My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP04428
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP04428
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:55:26 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:19:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.100.50
Description
CRSP
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
3/1/1988
Author
WAPA
Title
Replacement Resources Processes - Final Methods Report
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.
/
149
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 /><Section 3 <br /> <br />Polic~ Issues and Assumptions <br /> <br />. Hoover power is scheduled by its customers and their entitlements and rights <br />are based on its actual output. Therefore, customers would have to agree to <br />any changes in Hoover powerplant operations that could affect these <br />contractual rights. <br /> <br />. Regulation benefits could potentially be inqreased. <br /> <br />. Hoover customers schedule large amounts! of spinning reserves and have rights <br />to those reserves. <br /> <br />. Currently Hoover's operating restrictions place few constraints upon the <br />scheduling of its power output, except for the fact that its energy potential is <br />governed by water release requirements and .110tby power requirements. This <br />is likely to c~ge in the future due to tile constraints being placed on Lake <br />Mojave, and lake-level fluctuations may nqt be allowed for periods of up to six <br />months. Such constraints would degrade tfoover's hydraulic capacity, thereby <br />severely limiting its peaking capability. <br /> <br />. Contractual differences between the Boulder Canyon Project and SLCAIIP <br />may be difficult to reconcile, or may place constraints upon the scheduling of <br />the. projects. <br /> <br />. Transmission constraints and losses coul4 outweigh power benefits obtained <br />due to diversity in loads and power schedujing. <br /> <br />. It would be very difficult to measure th~ benefits and losses resulting from <br />integration, and determine to whom those penefits or losses should flow. Such <br />issues have been a matter of dispute among Hoover contractors for many years. <br /> <br />3.3.2.4 SUMMARY <br /> <br />Western reviewed the findings of previous studies performed by Western and Reclamation <br />on integrating Hoover and GCD. These studies iPdicate. that while. some efficiency <br />improvements are possible from integration, institutional and physical barriers make <br />realization of these efficiency improvements a difficult and complex task. At the present <br />time, integrating Hoover and GCD does not appear to be a feasible method for replacing <br />lost capacity at GCD. However, Western will continu~ to monitor, and participate in when <br />appropriate, ReClamation's future investigations ofpo~er plant integration. <br /> <br />3.3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE <br /> <br />Western will comply with the National Environmental ,Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) through <br />an appropriate level of environmental analysis on the i1npacts of any proposed replacement <br />resource. Western will also ensure that replacement powe~ acquisition is consistent with <br />the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations! for Implementing the Procedural <br />Provisions ofNEPA, and DOE policy and regulations} At the present time, Western does <br /> <br />3-8 <br /> <br />Western Area Power Administration <br /> <br />March 1998 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.