Laserfiche WebLink
<br />3. Power repayment studies <br /> <br />A. Power preference customers (CRECA) have objected to' <br />WAPA's proposed rate increases. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1) Key issue is whether authorized projects not yet <br />under construction are to be included in the <br />calculation for rate increases. <br /> <br />2) CREDA does not want them included on the grounds that <br />they increase power rates unnecessarily since some of <br />the disputed projects (e.g., San Miguel, West Divide, <br />Savery-Pothook, and Fruitland Mesa in Colorado) may, <br />CREDA alleges, never be built. <br /> <br />3) Colorado does not want such projects excluded from <br />the rate calculations because that will give the <br />appearance that they are no~ viable projects, is a <br />contradiction of our contention that certain projects <br />are to be built concurrently with the Central Arizona <br />Project (CAP), and could lead to future opposition by <br />power users to appropriations for such projects since <br />rate increases would then be specifically tied to an <br />individual project's construction start. <br /> <br />a. FERC reviews WAPA's proposed rate increases <br /> <br />1) FERC has recently ruled that projects not yet under .. <br />construction can be included in the calculation of <br />rate increases only if there is a showinq that there <br />is a "reasonable expectation" that a project will be <br />constructed. <br /> <br />2) CREDA and WAPA are now trying to get BuRec and the <br />Upper Basin states to join in an effort to define <br />what "reasonable expectation" means. <br /> <br />4. Financing of CREST program <br /> <br />A. History of issue covered in the attached June 1, 1982, <br />memo to Members, ewCB, from Bill McDonald. <br /> <br />B. Summary of major points <br /> <br />1) Sec. Watt wanted the entire program financed <br />from power revenues. <br /> <br />2) The 7 basin states agreed that the program was a <br />federal obligation and should be funded by <br />Congressional appropriations. <br /> <br />3) In light of watt's position, however, the Lower Basin <br />states proposed a O~1 mill increase in both <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-2- <br />