My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02005
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:33:53 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:47:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.100.50
Description
CRSP - Power Rates
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
9/5/1979
Author
USDOE/WAPA
Title
Colorado River Storage Project and Participating Projects - Revised Proposed Power Rate Adjustment
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
<br />9 <br /> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />13. Charges for wheeling over Parker-Davis system <br /> <br />Some customers who receive CRSP power over the Parker- <br />Davis system contend that the CRSP power rate should <br />include a wheeling charge so that they would not have <br />to pay for such wheeling. The present CRSP marketing <br />criteria were adopted and published in the Federal <br />Register on February 9, 1978. These criteria were <br />adopted after consultation with the customers and <br />include a provision that any wheeling charges over other <br />project systems such as the Parker-Davis system are to <br />be paid by the customers receiving the power. <br /> <br />14. Ratemaking methods on other projects <br /> <br />Some Lower Basin customers questioned why CRSP power <br />revenues must provide assistance for irrigation projects, <br />whereas Parker-Davis and Hoover Dam power revenues do <br />not. The power rates proposed for the CRSP as well as <br />other projects must be adequate to effect repayment as <br />contemplated by their authorizing legislation. Such <br />legislation does not always allow uniformity in methods <br />for determining power rates. Review of the matter <br />indicates that power revenues from the Parker-Davis <br />Project are used for irrigation assistance and Hoover <br />Dam revenues are not. Repayment on both projects is in <br />accordance with authorizing legislation, and Western has <br />made no changes in either study. <br /> <br />15. Phased Rate Increases <br /> <br />Some customers recommended that the proposed 38% rate <br />increase, if adopted, be phased in over a period of <br />years, citing as justification a case where the South- <br />western Power Administration did so. Western feels <br />that, in view of anticipated additional rate increases <br />in future years, due chiefly to cost escalation, phasing <br />the proposed rate adjustment over a period of years <br />would result in increasing the magnitude of the next <br />rate i~crease. Hence, Western does not believe the <br />increase should be phased. <br /> <br />B. Comments Related to Procedures <br /> <br />1. Computer program access <br /> <br />A number of comments reflected concern that the <br />procedures adopted by Western in promulgating the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.