Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />/'''\ <br /> <br />Upper Sasin'states according to a =ixed percentage <br />(Colorado is apportioned 46 percent). T~ose revenues <br />are then used to repay to ~~e U. S. Treasu~! the ?o=~ion <br />of the construction cost of a participating project's <br />irrigation features which is beyond the irrigators' <br />ability to repay. RepayMent must be made within SO years <br />without interest. The revenues so credited to a state <br />may only be used to repay the costs of irrigation projects <br />located in the state to which ~e revenue is credited <br />unless,'by "appropriate consent," one state permits ~~e <br />use of its revenues by 'some other state. <br />People often think of the Sasion Fund as a "cash kitty" which <br />~~e Opper Basin states should be able to draw upon directly and at <br />will to const..""Uct new projects. 'E'or two reasons, ~~is is incorrect. <br />First, the law specifically provides that appropriations for con- <br />struction must come from the general fund of the U. S. Treasur! <br />and cannot come from ~~e revenues which accr~e to the Basin rund. <br />Second, the Basin Fund does not have a continually inc:eas~.g <br />balance of cash on hand. This is because user chargers ~.d, more <br />importantly, ~~e price of C~P power, are set at rates designed <br />to create just enough revenue to cover the repayments to ~~e u. S. <br />Treasury which are required over ~~e specified SO-year repayment <br />periods. Thus, "extra" cash is net bu.ilcting up f:Qm which money <br />for construction costs could be taken, even if the law permitted <br />such. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-4- <br />