My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02209
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02209
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:35:17 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:58:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.100.50
Description
CRSP - Power Marketing
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
6/10/1982
Author
USCOE/WAPA
Title
Public Information Forum, Post 1989 Power Marketing Plan - Customer Comments
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.
/
188
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 />~r. Al Gabiola, Area ~anager <br />August 4, 1982 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />sources other than CRSP. One of those alternatives was a lesser cost <br />alternative of coal fired generation. It cannot seriously be doubted <br />that the United States in marketing 7% of the CRSP winter capability <br />and 20% of the CRSP summer capability to the Southern Division and the <br />balance to the Northern Division intended anything other than to convince <br />the customers they were buying a long term embedded cost resourCe like a <br />coal plant. :1any customers would undoubtedly have chosen a coal fired <br />resource if there were any suggestion at all by the United States that <br />the resource might be stripped from them at the end of the term under <br />the guise of a reallocation. Tberefore, San Carlos Irrigation and <br />Drainage District is firmly in support of the original allocations and <br />believes that the original allocations should be retained as originally <br />intended in 1962; and further San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District <br />believes that the existing embedded costs of those resources should be <br />recognized by the United States. San Carlos Irrigation and Drainge <br />District believes CRSP contracts to existing customers as originally <br />agreed to by the United Stptes in both kilowatts and kilowatt hours <br />should be re-executed in the post 1989 period. <br /> <br />3. Marketing Area <br /> <br />The San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District believes the current <br />marketing area should not be changed. <br /> <br />4. CRSP Load Factor <br /> <br />The San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District members believe that <br />Western should recognize that some customers may require higher load <br />factors for certain conditions and situations and Western should seek <br />to accomodate those entities. CRSP power should be marketed at no <br />less than a seasonal load factor of 58.2% and Western should give an <br />option for delivery up to a 70% load factor of energy after a suitable <br />evaluation. <br /> <br />5. Service Seasons <br /> <br />The San Carlos Irrigation and Drainge District does not favor a change <br />in service seasons. It would cause a reduction in the amount of power <br />and energy available to customers. San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage <br />District does support a flexible approach by Western to me2t the <br />individual needs of customers ~hen hydrological and electrical system <br />circumstances permit. <br /> <br />53 <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.