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 />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Item <br /> <br />Decrease in Proposed <br />Rate Adjustment <br /> <br />Eliminate escalation of future <br />wheeling expense. <br /> <br />Apply CUP & Seedskadee Power Revenues to <br />Utah and Wyoming as in Repayment Studies <br />Prior to 1973 <br /> <br />3.5% <br /> <br />7.3% <br /> <br />Defer unidentified future transmission <br />investments from 1981-84 period until <br />1990-2020 period <br /> <br />3.4% <br />14.2% <br /> <br />TOTAL DECREASE <br /> <br />The result of the above at 58.2 percent load factor is to <br />increase the existing rate by 23.8 percent instead of 38 <br />percent, as stated in the April 1979 brochure. <br /> <br />The customers, as a further challenge, have raised general <br />issues of fairness. Western is of the opinion that the <br />repayment procedure mandated by Congress was considered fair <br />by Congress. Western cannot deviate Congress' concept of <br />fairness in handling power revenues absent congressional <br />approval. <br /> <br />v. Discussion of Other Public Comments <br /> <br />Other public comments were received which were critical of a <br />number of assumptions which were made by the Western Area Power <br />Administration with regard to its repayment study. The areas of <br />comment will be discussed below. <br /> <br />A. Comments Related to Study Methodology <br /> <br />1. Inclusion of future projects in repayment study <br /> <br />The primary thrust of a number of the public comments <br />relating to the repayment study revolved around whether <br />or not all participating projects which have been <br />authorized by Congress should be included in the repay- <br />ment study. This concern has apparently emerged due to <br />the amount of time which has elapsed between authoriza- <br />tion and construction. It does not appear that Western <br />has discretion to exclude any authorized projects, <br />regardless of the scheduled in-service dates. It is <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.