| OCR Text |
Show through proposed Federal reservoirs at the Tails Greek, !Leesburg, Patlay, Howell Mill Shoals, and Fort Williams Shoals sites, the Lay, Mitchell, and Jordan Reservoirs of the Alabama Power Co., and finally through the planned Federal Jones Bluff and Millers Ferry plants below Montgomery. Big Canoe water would empty into the proposed Fed- eral Terrapin Creek Reservoir, and then, in turn, into Patlay Reservoir and downstream through the above listed reservoirs below Patlay. Yellowleaf would empty into Fort Williams Shoals Reservoir and pass through the others downstream. Weo- gufka would empty into the Alabama Power Co. Mitchell Reservoir and then through the chain of reservoirs downstream. Due to low head at these four sites, plants at these locations could not produce enough energy to justify the cost of installing generating facilities. However, the regulated flow obtained by the use of the gross storages of those reservoirs, when directed over the higher head downstream plants, both Federal and private, would provide enough addi- tional power value to justify the provision of up- stream storage. The small drainage areas involved, with flows almost directly into lower reservoirs, pre- clude th.e use of these storages for flood control. No general policy has been established favoring Federal construction or participation in the con- struction of projects for hydroelectric power alone. However, the Congress has authorized one dam almost exclusively for power production in the Columbia River Basin and steam plants for the Tennessee Valley Authority. Conclusions The extent to which the Federal Government, as contrasted with local public or private interests, should participate in the construction and operation of generating facilities primarily for hydroelectric generation, should be decided on the following bases: (1) The desirability of maintaining competing sources o»f power in the region. (2) The extent to which Federal development, with lower fixed charges, will permit more complete use of th_e water power resources of the basin. (3) The relation of the proposed project to other facilities in the program of basin development. Where a, given agency, whether public or private, has developed a key project, such as an important storage ireservoir, it usually has been considered logical for the same agency to develop closely associated power sites. (4) The relative efficiency in resource use undei plans proposed by different agencies, where more than one proposal is made. (5) The extent to which the projects under con- sideration form integral parts of a comprehensive basin program for which the Federal Governmeni is assuming responsibility. 4. A Pooled Account in Comprehensive Develop- ment The Problem The place of a pooled account in electric powei planning, construction, and operation in the basin, The Situation The hydroelectric plants included in the Corps of Engineers plan have been planned and evaluated for integrated operation in the basin system. Thus, of the 27 hydroelectric power plants included in the basin-wide plan, only eight are economically jus- tified as individual plants by the benefits produced at the site. These are Millers Ferry, Jones Bluff: Howell Mills Shoals, Fort William Shoals, Patlay, Leesburg, Little River, and Crooked Creek. Four plants, Ellijay, Big Canoe, Yellowleaf, and Weo- gufka, are proposed for power storage only with- out generating equipment at the site. These would have no economic value until downstream plants had been provided to use the regulated flow they would provide. However, if the plants are pro- vided in their proper sequence and if account is taken of the added values they bring to the system, all but five become economically justified. Ellijay, Jacks River, Wallahatchie, Weogufka, and Yellowleaf Reservoirs have been included in the plan even though they do not now promise in- cremental economic justification on the assumption that changing construction costs and power values may make them economically feasible at some later time. Conversely, such changes in conditions may eliminate some of the projects now proposed. The Corps of Engineers does not intend, under present law and policy, to recommend for actual construc- tion any plants not incrementally justified at that time. As power plants are added to the system, it is anticipated that the energy generated will be fed into a common transmission network which will interconnect these plants as well as the privately 550 |
