United States of America Federal Power Commission Decision - Arizona Power Authority, Project No. 2248

Document: United States of America Federal Power Commission, Decision, Arizona Power Authority, Projection No. 2248, Issued September 10, 1962, page 32-32- The Staff contends that if costs were properly based on a comparative basis, that is to say, if the same rate of interest were applied in each instance the additional power which the City's proposed potential project could produce over that which would be produced by the proposed Marble Canyon project could be obtained at less cost from steam-electric plants. The Staff has included in its brief, for purposes of illustration, a tabulation reflecting an incremental comparison of the Marble-Kanab project over the Marble Canyon project which shows incremental annual savings of hydro over steam ($1,000) and incremental benefits-cost ratios as follows: Cost of Money Incremental Annual Savings-Hydro over Steam - $1,000 Benefits-Cost Ratio for Increment 25 (-) 178 0.99 30 (-) 3,350 0.91 40 (-) 10,488 0.78 50 (-) 18,618 0.68 These figures indicate that assuming that the Marble-Kanab project could be constructed at the cost claimed by the City and that the cost of the Boulder Line is property allocated between Hoover Power Plant and Kanab Creek, the additional power which the City's plan could produce over that which could be produced at the Marble Canyon project, could be so produced at less cost by steam-electric plants. Effect on National Park As has been seen, about five miles of the Marble-Kanab tunnel would lie under the Grand Canyon National Park and the remainder would be located under and within the Kainbab National Forest. The Kanab Creek reservoir and power plant would be outside the Park but in close proximity to it. It is contemplated by the City's plan that the Marble Canyon plant would utilize a planned flow of 1,000 cubic feet per second (about 800,000 acre-feet a year) and this flow would continue down to "maintain fish life and the scenic attractions of the Grand Canyon National Park." The remainder, estimated at about 8,265,000 acre-feet a year would bypass that portion of the Colorado lying in the National Park and above Kanab Creek. Parenthetically it might here be said that no study has been made as to whether that flow would handle the sediment from the Little Colorado River. The flow of 1,000 cubic feet per second was selected, the City's testimony shows, because it was thought that "it would be ample to give a good appearance to the river, and also would not affect the width of the river greatly at most points where it could be seen from the canyon rim, or from the trails." That this would be the result is disputed by the testimony of the Director of the National Park Service more particularly referred to below.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,311,744 byte