My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06019
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:20:53 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:24:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.101.10
Description
Colorado River-Water Projects-Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powel-Glen Canyon Adaptive Management
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
1/1/3000
Title
Western States Power
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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 />01447 <br /> <br />already been downsized over the years and has a 100% workload. WAPA's new <br />organization would work if the other offices were over staffed and could take the <br />additional CRSP workload. With the exception of its HQ staff, WAPA field offices are <br />for the most part appropriately staffed. Loveland is the most notable exception. The <br />Loveland office is considered by many as a service office to other Projects because it <br />has no financial responsibility for a major project. Therefore an important questions <br />remains to be answered, can WAPA's new organization fulfill its federally mandated <br />responsibilities to the CRSP project? Many on the Western Slope and the Montrose <br />CRSP employees feel strongly that WAPA will not fulfill this obligation! <br /> <br />. If the Montrose Plan was adopted and the Loveland charges to CRSP were <br />significantly reduced what would be the power rate impact be to the Loveland <br />customers. <br /> <br />" <br />Using data prepared for a 6nt95 CRSP power rate analysis, Loveland charges <br />CRSP $4.7 million per year for services performed. The Montrose Plan identifies <br />that only $416,000 per year could be substantiated as work done by Loveland. <br />Many of the charges to CRSP in addition to the $416,000 are for HQ and Loveland <br />overhead. Using 100% for overhead charges, a charged of $832,000 would be <br />considered acceptable by using methods WAPA presently charges for overhead <br />(some argue that 100% overhead is extreme). That leaves approximately $4.0 <br />million per year that could be returned for CRSP functions. <br /> <br />Loveland ratepayers would see an increase of the $4.0 million per year in their rates. <br />Using Tri-State as an example its power costs would go up by $2.4 million per year. <br />This assumes that Loveland would have to pass the $4.0 million thru to the <br />customers. Loveland can mitigate the increase by reducing staff or look for other <br />ways to cut costs or both. <br /> <br />. WAPA contents what Loveland and Phoenix charge CRSP for work performed are <br />appropriate. <br /> <br />AS mentioned previously the Montrose Plan and many customers have challenged <br />WAPA on the reasonableness of these charges. The total yearly charges by Phoenix <br />and Loveland for Fiscal Year 1994 was $7,070,000. See attached rate analysis. <br />This amounts to 5% of the total yearly CRSP revenue requirement. This translates <br />approximately into a 1 mill/kwh rate increase (about 5%) for CRSP customers. The <br />present CRSP power rate is 20.17 mills/kwh. <br /> <br />Concerned officials should demand an outside audit of WAPA's interproject activities. <br />WAPA's practices could also be seen as capricious and arbitrary at the expense of <br />CRSP and therefore in violation of the CRSP act and other applicable Reclamation <br />laws. <br /> <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.