Laserfiche WebLink
<br />01375 <br /> <br />in Table 1. demonstrates that the elimination of apportionment would <br />cause a loss to the Treasury of over $184 million (present value) by <br />shifting the repayment of capital costs. However, this loss is <br />significantly compensated by added revenue from the increased payments <br />to interest under Section 5(dl (3). The net difference of $92,957,000 <br />in present value dollars reflects the loss to the Treasury with the <br />elimination of the apportionment requirement. In addition, Table 1 <br />illustrates that if payments were made for a 20-year period to <br />compensate the Treasury for the 10S8 in present value revenue with the <br />elimination of apportionment language from the current legislation, <br />those payment would be $9,264,477 annually. <br /> <br /> Comparison of the Present Value of CRSP Repayment Streams <br /> (Based on 1993 Brochure Study, Units-$l,OOO. Interest""??l'; 1/1 <br /> With Without Net <br /> Item Apportionment Apportionment Difference <br /> Electric Plant 66,836 34.400 32,436 <br /> Replacements 118,287 97,229 21,058 <br /> Additions 189,203 147,481 41,722 <br /> Interest 2/ 375,344 466,659 -91.315 <br /> Mainstem Irrigation 37,939 34,314 3,625 <br /> Participating proj ect <br /> Assistance 162,491 77,060 85,431 <br /> TOTAL 950.100 857,143 92,957 <br /> 20-year Annual Payments to Treasury for Compensation <br /> from the Elimination of Apportionment $9,264,477 <br />1 Current 30- ear Treasu constant matur~t1es <br /> <br />TABLE 1 <br /> <br />/ Y ry <br />2/ Interest payments on electric plant, replacements, and additions <br /> <br />Although the present value comparison presents an economic assessment <br />of the cost to the Treasury with the elimination of apportionment. the <br />basis for this assessment may alter significantly with changes in <br />participating project cost allocations, especially for those projects <br />located in the state of Utah. For example, it is currently not known <br />what the irrigation costs (and thus the mains tern assistance to repay <br />those costs) will be for the Bonneville Unit until a reallocation has <br />been approved by the Comptroller General, as specified in the Central <br />Utah Completion Act of 1992. Due to the apportionment formula, any <br />additional coses allocated to irrigation, will greatly amplify the <br /> <br />4 <br />