Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Al Gabiola <br />July 9, 1982 <br />Pag e 2 <br /> <br />I would like to addre.s 7 of the issues that you <br />prese~ted duri~g the prese~tation. <br /> <br />f <br /> <br />I}. CO:1tract Period <br /> <br />While this subject was ~ot addressed u~til the <br />questio:1 a~d a:1swer period, it was somewhat appare:1t from <br />the fact that all of the studies were for 10-year periods, <br />that there is some i~cli~at!o:1 to utilize a 10-year <br />contract period. . <br /> <br />While a 10-year period; provides considerable <br />flexibility to the Western Area Power Administration, it <br />imposes undue hardships on its customers. I am quite <br />certain that you will be hearing from the larger power <br />utilities concerning scheduling and lead-in times and the <br />like. Our prqblem is somewh~t different. <br />! <br /> <br />The contracting proced~re is a long i~volved process <br />that requires participationiby all interested parties. If <br />10-year contracts are issue~, the process of reallocation <br />will begin almost immediatety. For those districts that are <br />small, this represents a continued and relatively <br />significant burden to maintain representation in this <br />process. It is unreasonableito be looking at the continuing <br />allocation process that the ilO-year contract would mandate. <br /> <br />i <br />2). The degree of adve~sity i:1 determining kilowatt <br />availability. <br /> <br />From the view of the districts, it would be m~st <br />advantageous for the project to use the most adverse water <br />supply available so as to.provide a guaranteed capacity. <br />Given the small difference oetween the most adverse supply <br />and the 90% exceedence supp~y, it will appear that there <br />would be minimal advantage ~o take any additional risk in <br />guaranteeing kilowat1: sales.! <br /> <br />3). Median verses average water supply for the <br />determination of available energy. <br /> <br />28 <br />