WSP06852 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Chief Engineer actively participated in the meetings with Western and, at the request of the California Hoover Power Allottees, acted as their spokesman in preparing written responses to various elements of the marketing criteria as they were being developed. Some of the major points that were emphasized in the written responses to Western were (1) the California Allottees have a right io renew their present contracts; (2) t~e renewal right is founded in the enabling legislation and in the existing conlracts; (3) il right of renewal is also supported 'by equity and by the objectives stated by Western; (4) ". rates for Hoover power should be Jet at a level only high enough to recover Late in the year, Western inuicateu reimbursable costs plus lither costs that it was preparing to move toward authorized by law; (5) t~e Allottees' a 20-year contract, but there would right of renewal extenus to a right for be no specific provision for the a block of power and energy inclusion of a renewal clause in the equivalent to those amounts new contracts. The Chief Engineer histo,rically enjoyed by the Allottees; and the Allottees again coordinated Towards the end of 1980, the 80ard (6) tile Allottees also are entitled to responses, indicating that Western's staff made simplied inflow-outflow the benefits upon renewal they now support for a 20-year contract was a analyses of the impact of the change enjoy from integrating the power into step in the right direction but that the in flood control storage space their systems; and (7) renewal terms Allottees believe that they have a requirements during the August 1 to of contracts should be (or the same statutory and contractual right to a January 1 period in order to 50 years included in the original 50-ye~r renewal, including a renewal demonstrate to the New Mexico State contracts. prOVIsion. tf'~ (?o1f~:::;2.<;;'7;tJ3:c, ~ 00 - r--~ - ~ ," agreement is to implement flood control regulations which are in accordance with the findings of the recent study by the Service and the Corps which evaluated the flood control operation of Hoover Dam. The agreement will continue in effect until revised flood control regulations are formally approved. The Board's 1979 Annual Report described some preliminary findings of the study. Because one of the changes in the regulations would require larger available flood control storage space in Colorado River Basin reservoirs in the months of September, October, November and December than was required under the old regulations, the State Engineer of New Mexico telephoned the Board's Chief Engineer and stated that it appeared to him that the change could harm the Upper Basin states. He also stated that it was his understanding that the reason for the change was for the purpose of improving hydroelectric power plant operations, which he believed was not appropriate under the priorities set forth in the "Law of the River". After discussing the change with the Corps, the Board's staff concluded Ihat the change was not made for power purposes but was to extend the storage space-building period from three months to five months so that the required January 1 storage space could be developed without having to make high volume flood control releases in the fall months that would cause damage downstream from Hoover Dam. By extending the space-building period to include the entire five-month period from August 1 to January 1, the maximum required releases were reduced from 40,000 cubic feet per second to 28,000 cubic feet per second while also providing additional operational flexibility at Hoover Dam. ~ . Engineer that the total releases from Lake Powell or Lake Mead uuring that period would not be changed because of the change in flood <:ontrol regulations and that Upper Basin interests would not be adversely affected. -~. ----.... , .----- Hoover Dam Power Contracts The Western Area Power Administration is the federal marketing agency for hydroelectric power from lhe Boulder Canyon I)rojl'cl (Hoover Dam), and has been working on criteria to guide its marketing of the power after the current 50-year /. contracts expire in May 1987. ' " Western has sought the views of . present and potential contractors for the power on its proposals for the criteria, anu helu several meetings during the year both to present its proposals and to receive comments. / . As meetings between Western and the Allottees continued during the year, Western reached conclusions on some of the key issues that were generally favorable to California; i.e., agreeing that there should be renewal of power contracts with all of the existing power contractors with new terms and conditions to be negotiated, and that th~ rates will be based on a i cost of service concept and Willi ' include accumulation of funds fo~ the Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund, as authorized by P.L. 90-537 and P.L. 93-320. As set : forth in thost. Acts, tht' Fund will Ut' ' used for future augmentation of the Colorado River and to repay the costs of salinity control projects that are allocated to the Lower Basin. The major negative position held by Western was its early insistence on a ten-year contract tNm, which was far short of the initial 50-year term of the existing contracts. At the meetings, studies were presented to the Allottees of proposed structural changes at Hoover Powerplant to uprate the plant from its current capability, which exceeds by 98 megawatts the nameplate rating of 1,340 megawatts, to about 1,800 megawatts, and a proposed feasibility study of another 500 megawatt powerplant just down~,tream from the Arizona power house. Western indicated that legislation would be required to increase the funding authorization for the Boulder Canyon Project to accommodate the uprating portion of the program and to authorize the feasibility study of the new power house, " I I