My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06124
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06124
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:21:22 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:26:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.100.50
Description
CRSP - Power
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
10/27/1983
Author
Helene Monberg
Title
Public Power Preference Issues Article
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
News Article/Press Release
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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 />2-WRW washn x x x prefer- <br />ence, and because the new Federal Energy Reguliitory COlt. niss ion (FERC) <br />(PEL) . <br />On Sept. 14 voted 5-0 not to strip the Pacific Power & r,ight co. ,7an ~n- <br /> <br />vestor-)wned utility, of a license to operate ~erwin Dam in washington. <br /> <br />PP&L's 50-year license had expired in 1979, tho two washington public <br /> <br />power districts had sought to take over the fac:lity under the federal <br /> <br />preference statutes. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />/, <br /> <br />NRECA stated in its monthly power supply re[:.ort of Sel?t. 15, "The <br />Commission declared that publicly-owned utilities should ~ be given <br />preference in awarding long-term licenses for hydrl,-electric dams. The <br />decision is considered to have set an important I?recedent because it is <br />th f " ed ., d <br />e ~rst t1me FERC has reject/the preference argum(\nt and 1nd~cate <br />that public-owned utilities will have to rely on standard economic argu- <br />ments when they file a relicensing claim.. .As a further unexl?8cted de- <br />velopment, the Commission voted 3-2 to overturn... .an '1'ERC decision in <br />1980 in which the Commission had decided that prefererce did exist in <br />hydro relicensing cases provided all other things were equa1." <br />N.issouri Ba..!n sttates are concerned thai: FERC will not bE <br /> <br />The Ul?per <br />sympathetic to <br /> <br />development of more federal project:.s in tl1e upl?8r Missou- <br />and ear l~er s-tatutes. <br />ri, as provided for in the Garrison Reautho~ization Act of 1965/ Wein- <br /> <br />berg urged Abdnor's office on Oct. 20 to include pick-Sl)an ultimate de- <br /> <br />velopment in the series of amendments offered on Oct. 26 to "remove com- <br />pletely any basis for arguing that, in acting on pick-slean power rates, <br />FERC can sacond-guess ultimate development" I?rovisions already in law. <br />Other changes that NRECA, APPA and the South Dakota public power <br />leaders wanted in theo~ill were changas in the Gregory County authori- <br />zation allowing sales/hydropower under a "market-value" concept to the <br />highest bidder rather than under th3 "cost-of-poweJ;" concept to public <br />changes 1n <br />bodies under the federal preference statutes;/language which would raiSe <br />interest rates and shorten the I?ayout period; changes in language which, <br />they claimed, would have eliminated the area-wide "postage-stamp" rate <br />under which federal power is soldl and elimination of language which <br />would abolish the authority of the power marketing agencies to build26 <br />agreea to on Oct. <br />federal transmission lines. The Abdnor-Burdick-Baucus amendm~nts/met <br />most of the objections of the public power and rural electric group~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.