My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08244
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08244
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:47:27 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:50:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8147
Description
Arkansas River Basin - Gunnison-Arkansas Project
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
1/1/1954
Author
Unknown
Title
Gunnison-Arkansas Project - Reply to Questionnaire from John P Saylor to Secretary of the Interior - RE HR 236
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.
/
68
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 />00170 <br /> <br />A special type of repayment eontract is needed for the Fryingpan- <br />Arkansas Project not onlJ' because of its complexity, but to provide an <br />equitable basis for 10ne-terQ operations. The Government vdll actually <br />have triple security for repa)T.lont of the irrigation obligation after <br />the power and municipal costs are repaid. It will then receive revenues <br />from irrigation, pOVler, and r.mnicipal nater and still have features vr.ith <br />long useful lives. <br /> <br />10.(c) Question - Is it not true"thnt the Federal Govornoent and <br />the taxpayers would have to bear a greatly increased cost in meeting <br />interest on this investment under such prolonged defermcnt in starting <br />repayment? <br /> <br />Answer - There is no doubt that prolongatien of repayment also means <br />prolongation of interest cost. ConversGl}y, defonncnt of an investrlent <br />also means loss of benefits. Tho question of interest can becone quite <br />involved. In the case of irrigation investnent, interest is an econonic <br />cost and not a project financial cest because such investnents are <br />interest-free by direction of the Congress. In this respect irrigatien II <br />projects are in the same categery a~ flood contrel projects, or any \' <br />others, constructcd for thc national welfare. However, in order to pre- ! <br />sent as true a picture as PRssible, interest is considered as an expense <br />in the economic analysis. lhat analysis discloses that for the project <br />as a whole, the annual benefits vdll exceed the annual costs. ThUS, <br />although interest is a factor to be considered from the fiational viev~oint <br />it is not of such magnitude that it ir.1pairs the feasibility of the project. <br /> <br />10.Cd) <br />the Federal <br />in starting <br /> <br />Que~tion - What would be thc <br />Government and the taxpayers, <br />repayment? <br /> <br />additional cost of interest to <br />res ul ting from such defeI'lilGnt <br /> <br />Answer - Interest on the unpaid balance of irrigation investment to <br />be repaid by pm1er and municipal r~ter at the rate of 2~ percent annually <br />v~ld amount to C47,913,000 between payout year 1 and the year in vmich <br />repayment is started by those two functions. It should be realized that <br />this total interest cost is offset by benefits which Vlould be foregone <br />\-!i. thout the inVBstl7lent. Derivation of the interest is as follows: <br /> <br />Irrigation plant paid by pO'l:cr revenue: <br />$27,847,000 2 21% for 53 ycnrs _ . . . <br />Irrigation plant paid by municipnl "~tcr: <br />~6,085,ooo G 2}% for 64 years . . . <br /> <br />. . <br /> <br />. ;i36,897,000 <br />. 11,016,000 <br /> <br />. . . <br /> <br />Total. . . . . . . <br /> <br />. .. . . <br /> <br />. . . . . . . (~!17,913,000 <br /> <br />- 12 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.