| OCR Text |
Show petition for many years, the rates charged by private companies to rural cooperatives are 0.61 cent in Washington, 0.80 cent in Oregon, and 0.77 cent in California. Reductions Reflect Competition The following table shows the average cost of power to cooperatives year by year since 1941 for Texas and Oklahoma, and for Colorado and a combined group of Northeastern States. In Texas and Oklahoma public competition was present; in the other States it was absent. TABLE 3.-Cost of wholesale electric power to rural electric cooperatives [Cents per kilowatt hour] Year Texas1 OklahomaJ Colorado' Combined: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland * 1941______ .- 1.03 1.16 1.32 1.25 1942...... .86 .95 1.22 1.19 1943 .85 .86 .87 .94 1.19 1.25 1.22 1.34 1944 1945______ .. .80 .88 1.24 1.25 1946__...... .69 .76 1.25 1.22 1947......... .66 .73 1.23 1.22 1948 .66 .71 1.20 1.28 1949 .63 .66 1.19 1.35 1950 .56 .58 1.32 1.47 i Reduction due to Brazos River Transmission Electric Cooperative and Southwestern Power Administration. »Reduction due to Southwestern Power Administration and Grand River Dam Authority. • No competition. ' No competition. No electric cooperatives in New York during first 3 years. Souhce: Rural Electrification Administration. The table shows that in Texas and Oklahoma, where competition was present, the charges to rural electric cooperatives have been practically halved in the 10-year period. In contrast, in Colorado and the northeastern group of States, where there has been no competition, the charges to such cooperatives have remained stationary or even increased. As a result, cooperatives in Colorado and the Northeastern States are paying more than twice as much for their power as are those in Oklahoma and Texas. Texas and Oklahoma are in the general region in which the Southwestern Power Administration of the Department of the Interior has been estab- lished to market hydroelectric power from Federal multiple-purpose programs in the Arkansas, White, and Red Rivers. Other States in the re- gion are Arkansas, Louisiana, and western Mis- sissippi. In 1941 the cost of power in this region was between 1.0 and 1.2 cents per kilowatt hour. As the Southwestern Power Administration got under way, however, the companies' rates became lower and lower until they presently average be- tween 0.55 and 0.60 cents, or about half the original level. But the effective competition need not come only from Federal river basin programs. For in some areas, State authorities and Rural Electri- fication Administration generating plants have played an important part. Thus in central Texas it was the advent of the Brazos River Conservation and Reclamation District, set up by the State, marketing power from the Morris Sheppard Dam through the Brazos River Transmission Cooperative, which brought rates tumbling from somewhat over 1.0 cent to about half that amount. In other words, the Texas Power & Light Co., as a result of com- petition, reduced wholesale rates to cooperatives by about 50 percent. In South Carolina, where power costs averaged about 1.25 cents in 1941, it was the State-con- stituted South Carolina Public Service Authority, operating the Santee Cooper project financed by Federal loan and grant, which brought rates down to little over half that level. In Mississippi, REA-financed cooperative generating plants played an important part. In fact, in a con- siderable number of States the suggestion that such plants might be constructed proved sufficient to bring about material reductions in private com- pany rates to rural electric cooperatives. In order to eliminate the effects of political and other influences which frequently cause a company to give one class of customers low rates at the expense of higher rates for another, a study was prepared showing for each State a composite rank in terms of its electric charges for all classes of consumption ranging from residential use of 911609-5C -18 231 |
