Steve Kandra, President of KWUA welcomed approximately 150 Project
irrigators to a Power Update meeting today at the Klamath County Fairgrounds.
Lyn
Long, Power Contract Committee Chairman told the audience that Klamath Water
Users (KWUA)
have been on negotiating a new power contract with PacificCorp for the past 7
months. Other members of the Power Committee are volunteers attending
non-secret meetings that anyone may attend.
The next meeting is scheduled for Monday March 7th,
The
KWUA Power committee is representing all irrigators in the
Klamath Project irrigators pay 6 mil or 6/10 of a cent per KWH. This is not unique, some farmers and ranchers in other parts of the west pay even less or nothing for their electricity to pump water; depending on their contracts with which public held, private, or government agency that produces the power. A 50 hp pump is normally a 30 KWH pump and average Project pumpers use 43,000 KWH annually if they use a 50 hp pump.
How
much power is used in the Klamath Project annually?
Average years, the Project uses 15 mega-watts (1,000 KW) per day or in
other words, the Project uses 10% of the hydropower capacity that is generated
from dams on the
KWUA’s have used a lot of their budget to hire consultants, lawyers, hydrologists, etc.
One important factor in the contract negotiations is “Credit for Value.” We need to receive credit for the value of the water we supply down river for hydropower generation year round.
John Nichols, Langell Valley Irrigation District explained the 1956 Power
Contract between PacificCorp and the Klamath Project. (See KWUA’s
KWUA seeks to continue the 50-year power arrangement between the Bureau of
Reclamation and PacifiCorp using the 1956 Power Contract, which was shaped by
Section 4e of the Power Act.
Since the new 2006 Power Contact is tied to the FERC relicensing of the dams on the
Klamath River , and it is not unheard of for the relicensing process to extend beyond
the date of the original license, FERC will give PacificCorp an annual extension. These
negotiations will take time and there might be a 1-year or more extension to the
relicensing and our 1956 Power Contract.
Mr. Nichols went on to explain how provisions of the 1955 Klamath River Compact
(authorized by Congress and the states of
standings of the Klamath Project in negotiations.
The Compact contains the following provision:
“It shall be the objective of each state, in the formulation and the execution and the granting of authority for the formulation and execution of plans for the distribution and use of the waters of the Klamath River Basin, to provide for the most efficient use of available power head and its economic integration with the distribution of water for other beneficial uses in order to secure the most economical distribution and use of water and lowest power rates which may be reasonable for irrigation and drainage pumping, including pumping from wells.” Article IV (Emphasis added).
Scott Seus, KWUA Power Committee member then took the
audience through a mock PacificCorp bill for the Tulelake Irrigation District
(TID) using tariff rates instead of contract rates.
This exercise gave the farmers and ranchers a chance to see what
additional power expenses would be added to their yearly farm operations.
Instead of the 6-mil rate now enjoyed by Klamath Project
irrigators, the current tariff rate is 6.8 cents per KWH plus demand charges.
One example a 500 hp pump on one of the
But these are examples using large electric pumps.
Farmers and ranchers in the Klamath Project use various sized pumps to
lift water from laterals and ditches for pivot systems, wheel lines, and flood
irrigation using much smaller electric pumps.
So, what would the yearly farm expense be for a 50 hp pump?
The costs would go from $140/year to $3,049/year.
A 100 hp pump: from
$1,839/year to $26,322/year. A 225
hp pump: from $2,506/year to
$37,736.
On farm pumps will only be part of the added expense to
Project irrigators if new contract negotiations fail.
Farmers will see their Operations and Maintenance (O&M) fees go up as
well. Each irrigation district n the
Project has electrical costs that must be passed on to the irrigators.
For example in Klamath Irrigation District (KID), there are the costs to
run the Miller Hill Pumping Station and the Stukel Pumps.
When these additional power expenses are added in, Klamath Project
irrigators could face a 2500% increase in farm expense.
Lyn Long again took the podium to better explain the FERC
settlement/relicensing process. KWUA
has one seat at the table during the ‘secret’ meetings and they will begin
in earnest next week in
Mr. Long also explained that KWUA has hired a consultant to
look into other forms of power generation to be owned and operated by the
Klamath Project. Hydro generation on
the C canal drop, Gerber Dam, and Keno Dam would not supply enough power for
Klamath Project needs plus cost is prohibitive.
For each megawatt produced hydroelectrically costs 1.5 million to build.
It would cost
Wind power was also looked at.
In general, the
Geo-thermal, though readily available here in the
Solar power is the one bright spot.
PacificCorp is starting a 15-year long study using 3 or 4 on farm solar
projects to power electric pumps.
KWUA is also researching the organization of a PUD – a
Public Utility District that could be an alternative to fall back on.
The Klamath Project has the legal authority to form a PUD that would have
a great deal of flexibility. But in
order for this to happen, the Project would have to convince everybody in the
basin – air base, city, hospital, etc – to also sign on.
Scott Seus again took the podium to stress that the Klamath
Project irrigators need to get smarter about water and energy conservation.
He reminded the audience about Energy Trust of Oregon and their nozzle
exchange program and free pump efficiency testing that will be available
starting
Steve Kandra then asked Dave Sabo, Bureau of Reclamation
Klamath Office to speak about the upcoming water year.
Mr. Sabo
reminded the audience that the Bureau has been a partner with farmers for 100
years here in the
The Klamath Project “power rate is embedded in the
“The possible extension of the FERC license agreement
must contain the power contract,” though PacificCorp is saying no” at this
time. The FERC relicensing could
extend 10 years or more (Sabo has seen the same during other FERC relicensing)
because much more info, data, NEPA, etc must be developed.
Mr. Sabo then went on to talk about the 2005 water supply.
“It’s dry out there and current conditions are close to those we saw
in 2001.” The March 1 forecast
expects only 250,000 cfs of inflow into
He went on to say, “We’ll have as much delivery as we
can this year.” “The East side
(Gerber,
Sabo was asked about the Bureau’s Draft Undepleted Flow
Study and what the flows from Keno would be this summer without the Projects
stored water. Sabo stated,
“Without the Project in place and with these snow pack conditions, we would
expect to see flows in the
Other handouts from the meeting:
Why The Klamath Project Receives A Reasonable Power Rate
Klamath Water Users Association Electrical Power Brief
Comment: All content copyright Klamath Bucket Brigade, Inc. 2003 - 2005.
Please direct your questions and comments about this website to the Klamath
Bucket Brigade office. Contact Us Thank you.