WSP03019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- 2 - act in the public interest and to promote the general welfare; and that it is to promote the interest of consumers through the provision of an adequate and reliable supply of energy at the lowest possible cost. CREDA does not disagree with UP&L that these principles should govern Western's allocations of CRSP power. However, as the testimffY from over one hundred consumers and representatives of consumer groups _ at the Public Comment Forum overwhelmingly demonstrates, Western has abided by these principles both in its past marketing of CRSP power and in its proposed marketing criteria. In the discussion which follows, CREDA will illustrate the fact that UP&L's claims are unsubstantiated by reference to the testimony pre- sented by the consumers of CRSP power at the Public Comment Forum. The testimony of CRSP consumers also demonstrates the fact that UP&L's claim that "the poor" and minorities are more likely to be affected by Western's present marketing powers is unfounded. II. WESTERN'S MARKETING OF CRSP POWER IS CONSISTENT WITH STATUTORY MANDATES A. CRSP Power Is Marketed On A Widespread Basis At The Lowest Possible Rates CRSP power is marketed by Western in a six-state region comprised of the states of Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Wyoming. A graphic illustration of the vast territory throughout which the CRSP power is pre- sently distributed can be found in the map of5Txisting preference customers of CRSP prepared by R. W. Beck and Associates- which was submitted as part of CREDA's written comments. CREDA members alone serve over 625,000 house- holds or 1,540,000 persons; together, all of Western's preference customers serve over 1,240,000 households. R. W. Beck Report, Appendix II-A. An allocation of CRSP power to UP&L would not result in a more widespread use of that power. At present, Western markets all available firm sound business principles which support Western's marketing criteria have already been addressed in CREDA's Memorandum of Law and Policy and will not, therefore, be further addressed here. l! It is significant that of the 112 speakers at the October 5-6, 1983 Public Comment Forum, only 5 spoke in favor of UP&L's proposals. ~ See Exhibit I-I of "Impact Analysis: Utah Power and Light Company's Request for An Allocation of Power from the Colorado River Storage Pro- ject," R. W. Beck and Associates, October, 1983 (hereinafter, "R. W. Beck Report"), contained in "Defending the Public's Right to Public Power."