WSP03019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. I. INTRODUCTION In "CRSP Power: A Legal Birthright of Federal Preference Custo- mers," the Memorandum of Law and Policy submitted to the W1tern Area Power Administration ("Western") as part of the written comments 1 of the Colorado River Energy Distributors Association ("CREDA"), CREDA addressed the legal aspects of Utah Power & Light Company's ("UP&L") challenge to the preference laws. In its Memorandum, CREDA demonstrated that Western's proposed mar- keting criteria for the post-1989 sale of Colorado River Storage Project ("CRSP") power are consistent with the requirements of the preference laws. Furthermore, CREDA demonstrated that UP&L's constitutional challenge to the preference laws is unsound. For UP&L to ultimately prevail on many of its legal claims, it would have to make certain factual showings. For example, UP&L has asserted that Western has failed to comply with the statutory mandate that it market CRSP power on a widespread basis. Although the definition of "widespread" may involve a question of law, whether or not the power has been allocated on a widespread basis turns on a factual showing. Now that the Public Comment Forum sponsored by Western has been completed, an analysis of the transcript of that proceeding reveals that many of UP&L's legal claims which depend upon facts have not been borne out by the record. UP&L has repeatedly contended that Western's application of the preference laws fails to carry out the statutory ma~9ates of those laws and of the Department of Energy ("DOE") Organization Act. - Specifically, UP&L claims that Western has disregarded the following aspects of the preference laws and the DOE Act: the principle that Western is to sell power to encoVJtge the most widespread use thereof at the lowest possible rates to consumers; - that it is to 1J "Defending the Public's Right to Public Power: A Response of Consumer- Owned Utilities to Utah Power And Light's Application for Colorado River Storage Project Power" submitted by CREDA to Western on October 31, 1983. y See UP&L's April 15, 1983 submission to Western at pages 5-6; Testimony of Donald B. Holbrook on behalf of UP&L at the October 6, 1983 Public Com- ment Forum at Tr. 234; and Statement on Behalf of Utah Power & Light Company, submitted as an exhibit at the Public Comment Forum, at pages 3-4. Y The full language of this statutory mandate is "most widespread use thereof at the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent with sound business rinci les . . .." Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, 16 U.S.C. 25s. Although UP&L chooses to ignore the fact that Western is required to follow sound business principles in its marketing of CRSP power, the (Con't)