its power from the federal transmission <br />line, not conducting any of their power up there <br />at all, and in return they repay the federal <br />government from their own system here in Denver. <br />In southern New Mexico a large portion of that <br />state is served by the Public Service Company of <br />New Mexico and they have not' a single generating <br />plant in that south central part of the state. <br />.They obtain all of their power from the federal <br />government. It is then exchanged in the Albuquer- <br />que area, that is, a return. This is a very <br />advantageous and profitable operation for both <br />sides, but we say it must be a two-sided opera- <br />tion, and not a one way street. <br /> <br />In any event, this item has <br />with the application of Wheeling <br />ownership of transmission lines. <br />do with interconnecting systems. <br />should be fully interconnected. <br /> <br />nothing to do <br />charges or the <br />It has only to <br />vie believe they <br /> <br />Item 5 is a $71 million item which states <br />that the Bureau has made a differential of $71 <br />million in operating costs in evaluating the two <br />systems. We again believe that premise is false. <br />What the Bureau has done is to apply an operat- <br />ing cost to that portion only of the line which <br />they would construct in the event the joint pro- <br />posal is accepted. That section of line is over <br />some of the most rugged terrain in the united <br /> <br />I <br />