{"AIPUUID":[{"label":"AIP UUID","value":"b4209d6b-12b8-410a-b5ab-1d3377654fc3","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#identifierAIP","classmap":"oc:DigitalPreservation","property":"oc:identifierAIP"},"iri":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#identifierAIP","explain":"UBC Open Collections Metadata Components; Local Field; Refers to the Archival Information Package identifier generated by Archivematica. This serves as a link between CONTENTdm and Archivematica."}],"AggregatedSourceRepository":[{"label":"Aggregated Source Repository","value":"CONTENTdm","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/dataProvider","classmap":"ore:Aggregation","property":"edm:dataProvider"},"iri":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/dataProvider","explain":"A Europeana Data Model Property; The name or identifier of the organization who contributes data indirectly to an aggregation service (e.g. Europeana)"}],"AlternateTitle":[{"label":"Alternate Title ","value":"RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE.","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/alternative","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:alternative"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/alternative","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; An alternative name for the resource.; Note - the distinction between titles and alternative titles is resource-specific."}],"CatalogueRecord":[{"label":"Catalogue Record","value":"http:\/\/resolve.library.ubc.ca\/cgi-bin\/catsearch?bid=1198198","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/isReferencedBy","classmap":"edm:ProvidedCHO","property":"dcterms:isReferencedBy"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/isReferencedBy","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource."}],"Collection":[{"label":"Collection","value":"Sessional Papers of the Province of British Columbia","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/isPartOf","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:isPartOf"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/isPartOf","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included."}],"Creator":[{"label":"Creator","value":"British Columbia. Legislative Assembly","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/creator","classmap":"dpla:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:creator"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/creator","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; An entity primarily responsible for making the resource.; Examples of a Contributor include a person, an organization, or a service."}],"DateAvailable":[{"label":"Date Available","value":"2016","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","classmap":"edm:WebResource","property":"dcterms:issued"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; Date of formal issuance (e.g., publication) of the resource."}],"DateIssued":[{"label":"Date Issued","value":"[1945]","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","classmap":"oc:SourceResource","property":"dcterms:issued"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","explain":"A Dublin Core Terms Property; Date of formal issuance (e.g., publication) of the resource."}],"DigitalResourceOriginalRecord":[{"label":"Digital Resource Original Record","value":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/collections\/bcsessional\/items\/1.0319189\/source.json","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/aggregatedCHO","classmap":"ore:Aggregation","property":"edm:aggregatedCHO"},"iri":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/aggregatedCHO","explain":"A Europeana Data Model Property; The identifier of the source object, e.g. the Mona Lisa itself. This could be a full linked open date URI or an internal identifier"}],"FileFormat":[{"label":"File Format","value":"application\/pdf","attrs":{"lang":"en","ns":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/elements\/1.1\/format","classmap":"edm:WebResource","property":"dc:format"},"iri":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/elements\/1.1\/format","explain":"A Dublin Core Elements Property; The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource.; Examples of dimensions include size and duration. Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as the list of Internet Media Types [MIME]."}],"FullText":[{"label":"Full Text","value":" PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA\nReport\nof the\nRural Electrification Committee\nAs of January, 1945\nPRINTED by\nAUTHORITY OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.\nVICTORIA, B.C.:\nPrinted by Charles F. Banfield, Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty.\n1945. Rural Electrification Committee,\nVictoria, B.C., January 16th, 1945.\nThe Hon. John Hart,\nPremier, Parliament Buildings.\nSir,\u2014We beg to submit our final report on the extension of rural electrification\nin the Province. The further studies indicated as necessary in the letter of submittal\nwith our Progress Report have been completed and we trust that all the subjects set out\nin your instructions to us are now fully covered. Our further studies do not indicate\nthat any changes are necessary in the findings arrived at in our Progress Report.\nIn general, as compared with other Provinces in Canada, a high percentage of our\nrural population is supplied with electricity, the use of which is mainly confined to\nlighting purposes. Except in those areas supplied by some of the larger companies,\nthe rates are so high that any more extensive and varied use of electricity can not be\nexpected without radical changes in the organization of the industry.\nIt has become increasingly clear that rates which will permit the use of electricity\nother than for lighting can only be made possible if rural service is combined in some\nway with urban and suburban service. It is also clear that unless other uses are\ndeveloped the rates for electric service cannot be materially reduced.\nThe assistance of the various organizations mentioned in our Progress Report has\nbeen continued throughout and is again gratefully acknowledged.\nRespectfully submitted.\nRURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE.\nW. A. Carrothers, Chairman.\nJ. C. MacDonald, Member.\nE. Davis, Member. AUTHORIZATION.\nORDER IN COUNCIL No. 560.\nApproved and ordered this 19th day of April, a.d. 1943.\nW. C. WOODWARD,\nLieutenant-Governor.\nAT THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL CHAMBER, VICTORIA.\nTo His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor in Council:\nThe undersigned has the honour to report:\u2014\nThat, in order to secure reliable information in connection with the electrification\nof rural areas, it is deemed necessary and expedient to appoint a committee with powers\nto survey and report upon the extent and condition of electrical services in the Province,\nwith particular reference to the servicing of rural areas.\nThat, the said committee be instructed to survey and report upon the following\nsubjects:\u2014\u2022\n1. Rural areas in which electrical service is now available:\u2014\n(a.) The source of electrical energy and the terms and conditions under which\nthe service is furnished:\n(b.) Numbers of consumers presently served:\n(c.) Numbers of potential consumers not presently served and the reason\ntherefor:\n(d.) Methods of improving the supply and availability of electrical service.\n2. Rural areas in which electrical service is not now available:\u2014\n(a.) Number of potential consumers:\n(6.) Potential sources of electrical energy for such rural areas:\n(c.) Proposed methods of furnishing service.\n3. The feasibility of supplying numbers of presently isolated communities from\n\" grid \" transmission systems and central production plants.\n4. Preliminary estimates of the capital cost of works proposed for increasing\nthe supply and availability of electrical service.\n5. Estimated rates under which electrical service may be furnished under proposed\nplan.\n6. The financial problems involved in furnishing electrical service, including:\u2014\n(a.) Whether financing of extension projects can be handled by existing\nutilities:\n(&.) Whether rates pursuant to extensions could be carried by new consumers\nwithout concurrently increasing unduly costs to existing consumers:\n(c.) If projects cannot be on a self-sustaining basis, how could they be\nfinanced?\n7. Any other technical and economic information in respect to rural electrification\nwithin the Province.\nAnd to recommend:\u2014\nThat a committee of three be appointed for the aforesaid purpose, to be composed\nof Dr. W. A. Carrothers, chairman; Major J. C. MacDonald, member, and E. Davis,\nmember.\nThat the necessary and incidental expenses in connection with this survey, for\nthe fiscal year 1943-44, be charged to Vote 110a of the Department of Lands.\nDated this 13th day of April, a.d. 1943.\nJOHN HART,\nMinister of Finance.\nApproved this 13th day of April, a.d. 1943.\nJOHN HART,\nPresiding Member of the Executive Council. INDEX.\nPage.\nSummary of Findings 9\nMethod of Treatment\u2014\u25a0\n1. Rural areas in which electrical service is now available 11\n(a.) The source of electrical energy and the terms and conditions under\nwhich the service is furnished 12\n(6.) Numbers of consumers presently served 16\n(c.) Numbers of potential consumers not presently served and the\nreason therefor 17\n(d.) Methods of improving the supply and availability of electrical\nservice 20\n2. Rural areas in which electrical service is not now available 26\n(a.) Number of potential consumers 27\n(6.) Potential sources of electrical energy for such rural areas 27\n(c.) Proposed methods of furnishing service 29\n3. The feasibility of supplying numbers of presently isolated communities from\n\" grid \" transmission systems and central production plants 31\n4. Preliminary estimates of the capital cost of works proposed for increasing\nthe supply and availability of electrical service 32\n5. Estimated rates under which electrical service may be furnished under\nproposed plan 37\n6. The financial problems involved in furnishing electrical service:\n(a.) Whether financing of extension projects can be handled by existing\nutilities 39\n(6.) Whether rates pursuant to extensions could be carried by new consumers without concurrently increasing unduly costs to existing\nconsumers 40\n(c.) If projects cannot be on a self-sustaining basis, how could they be\nfinanced? 41\n7. Other technical and economic information in respect to rural electrification\nwithin the Province 42\nResume 44 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS.\n(As set out in the Progress Report.)\n1. British Columbia is a close second to Ontario in percentage of farms to which\nelectrical service is available\u201435.8 per cent, to 37 per cent.\n2. Except on the Lower Mainland (including the Fraser Valley), the cost of electric\nservice throughout the rural areas is relatively high, and quality of service is relatively\npoor.\n3. The average use in rural areas is relatively low.\n4. Average use and cost of service are closely interdependent.\n5. Sixty-five separate organizations are engaged in providing central station service in the Province.\n6. For statistical purposes service in the Province may be divided into 112 distribution systems.\n7. There are 206,723 customers of electric service in the Province, of whom 38,227\nmay be classified as rural.\n8. Many of these rural customers could not be served at existing rates but for\ntheir proximity to, and assistance from, more densely populated areas.\n9. Within practical distribution distances from central stations there are approximately 10,000 potential customers who might be served with central station energy.\n10. Few, if any, of these potential consumers can sustain separate enterprises at\nrates that will induce them to take service.\n11. Farm electrification will have to be developed by extensions from the local\ncentres of population, some of which are quite small.\n12. The limit of extension from such centres depends on the size of and use in\nsuch centres and on the suitability of the local supplying organizations.\n13. A number of the organizations providing service have insufficient capacity for\na material extension and have not the financial resources to provide additional capacity.\n14. The cost of administration of the industry as at present constituted is unduly\nhigh and is an important factor in the cost of service.\n15. Taxation (Dominion taxes alone approximate 20 per cent, of revenue) is an\nimportant factor in the cost of service.\n16. The practice of some municipalities of collecting electric revenues in excess of\ncost of service is a definite hindrance to increased use and consequent reduction of unit\ncosts.\n17. The average charge per kilowatt-hour in the Province under municipally\noperated systems is higher than under those operated by private companies and\nindustrial organizations.\n18. The undeveloped water-power of the Province is not an important factor in\nthe extension of rural electrification.\n19. The sparsity and distribution of population in the Province makes a general\nProvincial grid system impractical.\n20. No material extension of rural electrification can be made on a self-sustaining\nbasis without a reorganization of the central station industry. V 10 FINAL REPORT.\nMETHOD OF TREATMENT.\nIn this report the sequence of the subjects set out in the Order in Council appointing the Committee is rigidly followed and the questions in that Order are answered\nas fully as the information before the Committee permits. The numbering of the subjects as set out in the Order is followed in the chapters of the report. In reporting on\n\" Rural areas in which electrical service is now available \" the utilities are divided into\nfour groups: 1, 2, 3, and 4, based on size and ownership, for more convenient analysis.\nUnder \" Proposed methods of furnishing service \" (2 (c)), the areas are regrouped as\nI., II., III., and IV.\nThe calculations of rates and bills for Vancouver Island South in this Report are\nbased on the rates in effect prior to the reduction made on January 1st, 1945. Final Report, Rural Electrification Committee.\n1. RURAL AREAS IN WHICH ELECTRICAL SERVICE\nIS NOW AVAILABLE.\nIt has been pointed out in the Progress Report of this Committee of January 24th,\n1944, page 20, that \"Rural electrification is not a distinct brand of utility business;\nit is the outgrowth of the central station industry\u2014the widening of the areas to which\ncertain average costs are applied.\" Extensive rural communities adjacent to cities or\ntowns with good electrical service can be supplied much more economically than isolated\ncommunities far removed from an efficient urban utility. The availability of service\nin rural areas depends in large measure upon their location in respect to urban centres.\nIf the latter have adequate and efficient service it is usually possible to extend the distribution systems into the rural areas. If, however, the towns are too small to permit\nthe development of an efficient urban utility neither the townspeople nor their rural\nneighbours will have available electrical service in accordance with modern standards.\nThere is only one community in British Columbia where an electric utility has been\nbuilt and operated solely for a rural community. There are several rural areas served\nby extensions of the city systems; several which could be served by extensions of the\ncity or suburban systems; and several city and suburban systems which are incapable\nof adequate service within their own boundaries. If the rural electrical service is to\nbe self-sustaining it must be conditional upon urban and suburban service. It is a\nsimple matter to supply electricity to fifty farms on the borders of a city of 100,000\npopulation; it is a much more difficult matter to supply fifty farms surrounding a\ntown with 2,000 population. Thus it is found, in British Columbia as elsewhere, that\nthose rural areas adjacent to larger cities and towns enjoy a higher standard of service\nthan those which are isolated or those near small towns. Statistics on service in rural\nareas will have more meaning, therefore, if accompanied by corresponding statistics\non the associated urban services.\nThere are now five extensive areas\u2014later referred to in Group 1\u2014-served by\nprivately-owned utilities in which electricity may be said to be available to all who can\nmeet the conditions of service and pay the current rates. The degree of availability\nvaries. The fact that a resident, who can afford to contribute $100, can obtain electric\nlighting service for 12 cents per K.W.H. does not make electrical energy available to\nthe general public. Availability, according to modern standards of service, must be\ngeneral and at the option of the subscriber. The service must be reliable and adequate\nand it must be offered at rates which will permit the widest possible uses.\nWhere electrical service is furnished its efficiency and rates, including conditions\nof service, will be reflected in the average consumption and the average K.W.H. cost\nto the consumers. Each of the five important areas above mentioned receive special\nconsideration in this report on rural electrification. This is because they contain\n168,390 consumers out of a total of 210,000 for the whole Province, and 6,356 potential\nrural consumers out of a total of some 10,000 who might be included in a rural\nelectrification plan.\nOutside these five areas there are numerous smaller groups in rural communities\nadjacent to other privately-owned and municipally-owned plants. This report contains\nstatistics relating to these under the heading \" Other Electrical Service Areas.\"\nThe survey of the electrical services in the Province has clearly indicated two\nimportant facts:\u2014\n(1.) The practical impossibility of drawing a line between \" rural electrification \" and city and suburban electrification. Some of the distribution\n11 V 12 FINAL REPORT.\nsystems in cities and towns have so few consumers that furnishing\nservice is attended by difficulties equal to those in rural areas. On the\nother hand, an extensive rural area, such as the Fraser Valley, contains\na number of sizeable towns which tend to increase the average density\nof population for the whole area, thereby simplifying the problem of\ndistribution. It is therefore, impracticable and misleading to attempt\nany rigid classification of \" rural \" areas.\n(2.) The phrase \"areas in which electrical service is now available\" can be\napplied only with qualifications. A certain degree of electrical service\nis now \" available \" to 209,738 customers of all classes. The statistics\ncontained in the Tables 3 and 4 reflect something of the degree of\navailability. They indicate that in three out of the five extensive rural\nareas served by privately-owned utilities the average use of electricity\nis low and the average unit costs to consumers is high. The availability\nis conditional upon the consumers' ability to pay these charges. For the\none outstanding non-competitive use of electricity, lighting, it is available; for the numerous competitive uses of electricity\u2014cooking, auxiliary\nheating, refrigeration, etc.\u2014it is available to those who can afford it.\nIt is upon the development of the competitive uses that volume production\nand low unit costs depend.\nSubject to the foregoing qualification, statistics have been prepared relating to\nelectrical service in four areas where it is now available, namely:\u2014 consumers.\nGroup 1. Five large areas supplied by privately-owned utilities 169,390\nGroup 2. Other towns and rural areas where service is furnished by privately-owned utilities 15,874\nGroup 3. Areas where service is furnished by municipally-\nowned utilities 22,180\nGroup 4. Areas where service is furnished by industries 2,294\n209,738\n(a.) The Source op Electrical Energy and the Terms and Conditions\nunder which the Service is furnished.\nGroup 1.\n(i.) In the Lower Fraser Valley, including Mission, Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows,\nSurrey, Langley, Delta, Matsqui, Abbotsford, Sumas, Chilliwack City and Municipality,\nKent, Dewdney, and Nicomen, service is furnished by the British Columbia Electric\nRailway Company and its associated and subsidiary companies over the transmission\nnetwork which supplies Vancouver, University of British Columbia lands, Burnaby,\nBarnet, North Vancouver, West Vancouver, Richmond, New Westminster, loco,\nCoquitlam, Port Coquitlam, and Port Moody. The energy is generated by the following\nplants:\u2014\nHydro-electric\u2014 k.v.a. k.v.a.\nBuntzen No. 1 21,000\nBuntzen No. 2 26,700\nAlouette 10,000\nStave Falls 65,625\nRuskin 88,000\nTotal 211,325\nSteam-electric\u2014\nVancouver plant 20,130\nTotal 231,455 RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 13\nThe B.C. Electric companies have experienced a shortage of power for the whole\nLower Mainland area during the past summer which has been aggravated by low-water\nconditions. Additional power installations will be dictated by the needs of the metropolitan area of Vancouver and the energy requirements for all the rural areas in\nthe Fraser Valley will be incidental.\nThe Lower Fraser Valley area includes several fair-sized cities and towns, amongst\nothers Chilliwack, Abbotsford, Mission, and Langley. It can hardly be classified as\na rural distribution area, but the rates and conditions of service are the same throughout. For domestic service the rates are:\u2014\nThe first 30 K.W.H. per month per 1,000 square\nfeet of floor area 5 cents per K.W.H.\nThe next 200 K.W.H. per month 2 cents per K.W.H.\nAll consumption per month over 230 K.W.H 1 cent per K.W.H.\nMinimum monthly bill, 50 cents.\nThis is the same rate as that charged in the City of Vancouver except that the first\n30 K.W.H. per month per 1,000 square feet of floor area are charged at 1 cent per\nK.W.H. more.\nThe conditions under which service is extended in all the Lower Mainland area\nrequire a guaranteed annual revenue for each of the first four years equal to 25 per cent,\nof the cost of installation. That is, if the cost of an extension to one consumer is $300\nthe Company require the consumer to guarantee for four years a revenue of 25 per cent,\nof $300 or $75 per year. Energy to this value may, of course, be used by the consumer,\n(ii.) The Okanagan district from Sicamous to Winfield and Okanagan Centre,\nincluding Salmon Arm, Enderby, Armstrong, Vernon, Coldstream, Okanagan Landing,\nLumby, Lavington, and Oyama, is served by the West Canadian Hydro Electric\nCorporation, Limited, with energy produced at its Shuswap Falls 6,500-K.V.A. hydro\nplant. Approximately one-third the present annual output of this plant is delivered\nunder a short-term contract to West Kootenay Power and Light Company at Kelowna.\nThere is, therefore, considerable capacity available for further distribution in the area.\nThe service is reliable, but, as the whole operation is limited to about 4,000 subscribers over a wide area, the per customer cost for financing and necessary administration tends to high rates and consequently low average consumption.\nThe rate structure is the same for all consumers, but monthly bills are subject to\n20 per cent, discount in Vernon and 10 per cent, elsewhere.\nThe domestic lighting rate follows:\u2014\nFirst 30 K.W.H. per month at 12 cents per K.W.H.\nNext 30 K.W.H. per month at 10 cents per K.W.H.\nOver 60 K.W.H. per month at 5 cents per K.W.H.\nMinimum monthly bill $1 in Vernon, Armstrong, Enderby, and Salmon Arm;\n$2 elsewhere.\nDiscount: Vernon, 20 per cent.; elsewhere, 10 per cent.\nThere is an optional combination domestic rate applicable to higher consumptions\nas follows:\u2014\nFirst 30 K.W.H. per month at 10 cents.\nNext 60 K.W.H. per month at 3 cents.\nNext 100 K.W.H. per month at 2V2 cents.\nOver 190 K.W.H. per month at V-\/2 cents.\nMinimum bill, $3.\nDiscount; Vernon, 20 per cent.; elsewhere, 10 per cent. V 14 FINAL REPORT.\nService installations are made on the basis of a capital expenditure equal to\n36 times the minimum monthly bill. Thus for domestic lighting service outside\nthe cities of Vernon, Armstrong, Enderby, and Salmon Arm, the corporation will\nexpend 36 times the $2 minimum monthly bill for this class of service, or $72. The\nsubscriber pays any excess. For a combination service with a $3 minimum monthly\nbill the corporation will expend $108.\n(iii.) There are twenty-one rural communities served by the West Kootenay Power\nand Light Company, Limited, namely: Benvoulin, Black Mountain, etc.; Bonnington,\nSouth Slocan; Casino; Castlegar, Robson; Crescent Valley; Creston, Wynndel, Erick-\nson; Fruitvale; Grand Forks (rural), Cascade, Laurier; Greenwood; Hedley, Ellison;\nKaleden; Keremeos; Kinnaird; Naramata; Okanagan Mission; Oliver; Osoyoos;\nSalmo; Sheep Creek; Waneta; Ymir.\nThe Creston, Wynndel, Erickson distribution system is supplied from the Company's Goat River hydro-electric plant of 825-K.V.A. capacity.\nEnergy for the other distribution areas is generated at the Company's hydroelectric plants on Kootenay River:\u2014 k.v.a.\nNo. 1. Lower Bonnington 35,000\nNo. 2. Upper Bonnington 64,000\nNo. 3. South Slocan 52,500\nNo. 4. Corra Linn 45,000\nBrilliant 64,000\n260,500\nOver 97 per cent, of the output of these plants is used by Consolidated Mining and\nSmelting Company, Limited, at Trail.\nThe West Kootenay distributes electricity in Trail and Rossland and supplies\nenergy wholesale to the cities of Penticton, Summerland, and Kelowna. It also supplies\nenergy for distribution by the Princeton Power and Light Company. The Company's\n60,000-volt transmission-line from the Kootenay plants is connected with the West\nCanadian Hydro Electric Corporation's system near Kelowna and with the Granby\nConsolidated Mining, Smelting, and Power Company at Allenby.\nWest Kootenay Power and Light Company has ample power supply for its distribution systems and the service is reliable.\nThe domestic rate structure is not uniform. In the twenty-one distribution areas\nthe first block varies from 20 to 100 K.W.H. and the rate range is 10 to 14 cents\nper K.W.H. In some cases there is a second block of from 25 to 100 K.W.H. at rates\nof 3 to 10 cents per K.W.H. The lowest rate applying to the highest consumption is\n4 cents per K.W.H. In all but one district the monthly bills are subject to 10 per cent,\ndiscount for prompt payment. The minimum monthly charge is from $1 to $2.50.\n(iv.) Vancouver Island, south of the Cowichan Land District, is now served by\nthe British Columbia Electric Railway Company, Limited, and its associated and\nsubsidiary companies. This district includes the City of Victoria, Esquimalt, Oak Bay,\nand Saanich. All consumers within a 3-mile radius of Victoria City Hall are supplied\nunder City of Victoria rates. Cobble Hill, Mill Bay, Shawnigan Lake, and Sooke are\nsupplied at rates which result in a monthly charge 80 cents higher than in Victoria for\nconsumptions of 40 or more K.W.H. In other districts nearer Victoria the monthly\ncharge is only 60 cents higher than in the city. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 15\nEnergy is supplied from the following plants:\u2014\nHydro-electric\u2014 k.v.a. k.v.a.\nJordan River 27,000\nDiversion (dam) plant 1,875\nGoldstream 2,220\nTotal 31,095\nSteam-electric\u2014\nBrentwood 13,000\nTotal 44,095\nThe Company delivers energy at Duncan for distribution by Nanaimo-Duncan\nUtilities.\nIn the past year it has been necessary to restrict the use of electricity in the\nSouthern Vancouver Island area due to power shortage which has been aggravated by\nlow water run-off and war-time scarcity of fuel for the Brentwood steam plant.\nThe service has become generally available in rural areas in Southern Vancouver\nIsland; it is reliable and available to all who can meet the conditions of service. The\nsubscriber must guarantee for five years an annual revenue equal to 25 per cent, of\nthe capital cost of the extension.\n(v.) Vancouver Island Centre, from the southern boundary of Cowichan Land\nDistrict to Craig's Crossing, including Duncan and Nanaimo, is served by Nanaimo-\nDuncan Utilities, Limited.\nFrom Craig's Crossing to Dashwood, including Parksville and Qualicum Beach,\nthe National Utilities Corporation, Limited (a subsidiary of B.C. Electric Railway\nCompany, Limited), operates a distribution system.\nThe Jordan River and Brentwood plants of B.C. Electric's Vancouver Island Power\nCompany deliver 80 per cent, of the energy for this area over a 60,000-volt transmission-line to Duncan. The Nanaimo-Duncan Utilities operates 60,000-volt transmission\nfrom Duncan to Nanaimo, and sells energy to the City of Ladysmith for distribution\nby the latter. The Company delivers energy at Craig's Crossing, a few miles above\nNanaimo, to National Utilities Corporation for distribution in Parksville and Qualicum.\nThe total energy purchased in 1942 by Nanaimo-Duncan from the B.C. Electric\ncompanies was 19,471,700 K.W.H.\nThe Company has a small hydro-electric plant, 1,225 K.V.A., at Nanaimo which\ngenerated 4,986,000 K.W.H. in 1942, and a Diesel engine plant, 295 K.V.A., at Duncan,\nwhich generated 9,765 K.W.H. in 1942.\nService has been widely distributed by the Company over the rural areas adjacent\nto and between Duncan and Nanaimo, as well as on Saltspring Island. The Company\nreports only a small number of unconnected rural premises.\nThe service has been reliable but expensive both in the cities and rural areas.\nThis Company is faced with the necessity of obtaining a source of power for\nNanaimo and Duncan and the intervening rural areas. The B.C. Electric companies\nare also short of power for the Vancouver Island South area. Nanaimo-Duncan\nUtilities will require 10,000 to 15,000 horse-power as soon as it can be obtained.\nA more promotional rate structure would undoubtedly lead to greatly increased consumption of electricity in both city and rural areas. V 16\nFINAL REPORT.\nThe present domestic lighting rates are:-\nNanaimo\nand\nSuburbs.\nNanaimo\nRural.\nDuncan\nand\nSuburbs.\nDuncan\nRural.\nSaltspring\nIsland.\n$0.50\n.07\n.06\n.04\n1.00\n5%\n$0.85\n.07\n.06\n.04\n1.00\n5%\n$0.50\n.09\n.06\n.04\n1.00\n5%\n$1.00\n.09\n.06\n.04\n1.00\n5%\n$1.25\nFirst 20 K.W.H\t\n.09\nNext 30 K.W.H \t\n.06\nOver 50 K.W.H..- - \t\n.04\nMinimum charge \t\nDiscount \t\n3.00\nThere is a combination domestic rate applicable to large consumptions which is\nbased on a straight 3 cent per K.W.H. in addition to a service charge and a minimum\nbill as follows:\u2014\nNanaimo and suburbs $1.75\nNanaimo rural 2.25\nDuncan and suburbs 2.25\nDuncan rural 2.75\nSaltspring Island 3.00\nBills under this schedule are subject to 5 per cent, discount except in Saltspring\nIsland.\nIn the Parksville-Qualicum districts served by National Utilities Corporation,\nLimited, with energy purchased from Nanaimo-Duncan Utilities, the domestic rates\nare as follows:\u2014\nFirst 50 K.W.H. at 10 cents per K.W.H.\nAll over 50 K.W.H. at 3 cents per K.W.H.\nMinimum monthly bill $2 for ordinary two-wire service and $3.50 for three-\nwire service.\nThe Company maintains at Qualicum a Diesel-operated auxiliary plant of 125-\nK.V.A. capacity.\nThe five areas outlined above, three on the Mainland and two on Vancouver Island,\nmay be said to have electrical service available.\nGroups 2, 3, and U.\nNo attempt is made to enumerate the sources of energy and the terms and conditions under which the service is furnished in these groups as the majority of the\nutilities are small and the conditions of service varied.\nAnalysis of Rates and Average Consumption.\nSomething of the adequacy and the efficiency of the service in all groups may be\ngathered from Tables 3 and 4 at the end of this report.\nTable 3 shows the amount of monthly bills for various consumptions in K.W.H.\nTable 4 shows the total number of consumers, the average annual domestic consumption and the average per K.W.H. charged for domestic, commercial, and industrial\nenergy respectively. There is also shown the number of potential customers who could\nbe served from the existing systems or extensions thereto.\n(6.) Number of Consumers presently served.\nThe numbers of consumers presently served under varying degrees of availability,\nurban and rural, according to classifications made by the various distribution agencies\nare as follows:\u2014 RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE.\nV 17\n(The classifications between \" urban \" and \" rural \" consumers have little significance except in the case of Group 3, where the distinction is made between consumers\nwithin municipal boundaries and those beyond such boundaries.)\nConsumer Classification.\nGroup 1.\nGroup 2.\nGroup 3.\nGroup 4.\nTotal.\nUrban\u2014\n121,306\n18,966\n3,622\n28\n50\n21\n11,464\n2,710\n469\n30\n1\n19\n15,833\n2,772\n523\n15\n1,497\n131\n26\n2\n8\n150,100\nCommercial .. _ \t\n24,579\n4,640\n75\n51\n1\n49\nTotals ' \t\n143,993\n14,693\n19,144\n1,664\n179,494\nRural (outside city, town, and village) \u2014\n22,480\n2,504\n363\n26\n24\n1,048\n108\n20\n3\n2\n2,849\n142\n41\n2\n2\n581\n47\n1\n1\n26,958\n2,801\nIndustrial.- \t\n425\n32\n28\nTotals \t\n25,397\n1,181\n3,036\n630\n30,244\n169,390\n15,874\n22,180\n2,294\n209,738\n(c) Numbers of Potential Consumers not presently served\nand the Reasons therefor.\nIn 1943 the Committee made a general survey of the Province with a view to locating and determining the number of potential rural consumers within reasonable\neconomic distance of existing distribution systems or centres of population that might\nsupport a distribution system. In the case of the lower Fraser Valley and areas on\nVancouver Island adjacent to the British Columbia Electric Railway Company the\nsurvey was made by the Company. The Nanaimo-Duncan Utilities Corporation and\nColumbia Power Company assisted with information in their respective territories.\nThe Committee's staff covered 5,281 miles of highway. The object of the survey was\nto locate the number of possible consumers wherever the average density was three or\nmore to the mile of line required, in groups within practical reach of distribution\nsystems.\nThe survey disclosed that 9,387 potential rural consumers are so located that they\ncould be included in the first stage of a rural electrification plan. There may be others\nwho could be and would be included eventually if the first stage is completed. As\nsuggested in the Progress Report, no material extension of rural electrification can be\nmade on a self-sustaining basis until efficient and economical service is established in\nthe urban systems which must be expanded into the adjacent rural areas.\nIn addition to the potential rural consumers there have been reported to the Committee 390 potential consumers in the urban sections where some degree of service is\nnow available.\nPotential consumers not presently served, where there is an average density of not\nless than three per mile are located as follows:\u2014 V 18 FINAL REPORT.\nGroup 1.\u2014Five Extensive Areas requiring Extensions of Privately-owned Systems.\nPotential Consumers\nnot presently served.\nUrban. Rural.\n(i.) Lower Mainland, Fraser Valley 253 3,128\n(ii.) Okanagan District 1,185\n(iii.) Areas supplied by West Kootenay Power\nand Light Company 1,700\n(iv.) Vancouver Island South 342\n(v.) Vancouver Island Centre 443\n253 6,798\nGroup 2.\u2014Other Areas requiring Extensions of Privately-owned Systems.\nMainland\u2014\nBurns Lake 21\nElko 59\nGolden 15 8\nHazelton 21 53\nHope 85\nInvermere 12 160\nKamloops 234\nKimberley 22\nMichel 19\nNakusp 397\nPrince Rupert 40\nQuesnel 17 14\nSechelt 103\nSouth Wells 57\nTerrace (no public utility now operating) 195\nVanderhoof 40 13\nWardner 71\nWilliams Lake . 20 31\n125 1,582\nVancouver Island\u2014\nAlberni 89\nAlert Bay 9\nCourtenay-Campbell River 130\nLake Cowichan 50\nRoyston . 14\n292\n125 1,874\nCarried forward...., 378 8,672 RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 19\nPotential Consumers\nnot presently served.\nUrban. Rural.\nBrought forward 378 8,672\nGroup 3.\u2014Areas requiring Extensions of Municipally-owned Systems.\nCourtenay-Comox 60\nCranbrook 45\nFernie 92\nGrand Forks 25\nKaslo . 25\nMcBride ' 6\nMerritt 12 58\nNelson . 54\nRevelstoke 228\nSummerland 61\n12 654\nGroup U.\u2014Areas requiring Extensions of Systems operated by\nIndustries and Institutions.\nLillooet 61\n390 9,387\nThe reasons the foregoing 10,000 potential consumers are not presently served vary\naccording to the conditions of service in the respective systems which require extensions\nto serve them. The total volume of business in any one area would be inadequate to\nsupport a special undertaking to furnish electrical service. The only practical method\ninvolves expansion of the existing distribution systems and in most cases the generating\ncapacity. In Section (d) of this report, immediately following, each of these groups\nis discussed and the general methods proposed for improving the supply and availability\nof service suggest the reasons these groups are not served.\n(1.) In general the extension policies of existing utilities are based on individual\nservices or small groups, rather than on extensive areas as a whole. This policy has\npermitted expansion to those who could from the first guarantee the utilities' estimate\nof the cost of service. It is a costly method of negotiating contracts and of building\nextensions. It has resulted in service to those requiring the least outlay of capital and\nhas increased the difficulty of extending to the more remote. Under this policy the\nutilities have taken the \" cream \" of the business, including the cities and suburban\nareas, and left the \" thin milk.\"\n(2.) Except in the lower Fraser Valley and Vancouver Island South areas the rates\nfor electrical service in rural areas are not such as to encourage its installation or use.\n(See Table 3.)\n(3.) The small utilities do not own adequate generating facilities to supply more\nthan a necessary lighting service to their existing distribution systems. Rates are\nhigh and consumption consequently limited, making for a continuation of high costs.\nThey have not the capital resources to build extensions to their generating plants or\ndistribution systems, and to carry on through a considerable period during which a load\nmight be developed under a promotional rate schedule.\n(4.) The problem of rural electrification is inseparable from that of electrification\nfor central cities and towns. The latter must have adequate, efficient, and economical\nservice before rural electrification can be provided. V 20\nFINAL REPORT.\n\\d.) Methods of improving the Supply and Availability\nof Electrical Service.\nGroup 1.\u2014Five Extensive Areas where Rural Service is Available.\nThese five areas, listed in Tables 3 and 4, include large groups of rural consumers\nso located in relation to existing facilities that the problem of improving the supply and\navailability of service is simplified in comparison to other sections of the Province.\nBefore proceeding with a discussion of each of these five areas some indications of\nthe present comparative availability of service in the respective rural areas may be\ndrawn from the analyses of K.W.H. costs to domestic consumers and the average consumptions shown in Tables 3 and 4.\nFrom Table 3.\nFrom Table 4.\nArea.\nMonthly Bill for\nAverage\nAnnual\nK.W.H.\nConsumption\nper\nCustomer.\nAverage\n100 K.W.H.\n200 K.W.H.\nCharge\nper K.W.H.\n(i.) Lower Mainland\u2014\n$3.20\n4.04\n4.55\n3.24\n4.73 to\n9.09\n4.40\n4.20\n5.10\n5.60\n4.60\n5.10\n6.00\n6.50\n$5.20\n5.96\n6.70\n5.49\n7.43 to\n17.10\n6.40 |\n6.20 j\n7.95\nS.45\n7.45\n7.95\n9.00\n9.50\n875\n900\n769\n615\n437 to\n1,200\n752\n551\n729\n609\n447\n561\n545\nCents.\n2.57\n(ii.) Okanagan District\u2014\nCity of Vernon\u2014 - -\t\nArmstrong, Enderby, Salmon Arm, and rural districts\n(iii.) Areas supplied by West Kootenay P. and L. Co.\u2014\n4.12\n5.20\n6.6\n3.1 to\n(iv.) Vancouver Island South\u2014\nCobble Hill, Mill Bay, Shawnigan Lake, Sooke -\t\n9.0\n3.4\n(v.) Vancouver Island Centre\u2014\n6.6\n6.4\nNanaimo (city) - -.- - - -\t\nNanaimo (rural)- - - _ -\n5.4\n7.2\n8.6\nParksville, Qualicum, etc. -_ \u2014\n7.3\nWhile the size of farms and local economic conditions influence the use of electricity, the unit price of the service is a first condition of availability. It will be\nobserved that the average monthly consumption is higher where the average unit cost\nis lower.\n(i.) In the rural areas of the Fraser Valley the rates are such as to permit wide\nuses of the service. Here is the highest average consumption per customer and\nthe lowest average cost, notwithstanding a large proportion of the farms are small.\nIn this area rural service is tributary to the urban system of Greater Vancouver.\nThere are 3,100 unconnected premises according to information supplied by the British\nColumbia Electric Railway Company. It would require a capital outlay of over\n$800,000 to provide complete distribution facilities for this section. Thus far the policy\nof the B.C. Electric Railway has been to make extensions on an individual or small\ngroup basis. The Company now expends $82.50 per service and the subscriber is\nrequired to guarantee revenue over a four-year period equal to the amount of capital\nexpenditure.\nThis piecemeal policy of expansion makes for high capital cost of installation and\nnegotiation of contracts. The rural service in the Fraser Valley is associated with the\nLower Mainland distribution system and the investment is included in the rate base\nfor the whole area. It is suggested that availability of service could be best improved\nby a more liberal development policy under which the facilities would be provided RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 21\nreasonably in advance of individual demands and upon a scale to permit lower construction costs.\n(ii.) The Okanagan District served by West Canadian Hydro Electric Corporation\ncontains some 1,200 potential rural consumers. The corporation has made numerous\nextensions of its system so that in many sections service is now available. However,\nthe rates charged in the City of Vernon are considerably higher than rural rates in the\nFraser Valley; and in Armstrong, Enderby, Salmon Arm, and the rural areas 100\nK.W.H. per month now cost $4.55 and 200 K.W.H. cost $6.70. The average cost per\nK.W.H. at the 1943 scale of domestic consumption was 4.12 cents in Vernon and 5.20\ncents in all other areas.\nNotwithstanding these high rates the average consumption is higher than in any\nrural area except Fraser Valley (which includes Chilliwack, Langley, Mission, and\nAbbotsford). This indicates a good field for the development of electrical service.\nThere is adequate power at Shuswap for considerable expansion of the market. The\nconsumption by the present customers could be greatly increased by a more promotional\ntype of rate; the service could be extended to 1,200 new consumers by building distribution facilities in consolidated units covering whole communities. Like the B.C. Electric\nRailway Company the Corporation's rural extensions are made on a piecemeal individual\nbasis\u2014a slow and expensive method. It must be noted that the rural service of the\nCorporation comprises a large proportion of its total business. It is a comparatively\nsmall utility and the addition of distribution facilities to serve 1,200 rural consumers\nis a major undertaking to a company with only 4,000 customers. It involves a capital\ninvestment of $400,000 and it may require a few years under a rate structure that will\npermit load building to develop business to support such an expenditure.\nImprovement in availability of electrical service in this area, urban and rural,\ncould be effected by:\u2014\n(1.) A revision of the rate schedules to promote much higher average consumption resulting in lower average charges.\n(2.) Construction of extensive distribution facilities to include considerable\nareas under one job, instead of piecemeal construction to meet individual\ndemands.\nIt may be difficult for this corporation to carry out either of the above suggestions.\nThe total operation is small and has required extensive production and transmission\nplant for the number of consumers on the system\u20144,100. The cost of capital for the\nplant has been high and the carrying charges have to be met year by year. While a\ngeneral revision of the rate structure would undoubtedly tend to increase use and\ndecrease average K.W.H. costs it would take some time\u2014possibly a few years\u2014during\nwhich development period the earnings might not be sufficient to pay interest on funded\ndebt and dividends on capital stock. A small utility with limited working capital finds\nit difficult to provide facilities in advance of demand and to adopt a rate system which\nwill fail to produce during the first year revenue equal to cost, even though it be assured\nthat the net results will be improved in the second and third succeeding years. This is\nparticularly true of a utility with a small volume of business. Rural electrification in\nthe Okanagan district comprises an important part of the total utility service in the\narea and, under a progressive policy, it can become a larger part. The conditions\naffecting availability of service are different from those in the Lower Fraser Valley or\nSouthern Vancouver Island. In the latter cases the utility has the stable backlog of\nbusiness in Greater Vancouver and Greater Victoria; service to adjacent rural areas\nwould comprise a small proportion of the total business and should present no important\nfinancial problem to a utility capable of supplying the metropolitan consumers in contrast to conditions under the West Canadian Hydro Electric Corporation. V 22 FINAL REPORT.\n(iii.) West Kootenay Power and Light Company, Limited, a subsidiary of Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company, Limited, owns and operates five hydro-electric\nplants on Kootenay River and one on Goat River with a total capacity of 260,000 K.V.A.,\ngreater than the total hydro-electric capacity of all the public utilities in the Province.\nOver 97 per cent, of the energy is used by Consolidated Mining and Smelting at Trail.\nThe West Kootenay furnishes electrical service to the public in Trail and Rossland\nunder domestic rates which permit a use of 100 K.W.H. per month at $3.24 and 200\nK.W.H. at $5.49. These rates permit a comparatively high average consumption, as\nindicated in Table 4.\nThe West Kootenay Power and Light Company have a 60,000-volt transmission\nsystem extending westward to Oliver; thence to Allenby near Princeton, with a branch\nrunning north from Oliver to Penticton and Kelowna. The Company sells energy\nwholesale for redistribution by the cities of Penticton, Summerland, and Kelowna, and\nby the Princeton Power and Light Company in Princeton.\nThe Company has installed at several points sub-stations to transform from 60,000\nto 2,300 volts, and has built distribution systems in a score of widely separated rural\nareas listed in Tables 3 and 4.\nIt will be noted that the charges for service vary widely in these distribution areas,\nthe cost to the consumer for 100 K.W.H. is from $4.73 to $9, and for 200 K.W.H. from\n$7.43 to $17.10. These rates apparently have resulted from individual consideration in\neach separate community and are presently under examination by the Public Utilities\nCommission. There is a large number of potential rural consumers, some 1,700 who\ncould be served by extensions of the existing lines at an estimated capital expenditure\nof $410,000.\nThe availability of service in the areas served by West Kootenay Power and Light\nCompany could be improved by a revision of the rate schedules to promote load building and by a broad policy of extensions aimed at the greatest availability in all areas\nwithin economical distances of substations.\nThe volume of business which could be developed would be insignificant in comparison to the Company's total output and the position of the Company is such that it\nshould have no difficulty in financing a progressive policy in respect to rates and\nextensions of service. Whether it might be advisable to include the rural distribution\nsystems of this Company in a consolidated Provincial electrification scheme will depend\nupon the extent to which the Company is prepared to increase the availability of service.\n(iv.) In the Vancouver Island South area, from Victoria to Cowichan Land\nDistrict, electrical service is generally available and widely installed in the rural areas.\nThe B.C. Electric Railway Company surveys indicate that there are only 342 potential\nconsumers not presently connected. The service is reliable, it being an outgrowth of\nthe Greater Victoria distribution system, except for Cobble Hill, Mill Bay, Shawnigan,\nand Sooke, which are supplied from small substations on the Company's high-voltage\nlines.\nThe cost to rural domestic users for 100 K.W.H. per month is $4.40 and for 200\nK.W.H., $6.20. In Cobble Hill, Mill Bay, Shawnigan Lake, and Sooke the corresponding\ncosts are 20 cents higher. The average monthly consumption in 1943 was 752 K.W.H.,\nand the average price paid 3.4 cents per K.W.H. These are rates which permit installation and general use of electricity in rural districts. The conditions for new\ninstallations are similar to those in the Fraser Valley. Here again a piecemeal\npolicy of expansion is followed. Under this policy those consumers who can be reached\nwith the smallest capital outlay are first served, as the guaranteed revenue required\nfrom the consumer is lower in such cases. When a consumer within easy reach is\nconnected under such a policy it becomes a little more difficult to serve the remainder\nwho may be farther away from existing lines. If, as the Company reports, there are\nonly 342 potential rural consumers, for whom service facilities would cost $87,000, it RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 23\nwould appear that reasonable rural electrification could be effected under a single\nprogramme of construction. As in the case of the Fraser Valley, such a programme\nwould involve no financial problem to a utility equipped to furnish service in the Greater\nVictoria area.\n(v.) In Vancouver Island Centre, from Cowichan to Parksville and Qualicum, rural\nelectrical service is now generally available, but under conditions far less favourable\nthan in the southern section of the Island. Under present rates 100 K.W.H. per month\ncosts the user $5.10 in Duncan City and the rural areas near Nanaimo; $4.60 in\nNanaimo City; $5.60 in the rural areas near Duncan; $6 on Saltspring Island; and\n$6.50 in the Parksviile-Qualicum district. Two hundred K.W.H. per month costs the\nuser $7.95 in Duncan City and rural areas near Nanaimo; $7.45 in Nanaimo City;\n$8.45 in the rural areas near Duncan; $9 on Saltspring Island; and $9.50 in Parksviile-Qualicum district. The effect of these high rates is reflected in the low average\nconsumptions and the high average cost per K.W.H.\u20145.4 cents in Nanaimo City, 6.6\ncents in Duncan City, 6.4 cents in Duncan rural areas, 7.2 cents in Nanaimo rural areas,\n8.6 cents on Saltspring Island, and 7.3 cents in the Parksviile-Qualicum district.\nDistribution in this extensive area is by the Nanaimo-Duncan Utilities, Limited,\nexcept in Parksviile-Qualicum where distribution is by National Utilities, Limited, a\nsubsidiary of B.C. Electric Railway Company.\nThis area is now dependent for 80 per cent, of its energy supply upon the B.C.\nElectric Railway Company plants serving Vancouver Island South. Owing to shortage\nof power for their own distribution-lines the B.C. Electric Railway Company have\nindicated inability to continue the supply at Duncan. The Nanaimo-Duncan Utilities\nhave no generating plant capable of supplying the load and the whole area, including the\ncities of Nanaimo and Duncan, is faced with the problem of power supply. Nanaimo-\nDuncan Utilities Company has made preliminary surveys and investigations of a power-\nsite on Nanaimo River. If this is the most economical potential source of energy it\nshould be developed at the earliest possible date. It will involve a large capital expenditure\u2014in excess of the present total investment of the Company. The building of\nsufficient load to carry the cost of such a development will require a sharp downward\nrevision of the rates in the whole area; no substantial increase in load can be expected\nat the present rates. It may take a considerable period of time before revenues will\nbalance costs. Whether the Company is in a position to finance a required $3,000,000\nconstruction programme and to provide, in addition, working capital to carry through\na necessary development period is a question which the Committee cannot answer.\nThis is an important and extensive area where the need of some method for improving\nthe availability of service to both urban and rural consumers is apparent.\nThe Parksviile-Qualicum district is contiguous to the Nanaimo system although\nsupplied by the National Utilities Corporation with energy purchased from Nanaimo-\nDuncan Utilities. It is submitted that any comprehensive plan of rural electrification\nshould provide that this area be included in the Nanaimo-Duncan system.\nGroup 2.\u2014Other Towns and Rural Areas served by Privately-owned Utilities.\nTables 3 and 4 contain information in respect to available service in other cities,\ntowns, and rural areas served by privately-owned utilities. In this group there are\n15,874 connected consumers of all classes.\nThere are 1,874 potential rural consumers and 125 in towns who are within\neconomical distance of the existing distribution lines, and who could be served therefrom if the plant capacity and the rates were permissive.\nOnly seven of these distribution areas have over 500 consumers:\u2014\nKamloops with 2,427 is served by B.C. Electric Railway Company with hydroelectric and steam-electric energy generated by the Company. The average domestic V 24 FINAL REPORT.\nconsumption is 1,152 K.W.H. and the average K.W.H. charge is 2.9 cents. There are\n234 potential rural consumers near Kamloops and between Kamloops and Barriere.\nKimberley with 1,611 is served by Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company\nwith hydro-electric energy purchased from East Kootenay Power Company. The average domestic consumption is 1,085 K.W.H. and the average K.W.H. charge is 3.4 cents.\nThere are 22 potential rural consumers.\nMichel with 573 is served by Crow's Nest Pass Electric Light and Power Company\nwith hydro-electric energy purchased from East Kootenay Power Company. The average domestic consumption is 465 and average cost 6.5 cents. There are 19 potential\nrural consumers.\nPrince Rupert with 3,369 is served by Northern British Columbia Power Company\nwith hydro-electric energy generated by the Company. The rates are as low as anywhere in the Province. Average domestic consumption is 1,545 K.W.H. at an average\ncost of 2.2 cents to the consumer for domestic energy. There are only 40 potential\nrural consumers. The Company should be in a position to extend to these.\nPrinceton with 562 is served by Princeton Power and Light Company with hydroelectric energy purchased from West Kootenay Power and Light Company. The average K.W.H. consumption is 361 and the average cost 6.5 cents per K.W.H.\nAlberni with 2,244 is served by National Utilities Corporation (subsidiary of\nB.C. Electric Railway. The former Company also serves Parksville, Qualicum, and\nRoyston areas). The Alberni average domestic consumption is 598 K.W.H. and\nthe average cost 4.7 cents. Power is purchased from the Bloedel, Stewart and Walsh\nsawmill at Port Alberni. The Company maintains a Diesel standby. There are 89\npotential rural consumers.\nCumberland with 675 is served by The Cumberland Electric Lighting Company\nwith 25-cycle energy purchased from Wellington Colliery Company, Puntledge hydroelectric plant. The average domestic consumption is 390 K.W.H. and the average\ncost 8.2 cents.\nThe East Kootenay Power Company is primarily engaged in production and transmission of power. It owns and operates two hydro-electric plants\u2014at Bull River,\n5,000 K.V.A.; at Elko, 12,000 K.V.A. The Company has a steam plant at Sentinel,\nAlberta, 12,500 K.V.A. These plants are connected by 60,000-V. transmission. Energy\nis sold wholesale to Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company at Kimberley, and to\nthe cities of Cranbrook and Fernie, as well as to several mining operations. Power is\nexchanged with Alberta districts. The Company distributes directly to only 97 retail\nconsumers in Bull River, Crowsnest, Elko, and Wardner.\nAttention is directed to the small number of consumers in the other distribution\nsystems in this Group 2, Table 4, and to the high charges for various K.W.H. consumptions in Table 3. Rates are high not because the companies are making too much\nprofit; the undertakings are too limited to support individual organizations and financial structures. The generating plants are for the most part Diesel operated and too\nsmall to supply energy for general purposes. Lower promotional rates would tend to\noverload the existing facilities and few if any of the companies are able to finance new\nand larger plants and the temporary deficits which must be incurred during a load-\nbuilding period at greatly reduced rates. Electrical service in these communities is\nlimited by a chain of circumstances; small isolated operations cannot support technical\nmanagement or economical financing; plants have been installed for electric lighting\nand rates are electric-lighting rates; the business is not profitable because the volume\nis too small; the volume of business cannot be increased unless rates are reduced;\nif rates are reduced the plants will be inadequate; there is no capital upon reasonable\nterms to build new plants. L\nRURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 25\nTo improve the service to these communities and to permit of expansion to\nadjacent rural areas it will be necessary to install adequate, reliable, and efficient small\nplants\u2014mostly Diesel operated. It will be necessary to rehabilitate the distribution\nsystems and to offer service under a promotional type of rates that will permit general\nuse of electricity for domestic, commercial, and small industrial purposes. This involves problems of organization and financing beyond the capacities of these small\ncompanies.\nWhere small towns and rural areas provide an important proportion of the consumers on distribution systems, improvement in the availability and supply of electrical\nservice can be effected by the consolidation of such systems\u2014including production and\ndistribution\u2014under a single management and financial plan. Such a plan would require\nadequate financing to construct the most suitable generating plants; to rehabilitate\nexisting facilities that may be useful, and to carry the undertaking over a reasonable\nnumber of years required for load-building under promotional rates.\nRural electrification cannot be segregated from urban electrification, as a practical\nproposition. Until service is made available in the widest sense to the urban systems\nthere is little that can be done to improve the supply and availability to rural areas.\nIt has been pointed out that the supply and availability of service to the rural areas\nin the Fraser Valley and Vancouver Island South can be improved by extending the distribution systems of Greater Vancouver and Greater Victoria to cover these areas.\nIt should be possible for the West Kootenay Power Company to supply the rural areas\nwithin practical distribution distance of its existing facilities. In these three areas\nrural electrification would amount to a small fraction of the total business of B.C.\nElectric Railway Company and of West Kootenay Power Company. Both companies\nhave the necessary organization and financial resources to effect rural electrification\nunder reasonable terms and conditions of service. No hardship would be incurred by\nthe companies or by the present consumers if the former were required to extend their\nfacilities so long as the net revenues of the companies as a whole were not significantly\naffected. The same may be said of the extensions required to serve small groups outside Kamloops (B.C. Electric Railway Company), Elko and Wardner (East Kootenay\nPower Company), Kimberley (Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company), Michel\n(Crow's Nest Pass Electric Light and Power Company), and Prince Rupert (Northern\nB.C. Power Company). Such a change in policy, if not voluntarily made, would require\nrevision of section 35 of the \" Public Utilities Act.\"\nIn the other rural areas served by privately-owned utilities the rural service forms\nsuch a large proportion of the electrical business and the supply and availability of\nservice is so limited that a similar policy could not be applied without working hardship\non the companies and, in some cases, wrecking such service as now exists. Here it\nappears that any improvement in the supply and availability of electrical service in\nrural areas will depend upon reorganization and consolidation of the privately-owned\nutilities.\nThe financial problems involved in a practical reorganization will be indicated, as\ndirected, under Section 6 of this report.\nGroup 3.\u2014Cities, Towns, and Rural Areas served by\nMunicipally-owned Utilities.\nTables 3 and 4 contain information in respect to available service in cities, towns,\nand rural areas served by municipally-owned utilities.\nThere are 19 such systems with a total of 22,180 consumers, of whom 3,036 are\noutside the municipal boundaries.\nThere are 654 potential rural consumers who could be served by extensions of\nthese systems.\nAnalyses of rate schedules and average costs are contained in Tables 3 and 4\nrespectively. V 26 FINAL REPORT.\nIt will be noted from Table 4 that some of the municipal systems have developed\nfair average domestic consumption\u2014Revelstoke, 1,272 K.W.H. per year at an average\ncharge of 3.2 cents; Nelson, 970 K.W.H. per year at an average charge of 4.4 cents;\nKelowna, 838 K.W.H. with an average charge of 4.3 cents, etc. Some of the municipal\nplants have a small number of consumers and the average consumption is high.\nThe municipal systems have 3,036 consumers beyond their boundaries and the\nsurveys show 654 to whom the distribution systems could be extended. This indicates\n82 per cent, rural electrification\u2014a fair accomplishment.\nThe extension of service to rural areas adjacent to municipal systems will depend\nlargely upon the co-operation of the latter, and may require some financial assistance.\nGroup U-\u2014Service furnished by Industries and Institutions to\nEmployees and Others.\nIn order to complete the survey of the present extent of electrical service in\nthe Province information has been assembled in respect to distribution by primary\nindustries and institutions\u2014Tables 3 and 4.\nExcept in the vicinity of Lillooet, where the Pacific Great Eastern Railway operates\na small plant, there are no rural areas dependent for service upon this group.\nThe rates in effect and the statistics on consumption and operation are presented\nsimply to round out the survey. They have no particular application to the problem\nof rural electrification and the results cannot be regarded as standards for electrical\nservice. The furnishing of electricity to employees and others is incidental to the\nprimary functions of the larger industries and rates and conditions of service may be\ninfluenced by the general policies governing the main enterprise.\n2. RURAL AREAS IN WHICH ELECTRICAL SERVICE IS NOT\nNOW AVAILABLE.\nNo clear distinction can be drawn between areas where service is and is not\navailable. All areas, with the exception of Terrace, covered by this survey are adjacent\nto community centres where electrical service is available to some degree. In many\ncases the facilities are inadequate to supply the present consumers for anything but\nlighting and limited household appliances. Such plants must be enlarged and improved\nbefore a modern standard of service can be furnished to the present consumers, and\ncertainly before the adjacent rural areas can be brought into the distribution systems.\nAll groups of consumers listed under 1 (6) are again reported here as being in\nareas where electrical service is not now available. This is in the sense that service\ncannot be considered available until distribution-lines, connected with adequate and\nreliable generating plants, extend by the premises of the consumers. The construction\nof such lines and generating plants will not be sufficient to make service available; the\nfacilities must be financed, constructed, and operated efficiently so that service can be\nmade available to all at unit rates which will permit the widest use of electricity for\ndomestic, commercial, and industrial purposes.\nA programme of rural electrification must in most areas be contingent upon a\nmarked improvement in the existing service\u2014as to quality, quantity, and rates. The\nproblem of rural electrification is so closely associated with the problem of adequate and\neconomical service to the cities and towns that a report on the number of consumers\nnot presently served would be incomplete if it did not include the number of present\nconsumers for whom service could be greatly improved. In addition, therefore, to the\nnumber of potential consumers to whom service is not now available Table 1 shows,\nunder:\u2014\n(a.) Number of consumers for whom service could be greatly improved.\n(6.) Potential sources of electrical energy for such areas. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE.\nV 27\nO\nn\n>\no\nas\nOh\ns\n\u2666\u2014*\n(H\nJ\nEh\n\u2022<\nH\nK\nO\nH\nCQ\no\nJ\n&\no\no\nH\na\n>\n\u00ab\nH\n172\n\u00a7\nO\nffi\n\u00a3\n\u2022 DS\nrH O\nfa\nW ^\nJ M\n03 W\n\n0\nOh\nt>\n>\n0) .\n3\noi\n0\nfl\nCO\no\nC\no\n\"3\na\nM\n,5\nas\nfll\np\n..\n. 0\nIS\nrt\n_o\n\u00a3 w\n+J\nn\no\n0)\ni\nA A\ns\nn\nX,\nQ o\nP 73\nH3 13\n73\n73\nfi\n& >s\n>>\nr*\u00bb\n0)\n01 >>\nCm M Ph M Z\nz w\nJ5\ni\no\nPh\n\u00a3 1 a\nFu\n5\u00a3\nft .3\n\" Hi\nQJ C\nCJ\nU\np< ca\nh\n-H\nw S\nft\nfe\n01 *\nO\no\nHp\nc fi,\nPh\nu\u00ab\nc\nfi\nto\nV\ns\na\ni3 >\u00bb\no c\nft\n+>\nO\n\u25a0w\nC\nc s\nfi)\nM\n+j\nM\nu\n\"S w\nW\nBO\nA\n0\nu\nu\no\nV\n'u\n\u00aeU1\na\n(L>\n01\n1,\nW\ny\no\nCJ\nu\n0)\no\nu\nU\n0)\n0\n0\nrC\nO\n0\na\na\na\na\nS\nc>\n0>\n0)\nV\nD\nto\n3\nqi\n\no\n0*\n0)\nfi>\nQ Q Q Q\nA\np\nA\nQ Q Q Q\ns\n73\nf\u00a3\nts\n&\n^\nF\n(h|\n73\n^\nin\n73\n*\n73\n73\n15\nft\n\u2022\u00a3\nt\u00a3\n[\u00a3\n(\u00a3\nH)\n0)\n0>\nqj\n\n0)\nfl)\nSZ^^\nw\nW^ZWS^rHZZZWZ\nCO r-4 (fi CN W\nN t[) ^ Tf f\nH m W M N\nC4cooit-t--*cMeoffjootNt-(fieoiOTi >\nS 33\nS 2 g p.\nSi \u00bb fe\n0) ft ^J\nc o h ~ _:\n\u00a5 S a * *\nJ a\n\u00ab2-\na \u25a0\u00a7 3 S > S .E -R .H \u00ab -g\n33 \u00bb u S C\n'(. 3 q, S B .d\nPh C m Oi H > ! V 28\nFINAL REPORT.\nS\n8\no\nO\nm\nm\n\u25a0<\nEh\nfcD\nht\n01\n(3\nH\ns\nH\n+j\n4-\nE\nfl. \"\u00a3\nJ\nu\nc\nri\nrt 5\nCO\n*E\n0)\n0\nEfl\nOf\no\n!h\ns\n0\nj\nE\nefl\n2\n-3 \u00ab\n>\no 0 \u201e\nob ca 5\nhh >\n0) V T1\n\u00a7 1\n4-> HJ\nto to\nK >\nto w\naj o\ng\n1 . a\n. s. g . . a\ne \u00ab . \u00a3 \u00a3 s o\n| a g 111 S\n* * a & \u00a3 1 \u00ab\n91\n73\nP\n.3\nt\na\n\u00a3\nS\n&\ng\n0)\n0\nm\n3\np\n0J\nD\n0\nI\nz\n\u25a0+-\nj\nE\n1 1\n3 3\nC\n0\nc c\nE s\nEj B\nO O\n\u00bb5 \u00a7 s s g j\nS S a u \u00bb S S\n<\n>\np\n0)\n1\nPH\n0) 4) '\nr^\n\u2022y \u00abw\n*H *H *H *W \u00abH \u00abH *t\u00bb\nfu\np:\ns\n3\no\n5\nO 0\n0 0 o o o o c\nij\nW\n1\nTr\n\u25a0g g\nE E\n^^^^^^.^^^i-\n-o\nc\nj\n4-\nc\np\n(X\n6 c\n+-i +J +1 hJ +j +j h-\nb b 5 u \"5 b 2\nE\ns\n0\n\"p\na c\n(M IM\nH | \u25a0*\nOC\nu\nCM\nt> ir\nC-\nCD \"H\n01 (N CM \u00bb(5 Ii5 CM\ns\n:- Oi\nSip\nt-\nV\n\"^\n ^\n<5\n\u00ab\nS 3 jjM53\n>\nU3\ncc\nO\"\nU3 CC\nt-\nCM\n| |1S\no\nc-\no\n\u00abs\n09\nt- O\nUS\ni\n00\nu\nA\n1\nt>\nCN\nCM\nO i-H\n' 1\nI\nCN\noi*\n5hP- FJ qj'o\n(a.) Numbi\nof Potentia\nConsumers j\nAreas wher\nService coul\n\u20228\n-a\nc\n1C\nc-\nO\"\nC\ne\no u-\nN lO Ifl CD 00 V \u00ab\nt-\nH CM\n4)\nc-\ner\nIC\neo -^\nOi CN CM w o e-\nCB\n\no\np\n.2\n73\nS\np\no\ns\ns\n1\n.a\no\nc\nQ\n1\n>\n>\nE\nc\nJ\nc\ns\n1\ns\n1\n1.\na\ns\nti\nG\n1\nC\npJ\nC\na\n1\nC5\n1\n5\n9,\ncc\n1\nc\n^ c\nfi \u00ab\nS 3^\nc\n1\n>\n5 c\nfl\nF\n\u2022a c\nP rS\nca o\na\n3\nX\n1\ni\nc\n*\n1\n-\na\n1\na\nj\n<\np\na\ne3\n0\nH\n0\nc\nC\na\nft\n2\na\nP3\n0!\np:\nE \u00ab\nP ^\n3l\n+j CO\na g\n33 ^>\ng I\n\u2022- S\n\"\u20222\na\n>> \"42\n\u00ab M P\n^ T3 ep\nB i o\n33 ? J\n' \"3 a\n;.!$\na s &\nS \u00ab\nill\ncn a n\n1-1 4J .5\nto P\nrS 1 >l\n\u25a0\u2014 - \"\ng ft \u00a3\n-. \u25a0= j,\n~ * 2\n9 RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 29\n(c.) Proposed Methods of furnishing Service.\nThe methods proposed for improving the service are set out under four groups\nand remarks follow respecting each group. It should be noted that the grouping\nreferred to here and which is set out in Table 2 is not the same as the grouping 1, 2, 3,\nand 4 referred to in Tables 3 and 4.\nGroup I.\u2014That certain rural areas which are now served by private\noperators and where those operators are financially capable of\nmaking extensions and which also have sufficient plant capacity\nto serve these extensions, be required to extend their systems,\nif necessary invoking the provisions of the \" Public Utilities\nAct\" to require them to do so. These areas are referred to as\nGroup I. in Table 2.\nThe volume of business and the magnitude of the undertaking involved in effecting\nrural electrification in Fraser Valley and Vancouver Island South comprise a small\nproportion of the total business of the B.C. Electric Railway group in the Vancouver\nand Victoria areas respectively. In the lower Mainland area the Company now has\n122,800 consumers; there are 3,128 potential rural consumers. In the Vancouver\nIsland South area the Company now has 27,000 consumers; there are 342 potential\nrural consumers. The obvious method of furnishing service is to extend the distribution systems to make service available. This would involve a capital expenditure for\ndistribution lines estimated at:\u2014\nFraser Valley $820,000\nVancouver Island South 87,000\n$907,000\nSomewhat similar conditions exist in the rural areas adjacent to those now served\nby the West Kootenay Power and Light Company. In the latter the rates are high\ncompared to those in Fraser Valley or Vancouver Island South. But the Company\nproduces a great volume of electrical energy, over 97 per cent, of which is used at Trail.\nIt now has a high-voltage transmission-line to the various rural substations and, while\nit supplies only 8,500 individual consumers, the addition of 1,700 to its various existing\ndistribution systems would be a comparatively small undertaking involving capital\nexpenditure of the order of $410,000. In this case it would be desirable to effect a more\nuniform rate structure of a promotional type.\nIn the three foregoing areas, and those served by the B.C. Electric Railway Company at Kamloops, the East Kootenay Power Company, Limited, the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company, Limited, the Northern B.C. Power Corporation, Limited,\nand the Crow's Nest Pass Electric Light and Power Company, Limited, rural electrification could be financed and accomplished by the utilities now operating, even to\nthe extent of providing facilities for the total areas, without increasing unduly the total\nexpenses of the companies.\nThe suggested method could be carried out voluntarily in these areas or required\nby an amendment to the \" Public Utilities Act,\" sec. 35, subsec. (1). It is suggested\nthat the Act might be amended so that the Public Utilities Commission could require\nthe utilities to make a survey of any rural area and to report on the capital expenditure,\nestimated revenues and expenses involved in supplying such area. If the Commission\ndecides that the operation would not result in increased rates to the present consumers,\nand that it would not reduce the utility's net earnings as a whole below its permitted\nreturn on the total investment, the Commission might be empowered to order the necessary construction. V 30 FINAL REPORT.\nGroup II.\u2014That other areas referred to as Group II. in Table 2\nwhere the private operators of the systems serving those areas\nare considered for the reasons expressed in this report, in a difficult position to make the desired extensions or to increase\nthe plant capacity, should be organized into a single enterprise as\na sufficient volume of business would then be provided to support\na centralized management with an efficient technical staff.\nThe same method as for Group I. is not applicable to other areas within reach of\nthe existing distribution systems. Any practical method of improving the service\nof these plants and of expanding it to the adjacent rural areas should involve an amalgamation of the various properties into a single enterprise with sufficient volume of\nbusiness to support a centralized management and operation. A considerable amount\nof capital expenditure would be required for new plant and sufficient credit to sustain\nthe operation over a considerable development period under much lower rates of\na promotional type. The financial problems involved are discussed under Section 6 of\nthis report.\nIn the case of the North Okanagan district, served by West Canadian Hydro\nElectric Corporation, there are now only 2,749 customers in the City of Vernon.\nIn Armstrong, Enderby, Salmon Arm, Lumby, Lavington, Oyama, and the rural areas\nthe rates are similar and the total number of consumers is 1,427. There are 1,200\npotential rural consumers. Under a complete electrification plan 50 per cent, of\nthe total consumers will be outside the City of Vernon. It will require a capital\nexpenditure of $380,000 for new distribution-lines in addition to considerable improvement to existing equipment to effect reasonably complete electrification. Rates in\nVernon as well as the other towns and rural areas would have to be revised downward\nto build a load that could support the present and additional capital expenditures.\nIt might require several years to develop higher consumptions and sufficient business\nto make the undertaking self-sustaining. The cost of financing by the Company is\nhigh; the whole operation is comparatively small, and it has not now the backlog of\nbusiness to enable it to finance extensive new plant during a period of load-building.\nThere are similar conditions in the Vancouver Island Central area. Here the\nNanaimo-Duncan Utilities have 4,000 customers in the cities and suburbs of Nanaimo\nand Duncan and 2,450 in rural areas. Eighty per cent, of the Company's power is\npurchased from B.C. Electric Railway Company and the latter is short of power for\nVancouver Island South. A new generating plant is required for this area at a cost\nof $3,000,000 for hydro-electric development. A steam plant would cost much less\ninitially but its production costs in the long run would be higher.\nAverage K.W.H. charges in the two cities are approximately double those in rural\nareas of Vancouver Island South and the average consumption is consequently low.\nIt will take a long time at the present rates and consumptions to build a load that will\nsupport a new production plant. A large proportion of the consumers are in rural\nareas and there is no volume of urban business upon which to finance a new plant\nduring the necessary development period.\nNorth of Nanaimo the Parksviile-Qualicum district, supplied by National Utilities\n(a subsidiary of B.C. Electric Railway Company) has even higher rates and lower\nconsumption. It is suggested this area should be combined with Nanaimo-Duncan\ndistribution system and that the system should be expanded to 342 potential rural\nconsumers.\nWhat has been stated regarding the Okanagan and Central Island services applies\nwith greater emphasis to other services, with the exception of Prince Rupert, included\nin Table I. under Group 2\u2014Privately-owned Utilities. As pointed out in the Progress\nReport these utilities are too small to support the management and financial structure RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 31\nnecessary to provide service in volume at attractive unit costs. Most of them require\nnew production plants and improved and extended distribution systems. As isolated\nundertakings they cannot be financed and operated on self-sustaining bases.\nGroup III.\u2014That municipal areas referred to as Group III., in\nTable 2, to be assisted financially in providing extensions outside\nthe municipal boundaries or be required to sell energy wholesale to the single enterprise referred to above who would undertake the extensions.\nIn Group III., Table 2, there are only 654 potential rural consumers with a density\nof three or more per mile who could be reached by extensions of municipally-owned\nplants. Some of the municipal utilities have extended their lines to adjacent rural\nareas but are under no obligation to expand that policy. Methods of serving the above-\nmentioned 654 potential customers would involve working agreements between some\ncentral authority and the municipalities.\nGroup IV.\u2014That the extensions required to serve the potential consumers adjacent to the Town of Lillooet should be undertaken by\nthe P.G.E. Railway Company. If the Company is not prepared\nto provide additional generating capacity or to make the extensions to the system then the latter should be incorporated in\nGroup II. referred to above.\nIn the industrial Group IV. there is only one area, Lillooet, where rural electrification depends upon existing plants. Here there are sixty-one who could be served by\nextensions of the P.G.E. system. The latter's small hydro-electric plant at Lillooet is\nnow in need of considerable repairs.\n3. THE FEASIBILITY OF SUPPLYING NUMBERS OF PRESENTLY ISOLATED\nCOMMUNITIES FROM \"GRID\" TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS AND CENTRAL PRODUCTION PLANTS.\n\" The great distances between the centres of population and the small loads make\nit economically impossible to transmit energy from a single generating plant, and it\nmay be stated without reservation that there is no practical possibility of constructing\nextensive high-voltage grid systems in the Province to deliver energy for general\ndistribution to the public.\"\u2014Progress Report, page 56.\nThere is at present a 60,000-volt transmission-line from the Vancouver Island\nPower Company's (B.C. Electric group) Jordan River and Brentwood plants to\nDuncan and Nanaimo. The need for a production plant at Nanaimo is pressing and\nthe Nanaimo-Duncan Utilities has made some preliminary studies of a development\non Nanaimo River. If this plant is constructed the supply for Vancouver Island South,\nincluding Victoria, could be augmented by energy from the new plant delivered over\nthe existing line. With a plant at Nanaimo it might be practicable to extend 60,000-\nvolt transmission as far north as Courtenay, with a branch to Alberni. From Courtenay\nto Campbell River there is now a 20,000-volt distribution-line. The provision of\na source of energy at Nanaimo would, therefore, make it physically possible to deliver\nelectric service all the way from Victoria to Campbell River, and from Parksville or\nQualicum to Alberni and Port Alberni.\nOn the Mainland extensive transmission grids will be uneconomical until such time\nas the power requirements are greatly increased by development of the existing markets\nor by new industries requiring large blocks of energy. There is now in operation\na 60,000-volt transmission system between the West Kootenay Power and Light Company plants on Kootenay River and the West Canadian Hydro Electric Corporation V 32 FINAL REPORT.\nplant at Shuswap Falls. Thus the Okanagan Valley from Sicamous south to the U.S.\nborder; Allenby, Princeton, and Copper Mountain; and Oliver to Rossland and Trail\nare all connected to a grid system which provides extra insurance to the energy supply.\nThe Fraser Valley areas from Agassiz and Rosedale to Vancouver and Britannia\nBeach are connected to the 66,000- and 33,000-volt transmission system of the B.C.\nElectric group of companies.\nOutside the above-mentioned areas the indications are that energy for general\npurposes must be produced in comparatively small plants\u2014hydro-electric or Diesel-\nelectric\u2014until the market will permit of economical connection with larger hydroelectric developments. The establishment of new large power-consuming industries in\nthe Interior would, of course, facilitate the development of larger plants and transmission systems.\n4. PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF THE CAPITAL COST OF WORKS PROPOSED FOR INCREASING THE SUPPLY AND AVAILABILITY OF\nELECTRICAL SERVICE.\nPreliminary estimates of capital cost of new works proposed for increasing\nthe supply and availability of electrical service have been made on the basis of 1943\ncosts, as follows:\u2014\nI. Proposed extensions by private operators\u2014\nAffecting new consumers 5,615\nand improved service to 3,846\n9,461\nEstimated capital cost of new works\u2014\nB.C. Electric Railway Company\u2014\nFraser Valley, Kamloops - Barriere,\nVancouver Island South $1,003,549\nWest Kootenay Power and Light Company\u2014\nSeventeen areas \u25a0 410,000\nEast Kootenay Power and Light Company\u2014\nElko and Wardner 45,919\nConsolidated Mining and Smelting Company\u2014\nKimberley 5,197\nNorthern B.C. Power Company\u2014\nPrince Rupert . 9,900\nCrow's Nest Pass Electric Light and\nPower Co.\u2014\nMichel '. 5,832\n\u2022 $1,480,397\nII. Proposed consolidation of privately-owned operations\u2014\nAffecting new consumers 3,182\nand improved service to 16,956\n20,138\nCarried forward __ $1,480,397 RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 33\nBrought forward $1,480,397\nEstimated capital cost of new works\u2014\nGenerating plant\u2014\nHydro-electric plant, Nanaimo $3,000,000\nFourteen Diesel electric plants or\nequivalent 921,299\n$3,921,299\nDistribution plant 897,813\n 4,819,112\nIII. Proposed extensions of Municipal systems\u2014\nAffecting new consumers 654\nEstimated cost of extensions to ten systems 195,557\nIV. Proposed extensions of industrially-owned systems\u2014\nLillooet, affecting new consumers 61\nEstimated cost of extension 20,780\nTotal estimated cost $6,515,846\nTotal new consumers I 9,512\nTotal present consumers to whom service would\nbe improved .* 20,802\nTotal consumers affected 30,314\nThe proposed consolidation, Group II. of the foregoing, involves 23 operations of\nprivately-owned utilities. The present reported investment in electrical service plant,\nexclusive of \" intangible assets,\" is as follows:\u2014\nReported original cost of property $4,999,115\nReported depreciation reserves 1,365,237\nNet investment $3,633,878\nIt is estimated that the depreciation reserve which would\nbe applicable to plant to be retained in service, and\nwhich would therefore constitute a capital liability,\namounts to $1,033,943\nA measure of the total capital involved in the consolidation may be stated as follows:\u2014\nPresent net investment in plant 3,633,878\nAccumulated capital liability in respect to depreciation of old plant to be retained in service 1,033,943\nEstimated cost of proposed new works:\u2014\nGenerating plant $3,921,299\nDistribution plant 897,813\n 4,819,112\nTotal $9,486,933\nThis consolidation would provide for increasing the supply and availability of\nservice to 16,956 consumers now receiving limited service and would provide for service V 34 FINAL REPORT.\nto 3,182 rural consumers, thus affecting 20,138 consumers. The capital investment\nwould, therefore, be $471 per consumer.\nThis figure, which includes the full original cost of both generating and distribution plant compares favourably with the estimated expenditures for distribution plant\nonly under some of the rural electrification plans in other jurisdictions. It is an extraordinary coincidence that original cost investment in total electric service facilities of\nthe B.C. Electric group of companies, as determined by the Public Utilities Commission,\nis also $471 per consumer.\nThis is a reasonable figure for capital cost, including as it does both production\nand distribution plant and all classes of consumers\u2014domestic, commercial, industrial,\netc. The proposed hydro-electric plant at Nanaimo will solve the supply problem\nfor all Vancouver Island for some time, and there are other potential sites on the same\nriver which can be developed as required. The storage facilities provided for in\nthe preliminary estimates for the first installation will serve future developments,\nthereby reducing the unit cost of the latter.\nOperating costs of the consolidated undertaking will not compare so favourably\nwith large concentrated operations. The consumers are located in widely separated\ngroups and a considerable number of these groups must be supplied for some time to\ncome from Diesel-operated plants. While it cannot be hoped to realize operating costs\nas low as in the metropolitan areas a great improvement over present conditions will\nresult from a consolidated operation under one competent organization.\nA summary of the estimates of capital cost of new works is contained in Table 2. RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE.\nV 35\nH\npa\n3\nj\n>\n\u00ab!\nQ\nZ\n<;\nPh\nPh\nP\n03\nw\nH\nH\nU\ng\nTO\ni\nPS\nu\nZ\nw\no\nPm\nQ\nW\nCO .\nO H\nPh o\n\u00ab J\no <\n\u00a31\no\nhi\nGQ\no\nO\nPh\n<\nO\nw\na\nH\nh\no\nen\nw\nH\n<\n\u25a0s\nI\u2014I\nH\nCO\n>H\nPS\n\u25a0a!\n55\nP3\nPh\na\npa\n3\ncS\n^\n33\nr\n.a\ncS\nj\no>\nB\n\u00a3\na\n0\n\u2022 fa\n0 m\nI\nO T3\n0\n** ^\nPh\n1\n. P\n* \u00a3-J 33\na s e \"3\nP. ft S yl\n\u00a3 g \u00bb 0\na\ncfl\ns\nM\nI\nP\nu\n1 I\n1 1\n0 .9 ^ 'C 0\nd\n'rt\ns \u00ab\n>> S \" 8 \u00ab\u25a0\na S M r S\nfi O '\" * 0\n0)\nP\n1\nP OQ\n1 2 S 8 ^ g g\nd\n1\n0\nCS T3 T> \"P TJ T3\neg\n'3 Ah.S B Ph\n,a 3 T? \u2022+> *-\nfa\np\nen\nP >. ?\u00bb\u00bb >. bT r^ t>\u00bb\n\u25a0\u00b1 U U f~, *h U U\nO t po ,00*00\nP fljQj'oJ'oS o* do) qj'oj'o) oj'oj'c\nc\n0\n\u00a3 | S $ \u00ab\n0)\n(21\n0 0 \u00abS Sz c\nn 0 ' \" ^\n0\n0\n'\"(pcoujoicncOfl.cncctfiMcnM\n8\n3 M 1 \u2022* J\nW\n4fi(S&5pQjS-SSflS5\n1\n9 S g \u00a3 |\nfa K O O 5\n*g\n1 *\n\u00a3**%***\u00a3\u00a3*\u00a3***\nCJ\na\n\u00ab 0)\n3:a>o>cDa>0)a)'Hflja)0>a>o>ai\n3\nfa\n\u00a3 Z\nfa\nKJ\n0 0 en 0 c- cm 0\nC7i O\nt~-\nO Q Ifl\n! IO 15 O 00 t- M !CDTf**l>CMCNI\nO\nCO\nP S\n0 0 \u25a0* \u25a0* cn co e\nO O\ner\nO CM \u00abD\nCO CO CM CM Oi t-\nHJ CD 00 H O) CC\nCO\nCO\n \u00bb(S CM rH\n\u25a0**\n,_,\nN CO Ol H\nN ^H\n01\nCjO H lO\n<* CO O O \u25a0* t-\nx rH cn 0 \u00bbo cc\nCM\n\u25a0^\nW\n2*\nCO\n\u25a0*\n**\nCO rH\n&9-\nrH rH CM\nrH i-H\nfc-\nM\n\u00a3h oi\nw CO\nI\n**\no\nfc\nw\n1\nc\n0\nOOAOt- NO\na 0\nb.\n0 0 CO\nicocooco :o :rHoo)i>irjCN\nO\nCD\n0 0 \u25a0** \u25a0\u00ab* as CC 0\nc- 0\nC7-\nO M (C\nCO QO t-H rH\nai\nco 0 co 0 en t-\nCO\nCO\nft.\nB B\n0 0 in 0 \u00bbh 00 03\nCO 0\nCC\n0 t- c-\nlO t- M O\ncc\neo 10 0 en cd cc\n10\no\nO N to CO w w cr\n0 0\nC\nO to tr*\nCO CD lO CM\nc-\nf CD t- CO CC C\n>*\nCO\nCM CO CJ rH\nCM --H\nOC\n00 rH\nrH fiO CO\n10\nT~{ i-i CO\n01\nCD\nEh\nm\n\u00a3\u00a3\n00\n>*\nCO rH\n\u00a3r>\nH\nCO\no\n5\n\u00ab\nj\n3\nE\nM\nu\nB\n0 i>\n: t- t- 0 0 c- eo\nW ^ US O C- c\nCM\na c\n0 en\ni en 01 h h ro co\nrH CD rH rH Cn r-\nO\n0 c-\nj fc- t- tp t\u00a9 t\u00bb OS\n\"* CM ** CD t- CD\nm\n^ a\nO CO\n1 CO CO rn rH CO to\nO >* O rH CO r-\nt-\nQ>33\n0 ^\n. ^ \"^ t- t- \u25a0^ r-f\n00 cn 00 t> -qi t-\nE-\nSPh\n0\nCO\ns\nco'\ne\nH\ncm'\nco\"\nCO\nflj\nto o .\nih 2 P Q oj\n! C\u00a3\nu\nCD W C\nl> O tt\nNOlONlOCOMNtDM\u00ae\ni-l CM\n^*\nco ^ ^f co *h,S5\n0 H-i r-\n\u2022 c I\n0 flj p\na N \u25a0<* 0 N Oi c\ni-t c\nif\nlO CO 1-\n: eo \u00abtf \\a cm\nt-\nrH CO O lO CO r-\nc~.\ncn\nN if M lO e\n4-\ni\nH\nS\n0\n\u25a0o\nc\n1\n13\nd\nS\nH\n<\n0\ng. a\ng * \u00bb\nft. 5\n1 Is\n\"1 1\ns\n(5\n! Of\n>> la\na, M\n> > e\n11E\nfa > u\n1\nC\n<\nc\nI\n1\n*\nt\n1\n|\nk\nI\nC\n\u00bb\u25a0\ns\ns\nc\na\n1\nV\nI\n1\n1 g 1\nft! 1\n1 A\na > \u00ab\nta 3 h\na 0 a\ng B \u00a3\nrM Ed B\n0 > S\np\n4)\nc\nC\nE\n-2\nCL\ne-\nB\na\np\nc\nw\n0\n\u00a3\nr\ng\nP\nc\nc\nr-\n7\nc\nc\n\\\na\nt\nP\n1\nC\na\nq\nP\nG\n\u25a0r-\nf\nJ-\na\nH-\n1\n1\n\u00ab4-\nc\nc\n1\nX\n>\n1-\n|\n1\n1\n1\ni\na\nu\nV\n<\n0\n\"r-v\n\u2022a\na\nB V. 36\nFINAL REPORT.\npa\nHI\nJ\n<\n>\n<\nPh\nPh\nP\n03\nW\nW\nH\nO\ng\n<\n\u00a7\n8\ng\nPS\nO\nQ\na\nw\no\nPh\nto\nPh\no\no 6\na w\nE Ph\n<: o\nCJ\nw\na\nH\ntn\nO\nCO\nH\nH\n<:\ni-i\nH\nCO\nw\nPi\n<\n\u25ba4\nPh\nw\npa\n<\nJ3\nu\ns\ns\nfa\na\n(1\nc\n&\n0\nPurchase, Canadian Collieries.\nPurchase, Canadian Collieries.\nPurchase or Nanaimo.\nPurchase, Canadian Collieries.\n'3\nfa\nW\nd\nfa\nw\nM\nH\nO\nft]\nft.\n\u00a9\nEh\n01\nO\nO\nJ\na\n3.\n<\n*hJ2-\nO rH\ntw 0\n4,741,288\n44,374\n15,700\no o\nO lO\no t-\n\\a cm*\nCM\nOS\nOC\nCMinCOCMlOOCMCOOSCO\ncxenioioeooocMcoioco\ncMeoco-^co-cPcnen'^CM\nC0\"o^^*C0*CM00\"cM0c\"rH\"\nrH rH CM i-H rH CO rH\nt-\nio\nU3\niO\nOS\nM\no\n00\nt>\no\"\nCM\no\n00\n6-\nO\nCM\nCO\nIO\nLO\nto*\nB\no\n+gfa\nS\nCD C- O\n00 t*- O\n[> lO t*\nco\" lO\nCD rH\nOO\no o\no io\no t>\nio cm\"\neo\nCjO\nC-*\ncn\n00\nCMiococMioocMcocnco\ncocnioiacococMcoiooo\nCNMCC^coM'cacRH\/iM\nCO* C* V *** OO\" CM\" CO* CM* CO* rH*\nrH i-H CM rH rH 00 rH\niO\nlO\nUS\n0)\no\n00\no*\nCM\n69\no\nCO\nt-\no\"\nCM\n\u00ab\u25a0\nHt\nin\ncm'\nt\u00bb\nos\nOS\n*i\nCM\nat\n.5\nBS P\nh cd\nPfL,\nat\nCM C-\no cn\nlO c-\nt> co\"\nCO\neo'\n'\ncn\nen\nCM\nCM\ncn\neo\ni\nn\nt- hj ft |> o lO\nCD rH CM CD rH\ntd\nto\nIO\nOS\nCO*\nrH\nr\u2014> CO\n\u00abH.5'cj\n!li\n0 cj P\n!,+> CD\nZoc\nfa o\ncn cs o\nt- eo\nCn rH\ncm\"\nio ih\nCM\nX\neo*\nOlOfNlfllOcDCCHjcCrl\nco-sHcncMCM in lo m co\nCM\nCD\nCD\ncc\nCM\nlO\nV\nrl\nBrought forward\t\nGroup 11.\u2014Proposed Consolidation of Privately-owned Operations\n\u2014Continued.\nr-\n1\nr\nfa\n1\n\u00a3\nC\nC\ne\nt\nP\n0\ns-\nfl\n\u00a3\np\nCJ\n5\nX\nt\n1\n0\ncc\nr-\nB\n5\nV\n>\nQ\nfa\n\u25a0a\nc\n4-\nc\nE-\nGroup 111.\u2014Proposed Extensions of Municipally-owned Systems.\n1\np\na\nr.\n.a\nE\n%.\nrl\n\u25a0*-\nE\n3>\nC\nU-\n\u25a0S\nc\ne\nc\nJ\nK\n'X\na\nT\n1\n|\na\np\nc\n0\n1\na\nrV\nq\n$\ns\n1\na\n1\n1\nEC\nc\nGroup IV.\u2014Proposed Extensions of Industrially-owned Systems.\n\u00ab\nC\n1\n2\ng\na\nw RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 37\n5. ESTIMATED RATES UNDER WHICH ELECTRICAL SERVICE MAY\nBE FURNISHED UNDER PROPOSED PLAN.\nThe rates on which local service can be furnished depends upon so many elements\nthat estimates of the rates made before these elements are determined would be meaningless. The actual rates will depend upon the organization of the utilities supplying\nthe service\u2014upon their management costs and financial credit. In the Progress Report\nthe Committee emphasized the interdependence of three factors, namely: rates, consumption, and plant growth.\nIn this report it is accepted as axiomatic that unit costs decrease as consumption\nincreases. But it may be as well to explain briefly the interrelationship of these\nfactors.\nA substantial part of the cost of providing electric service is only to a negligible\nextent affected by the quantity used. This part of the cost includes the outlay for\nmeter-reading, billing, servicing, acquiring new business, a proportion of the general\noverhead, and interest and depreciation on the construction cost of the distribution\nsystem. These items are the same whether 1 K.W.H. per month or 100 K.W.H. are\nused. They are only slightly increased if the use requires a three-wire connection and\nare again stationary to the limit of the demand of any residential user. These items\nare affected by density of population, labour and material cost, standards of construction, efficiency of operation, and other factors. They vary according to a continent-\nwide survey made by the Power Commission of the United States from a minimum of\n83 cents to a maximum of $2.43 per customer per month. In British Columbia an\naverage of $1.50 per customer per month is a conservative assumption. These items\nare commonly referred to as \" customer costs,\" and are in addition to the generating\nand transmission costs.\nOn the basis of \" customer cost\" of $1.50 and a use of 30 K.W.H. per month\u2014\na lighting load\u20145 cents per K.W.H. must be added to the generating and transmission\ncost. If use is increased to 150 K.W.H. per month\u2014a lighting and range load\u2014only\n1 cent must be added. As a result of the increased use the unit cost is reduced in this\ncase by 4 cents per K.W.H. As consumption increases the \" customer costs \" are spread\nover a greater number of K.W.H. and the unit K.W.H. cost automatically decreases.\nThe average unit cost of electricity is more significant than rate schedules.\nThe former will be high if the service is for house-lighting only. Service will be\nlimited to house-lighting if the rates are not designed to enable the consumers to use\nelectricity for wider purposes. It is therefore desirable that a type of rate structure\nwhich suits the requirements of the household consumer be made available so as to\npermit a greater use of electricity. Such a rate structure, which is called promotional,\nshould be designed to lower the average unit charge to the consumer, as the latter\nmakes possible a greater output and a lower unit cost of production. An example of\na promotional rate structure is that available in the Fraser Valley, i.e.:\u2014\nFirst 30 K.W.H. per month per 1,000 square feet\nof floor area 5 cents per K.W.H.\nThe next 200 K.W.H. costs 2 cents per K.W.H.\nAll excess over 230 K.W.H 1 cent per K.W.H.\nAnd, in addition, water-heater service may be obtained in conjunction with a cooking\nrange at a flat rate per month of $3 for a 750-watt heater and $4 per month for\na 1,000-watt heater. This works out at 55\/100 cent per K.W.H. This is similar to\nthe proportional rate structure used in the City of Vancouver.\nThe reason for the higher charge for the first block for the rural area is that\nthe cost of distribution is higher because of the greater distance between consumers.\nWhere the consumers are more scattered than in the Fraser Valley the unit rate in\nthis block would necessarily be higher. V 38 FINAL REPORT.\nAnother example of a promotional rate structure would be:\u2014\nFirst 30 K.W.H. per month @ 8 cents per K.W.H.\nNext 170 K.W.H. per month @ 2 cents per K.W.H.\nNext 720 K.W.H. per month @ y2 cent per K.W.H.\nAll over 920 K.W.H. per month @ 1 cent per K.W.H.\nThis type of rate structure fits the requirements of the household consumer and\ntherefore promotes the greater use of electricity. The first block would include house-\nlighting, which practically every one requires, there being at present no serious\ncompetition. If electricity is used for house-lighting only the volume of business is\nvery small and the unit cost of furnishing service is high. Hence the reason for high\nrates on the first block. The second block of 170 K.W.H. approximates the consumption of a range. Here the service is in a highly competitive field where the consumer\nhas available coal, wood, and sawdust, oil, and in some cases gas. If the rate for this\nblock does not meet the competitive costs the customer's use of electricity will be limited\ngenerally to lighting. The third block enables the customer to operate a 1,000-watt\nwater-heater as cheaply as by any other method. A water-heater requires more heat\nunits than cooking and unless rates are suitable many customers will find it more\neconomical to use other fuels for both water-heating and cooking. The final block rate\nis the average of the previous rates and enables the consumer to use any additional\nelectricity at this average rate.\nFrom the foregoing the promotional feature of this type of rate structure may be\nobserved. A rate which permits the full use of electrical service enables a customer\nto use thirty times as much energy at only four times what he would pay for lighting\nonly. But the average cost to the consumer is lowered from 8 cents to 1 cent\nper K.W.H.\nUnfortunately in the past, utilities, both publicly and privately-owned, have\ndeparted from logical or scientific rate structures for a doubtful advantage in public\nrelations. As a consequence the public has been given a wrong conception of the cost\nof electric service and it may be very difficult to secure acceptance of a rate structure\nthat will best promote a high average use and consequent low average unit cost.\nUnder the type of promotional rate structure suggested above many customers find\nit to their advantage to become large users of electrical service. That leads directly to\ngreatly increased energy output by the utility at lower average costs of production.\nBut the utility must have the necessary capital resources and credit to provide the\nenlarged plant facilities required to furnish the increased volume of service.\nThe importance of financial credit on rates may be gathered from the analysis of\ntwenty-three areas, in Table 3. This group of small utilities which are classed as\nGroup 2, under the proposed consolidation, have now plant with a reported investment\nof $3,634,000. One per cent, interest rate on this amount is $36,340 per year, which\nis equal to over $2 from each of their 16,956 consumers. Under the suggested consolidation of these twenty-three areas, including adequate generating plant and distribution to contiguous rural areas:\u2014\nThe new capital required is estimated at (see Table 2).... $4,819,000\nThe presently reported net investment is 3,634,000\nTotal net capital required $8,453,000\nThe total number of consumers will be 20,800.\nOne per cent, interest rate on the net capital is $84,530 per year which will equal\n$4 for each consumer. Hence the impossibility of estimating rate before the basis of\nfinance is determined becomes apparent.\nThe effect of income taxes on the cost of furnishing service has been pointed out\nin the Progress Report. This particular group of twenty-three companies in 1943 RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 39\npaid non-refundable income taxes in the amount of $132,285, equal to $8 for each of\nthe 16,956 consumers. Some of the group paid no income taxes while the total paid in\nrespect of Vancouver Island Centre was equal to $14 per consumer. The rates cannot\nbe estimated until it is known whether or not the plan of consolidation will eliminate\nthis item in the cost of furnishing service.\nThe future specific rates under the proposed consolidation cannot be estimated until\nthe basic conditions of service are established\u2014organization, method of raising the\nnecessary capital funds and the cost thereof, the amount of income tax, the scope of\nthe consolidation, the possibility of establishing a proper rate structure, and many other\nfactors.\n6. THE FINANCIAL PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN FURNISHING ELECTRICAL\nSERVICE.\n(a.) Whether financing of Extension Projects can be handled by\nExisting Utilities.\nThe Committee submitted to the various utilities a questionnaire regarding extensions of service to the potential rural consumers in their respective areas of operation.\nAmong others the following question was asked:\u2014\n\" 9. Is your utility in a position to finance the indicated capital additions to\ngenerating and distribution plant? \"\nThe foregoing question was submitted to fourteen privately-owned utilities. The\nB.C. Electric Railway Company and the West Kootenay Light and Power Company\nreplied \" Yes \"; two others replied \" No \"; one replied that it was not accepting any\nmajor loads at the present time due to power shortage, but did not state its position\nin respect to financing new plant. The East Kootenay Power Company is working on\nthe questionnaire. The West Canadian Hydro Electric Corporation indicates ability\nto finance in part. No replies have been received from other privately-owned utilities.\nThe question was submitted to ten municipally-owned utilities. Six replied. Only\none answered \" Yes \" to the above question; four answered \" No \"; one was indefinite..\nOne industrial corporation answered \" No,\" while the other has the matter under\nconsideration.\nIn the two extensive areas, Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island South supplied\nby the B.C. Electric Railway Company group, rural electrification would be a small\nproject in comparison with the existing electrical undertaking of the companies in\nVancouver and Victoria areas respectively.\nIn the areas served by West Kootenay Light and Power Company the total investment required for further rural electrification would be small in comparison with the\nCompany's existing undertaking. It may be assumed that the existing utility could\nhandle the financing.\nOther small extensions of privately-owned systems\u2014Group I. of Table 2\u2014would\nappear to involve no financial problem beyond the utility's ability to handle.\nIt is extremely doubtful if any of the projects included under Group II. of Table 2\ncould be financed as separate undertakings by any one of the existing utilities. It will\nbe noted from Table 2 that this group will require for generating plants and distribution-lines . $4,819,000\nThe present reported net investment in plant is 3,634,000\nThe capital liability in respect to depreciation of plant to be\nretained in service is estimated at 1,034,000\nTotal capital requirement $9,487,000 V 40 FINAL REPORT.\nIt might be possible for a single company in possession of all the existing assets\nto obtain the $5,800,000 new capital required. But a large part of the existing plant\nhas been financed by bond issues and it is hardly possible that the additional amount\ncould be raised by the sale of bonds unless the latter were guaranteed by the Province.\nThe incidence of income tax\u2014not less than 40 per cent, of the earnings on common\nstock equity\u2014makes it necessary for common stock to earn 10 per cent, in order to pay\n6 per cent, dividends. If the service is to be self-sustaining it is essential that the\ncapital funds be obtained at the lowest possible rate of interest.\n(b.) Whether Rates pursuant to Extensions could be carried by New Consumers\nwithout concurrently increasing unduly Costs to Existing Consumers.\nIn those extensions proposed for the larger companies\u2014Group I. of Table 2\u2014the\ncost of the added services would be so small in comparison to the present business\nvolume that there should be no difficulty in furnishing the service at reasonable rates\nwithout increasing the cost to existing consumers.\nIn Group II. of Table 2, which includes the areas suggested for consolidation, the\nservice could be so organized that instead of increasing costs to present consumers\nthey could be lowered materially and progressively. Lower costs to present consumers\nwill result from increased uses which will follow improvement in the quality and availability of the service.\nThe last annual reports of the utilities operating in these areas have been summarized. Estimates of operating costs of the proposed consolidation have been made\non a conservative basis. In the latter, provision is made for depreciation and full-time\noperation of a new hydro-electric plant for Vancouver Island Centre and for fourteen\ncomplete new Diesel-operated plants, or their equal. It is assumed that the consolidation will finance on a basis not subject to income tax. The revenues have been\nestimated on the same per customer ratio as for 1943 while provision is made for considerable increase in production and energy sales. The comparative data follow:\u2014\nComparison between reported Operating Results for 19U3 in 23 Areas and estimated\nOperating Results for the same Areas under proposed Consolidation to include\nExpansion to adjacent Rural Areas.\nEstimated under\nActual, 1943. Consolidation Plan.\nNumber of consumers 16,956 20,118\nK.W.H. produced and purchased 50,757,000 56,985,000\nK.W.H. sold to consumers 44,785,000 50,146,000\nAverage revenue per consumer $70.59 $65.45\nAverage revenue per K.W.H. 2.7 2.6\nTotal revenue $1,196,900 $1,316,800\nOperating costs\u2014\nAdministration $117,353 $100,000\nProduction\u2014operation and maintenance 288,740 305,913\nDistribution\u2014o peration and\nmaintenance 140,612 204,388\nDepreciation on plant 163,700 271,079\nTaxes, land, etc. . 11,891 12,241\nIncome taxes, non-refundable 132,285 \t\nTotal, exclusive of interest _._. $854,581 $893,621\nAvailable for return on capital 342,319 423,179\nNet investment (reported original cost\nless depreciation reserve) $3,633,878 $8,452,990\nRatio return to net investment 9.4% 5.0% RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 41\nThe foregoing comparisons are of conditions as they are and as they would be in\nthe first stage of the programme. Under that programme there would be adequate\ngenerating and distribution facilities for a great increase in production and sales at\nvery little additional cost. The possibilities for developing sales of electrical energy\nunder rates permitting general uses are obvious. As the use and sales increase\nthe average unit cost to the consumer will decrease.\nThe costs need not be increased to existing consumers if the project can be financed\nfully at less than 5 per cent, interest rate. Each 1 per cent, reduction in the interest\nrate below 5 per cent, will permit 6% per cent, reduction in revenue upon the present\nvolume of business. Conversely each 1 per cent, addition to the interest rate above\n5 per cent, will require 6% per cent, increase in revenue upon the present volume\nof business.\nEach 1 per cent, in the interest rate will be equal to $4 per year per customer.\n(c.) If Projects cannot be on a Self-sustaining Basis,\nhow could they be financed?\nIt is submitted that electrical services should be established on a self-sustaining\nbasis; i.e., that revenues from service should be sufficient to pay all operating and\nadministration costs, to provide reserves to maintain unimpaired the plant investment,\nand to pay the interest on capital invested. That is not to say that the revenues and\nexpenses should be balanced in the first month or the first year of each operation, but\na utility project should be planned so that expenses and revenues will balance over\na foreseeable operating cycle. The first part of such a cycle will begin with the organization, planning, and construction of facilities. Plans and facilities must be in advance\nof one year's requirements; they should provide for a period of growth in service and\nfor stimulation of growth. Consequently in the first part of the operating cycle\nthe expenses may be expected to exceed the revenue; in the middle of the cycle\nthe revenue may be expected to equal the expenses; in the final part of the cycle\nthe excess of revenue over expenses must balance the deficiency in the first part.\nComparatively large amounts of capital are necessary for:\u2014\n(1.) The construction of plant, and\n(2.) Working capital or credit to carry the enterprise through complete\noperating cycles.\nThe interest or return on the invested capital is an important factor in the cost\nof service. The ability of a utility to furnish a modern standard of service, and to\nincrease its use while decreasing its unit cost, depends in large measure upon its\ncapital resources and the rate of interest thereon.\nFew individual investors have the knowledge and experience to assess the organization, management, and prospects of any particular utility undertaking. Their investment in utilities is subject therefore to a degree of risk that is reflected in the interest\nor dividend rate. There should be a minimum of risk to investment in soundly conceived and efficiently operated electric utilities. Prior to the imposition of large-scale\ntaxation those utilities which were soundly planned as regional systems and operated\nunder Government agencies had an advantage over privately-owned utilities because\nthe Government guaranteed the investor against any risk, real or assumed, and thereby\nenabled the systems to obtain capital at low cost. The enormous increase in Dominion\nincome tax applicable to private companies is a fact which further increases the difficulty of financing privately-owned utilities. Apart from land, school, and other\nmunicipal taxes, the electric utility service operated by companies in British Columbia\npaid Dominion income taxes totalling $3,469,000 in 1943. It seems incongruous that\nan industry paying national taxes on this scale should have to be subsidized. V 42 FINAL REPORT.\nIt has been indicated in this report that a limited service to a great majority of\nthe population is, or can be, furnished on a self-sustaining basis. But it is possible\nthat costs of that service in some of the areas listed in Group II. may be too high to\npromote sufficient use to materially improve the living conditions of the rural consumers. It may then be in the public interest to stimulate, an extensive use by\ndeparture from a strict cost basis. To what extent this should be done becomes a\nmatter of policy.\nAfter consolidation of Group II. is effected there may be a few thousand potential\nconsumers beyond economical distance of the improved services. In such cases it may\nultimately appear in the public interest to provide some degree of direct governmental\nassistance by way of operating subsidy or payment for distribution facilities.\n7. OTHER TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC INFORMATION IN RESPECT TO\nRURAL ELECTRIFICATION WITHIN THE PROVINCE.\nThe principal difficulty restricting rural electrification in the Province is the uneconomical number of agencies engaged in furnishing a degree of service to small isolated\ngroups of consumers. No significant progress can be made in rural electrification\nunless the industry which must undertake extensions to rural areas is organized to\nplan, finance, build, and operate efficiently. It is obvious that a few hundred consumers\ncannot provide sufficient volume of business to support an efficient public utility\norganization and to pay the carrying charges on the capital investment required for\nsuch an undertaking.\nThe success of any reorganization of the industry will depend upon:\u2014\n(1.) The inclusion of a number of consumers sufficient to warrant the employment\nof competent personnel to plan, build, and operate the necessary plant facilities.\n(2.) The development of the uses of electrical energy by those to whom a limited\nsupply is now available. The present use of electricity is not sufficient to warrant\nthe capital cost of adequate facilities, and more general use will depend upon rate\nschedules which will permit electricity to compete successfully with other fuels for\ncooking, water-heating, auxiliary space heating, etc.\n(3.) The ability of the reorganized industry to obtain capital and credit to\nconstruct facilities and to provide working capital over a necessary period of load\ndevelopment.\nThe latter is important, for it may require from three to five years under promotional rates to build a self-sustaining volume of business. At the present time electrical\nequipment and appliances are hard to obtain and will be for a considerable period after\nthe war. This period could be used advantageously for the planning and construction\nof necessary plant facilities and for the reorganization of the industry so that it would\nbe ready to meet the post-war demand.\nThe twenty-three areas in Group II. of Table 2 represent what may be considered\na minimum requirement for a self-sustaining enterprise. The amalgamation of these\nareas under a single organization, whether the latter be a private company or a public\nauthority, would seem to require legislative action. Even in the case of consolidation\nunder a private operation it may be necessary for the Province to participate in financing so that the lowest rate of interest may apply to plant investment, and so that\nthe credit of the undertaking can be maintained during a reasonable development\nperiod.\nIn the twenty-three areas suggested for consolidation the existing utilities now\nhave a reported net capital investment in plant totalling $3,634,000. There are now\n16,956 connected customers who also have a considerable investment in wiring, motors,\nfixtures, and appliances which may average $200 per customer and in the aggregate RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 43\nmay be over $3,000,000. Under existing conditions both the utilities' and the consumers' capital outlay are being utilized on a short-time and costly basis.\nEven when the facilities for producing and distributing electricity are provided it\nis necessary for the subscribers to make a considerable expenditure for wiring and\nappliances before general use can be made of the service. It is suggested that some\nprovision whereby the central utility could make limited short-term loans to subscribers,\nfor wiring and appliances, would encourage the use of service and the development of\nload.\nThe survey by this Committee and its report deal primarily with rural electrification. Consequently, the methods suggested herein for improving rural electrification\nby consolidation apply only to those areas and services which must be expanded to\ncarry out a practical general plan. There are other communities with inadequate and\ncostly service which might be included in the general plan when its advantages are\ndemonstrated.\nAs referred to in the letter of transmittal, your Committee has confined itself as\nclosely as possible to the financial feasibility of rural electrification as expressed in\nthe terms of reference and has not considered the possible general economic and social\nimprovement which might result in assisting the rehabilitation of the rural areas by\nproviding those areas with electricity on similar terms to those in the larger cities of\nthe Province.\nIf it is accepted as a fact that for the economy of the country as a whole the rural\nareas should be populated in order to provide agricultural products and reduce the\nimportation of foodstuffs, it may be desirable as a contribution to rehabilitation to\nprovide farm families with modern conveniences even though the agency supplying\nthose conveniences is not self-sustaining. The inevitable trend, however, will be to\nbuild electric lines that are not self-sustaining; therefore there should be a limit set\nbelow which densities per mile of line or minimum revenue per mile should be considered even from the social standpoint. There is no justification for building the\nlines which have no semblance of self-support.\nThe Committee suggests the consolidation of the smaller utilities in order to\nprovide a better financial status and more economical management, thereby permitting\na reduction in the retail charges. Under such a consolidation it may be possible to\nestablish uniform wholesale costs to the several distributing areas by pooling the production and transmission expenses. To establish uniform retail rates in the distributing areas within the suggested consolidation would necessitate increasing the rates in\nthe larger cities and towns in order to make the enterprise self-sustaining. As an alternative some plan of governmental subsidy would be required to absorb the deficits.\nThis is a matter of policy.\nIn 1941 the Legislature of Tasmania amended the \" Hydro Electric Commission\nAct\" of that State to bring into effect uniform charges throughout the State for\nelectricity for other than bulk supply purposes. These charges to be the same as those\nruling in the city of Hobart.\nThis reflects the idea that has begun to appear in some quarters to the effect that\ncharges for electric service, like postage, should be uniform to all without reference to\ncost. This idea, attractive as it may be as a social development, holds a possible danger\nto the successful operation and expansion of the electric industry, whether privately\nor publicly owned. The experiment in Tasmania, combined with the proposal to extend\nrural service beyond economic limits, will, according to the Commissioners, turn the\nformer successful operation of the Commission into a serious burden on the taxpayers. V 44 FINAL REPORT.\nThe idea appeared in a somewhat different form in Ontario, when in 1943,\nthe Government suggested the elimination of service charges in the rural areas.\nThe Chairman of the Hydro-electric Commission pointed out that a subsidy by the taxpayers of $1,600,000 a year would be required if the financial standing of the Commission was not to be jeopardized. The proposal was materially modified.\nIt is a common, almost universal practice, to set up uniform charges for a class of\ncustomers within the limited areas such as a city, municipality, or district. This is\njustified when the differential in cost is so moderate that none in the consolidation is\nseriously adversely affected.\nBut the same scheme on a Province-wide basis may be quite impractical. Here\nthe differential in cost is much greater and the average charges may appreciably exceed\nthose paid by some of the group. This increase may well result in an increase in cost\nto all and a consequent decrease in use and to a general slowing-up of the ultimate\nobjective, the widest possible use of electricity in the service of the public.\nAny artificial reduction below basic cost by uniform charges or otherwise should\nbe approached with caution and the best technical and expert advice should be sought\nand followed.\nRESUME.\n1. There is no definite line between rural electric service on the one hand and urban\nand suburban on the other.\n2. There is a close interdependent relationship between rural electrification and\nthe central station industry established to supply cities, towns, and villages.\n3. Extension of rural electric service requires a sound and progressive central\nstation industry.\n4. The large number of small separate organizations supplying electricity in the\nProvince is a serious obstacle to a sound industry and extension of service.\n5. The number of customers served by many of the organizations is too small to\nsupport the technical personnel necessary to promote good service.\n6. The overhead cost of the many organizations is excessive.\n7. Electricity for lighting service is available to a large percentage of the population of British Columbia.\n8. Average consumption for domestic purposes is less than half that of the\ncomparably sized communities in Ontario and the average unit cost is more than double.\n9. The average unit cost cannot be materially reduced unless consumption is\nincreased.\n10. Increased consumption will necessitate increased plant capacity which requires\na substantial capital outlay.\n11. Many of the organizations have not the capital or the ability to secure it to\nprovide the required expansion of service and to operate it during the development\nperiod.\n12. Some of the larger and financially stronger companies may be able to secure\nthe necessary capital.\n13. In the case of these companies the cost of rural extension bears so small a ratio\nto the total cost of operation that the cost of rural extensions will have no appreciable\neffect on urban service.\n14. The volume of business of the other companies is so small that rural extension\nwill have a serious effect on the business already established.\n15. In the opinion of the Committee, a major reorganization of the central station\nindustry is necessary not only that service may be extended in the rural areas but also\nthat rates and service in towns, villages, and areas at present served may be improved.\n16. In the reorganization as many as possible of the present supply systems should\nbe combined under one control which should have sufficient capital to carry out an RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE. V 45\nextensive construction programme and to carry on the operation of the combined\nsystems until they become self-sustaining.\n17. The organization proposed cannot be expected to be self-sustaining until a\nsufficient load is built up to carry the expanded supply systems.\n18. The length of the deficit period suggested above will depend on the energy,\ninitiative, and vision of the administration, on its freedom from excessive overhead\nand other adverse influences, on availability of appliances, and on the establishment of\na scientific rate structure.\n19. Until a policy of reorganization is determined, estimates of rates give no\ninformation of value.\n20. Service should be provided at cost and the cost should be kept to an absolute\nminimum. The cost of capital\u2014interest on borrowed moneys or dividends to shareholders\u2014should be carefully controlled. Unnecessary capital costs, excessive overhead, profits to municipal or other public ownership organizations are all detrimental\nto expansion of service.\n21. The undeveloped water-powers of the Province are not at present a material\nfactor in rural electrification. Their development depends on a general growth of the\ndemand for domestic, commercial, and industrial purposes. For the time being many\nof the smaller communities must be served by individual fuel plants which should be\nstandardized and improved and which should be controlled by a centralized organization. V 46\nFINAL REPORT.\n3\nH\nX\n<\nH\n03\n<\nH\n>\n55\nZ\nm\nH\nx\nW\nw\n>\nCO\n3 02\n2 a\nE-1 P\nOh B\ns ti\nP H\ngp\nO Q\nO H\n. z\nw fee\nr3 q\nrt ^\nM H\nE-i\n2 <\n(TO\n03 S3\nS Ph\nrn\no >*\ng\n03 S\nO \u201e\nPh JS\npq 5\n63\nX\nH\nZ\no\na\nH\nz\nw\n02\nw\n03\nPh\nfc\nO\nH\nz\np\no\na\n cc\nd\no o\ntfi (XI\nCO CM C-\ne\n\u00a9\nCO\nw \u00a9\n\u00a9\nS\neo o\nlO o\n\u00a9 CJ \"^\nu\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nt- t-\n\u00a9\n66-\n-* -*\nXQ CO\n\u25a0cr t> n\ncc\n\u00a9\nLO\n\u00a9 t-\n\u25a0J\n*\nri\no G\n\u2022^r t-\nt- M CT\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\n00 CM\no\nua\nCO c*\no to\nCO \u00a9 CC\nCO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 \u00a9\n\u25a0*\n&S-\nCO \u00abj\nid id\n\u25a0rf [> Cv\nt^\nOC\nCO\nd i>\n\"*\n1-1\nid\nCM\no c\n\u00a9 \u00bbH\nH N \u00a9\n\u00a9\nc\neo\n\u00a9 \u25a0\u00ab*\n\u00a9\n6\"?\neo t-\nP0 CC\nU3 rH\n\u25a0J in\nCO rH CO\nco d \u00a9\ncc\n\u00a9\nxd cc\n\u00a9\nco'\nrH\nrH\n\u00a3\no\nEH\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\no \u00a9\n-H- Ifl\n** CM \u00a9\nc\nc\n\u00a9\neo t-\n\u00a9\nCm\nCO c<\n\u00a9 UO\nCM CM \u00a9\nCX\n\u00ab\nO\nC- cc\n\"*\ns\ntv?\neg cc\n-* -^\nco' id \u00a9\nu:\n^c\nd\nh* IT\nCO\nu\nCO\no\nu\no o\nCO rH\n00 CM t-\nc\nc\nm\nxa c\n\u00a9\nire\nt-\nCO t-\n^ cn\n\u00a9 eo o\ntc\nT\n\u00a9 c\no>\nw\nW\neg cm\nCO CO\nCM* \u2022* c-\nu\nd\n\"* lO\ncm'\nis\no \u00a9\n\u00a9 HrtH\ncm cm xa\nc\nc\n\u00a9\nCO c\\\n\u00a9\nCO CN\n\u00a9 eg\nrH -^ C\ncc\n1G\nLC5\neo o\"\nM1\nua\nrA ei\nCO CO\nCM CO -*\nec\n-a\n\u2022*\nCO ^\nCM\nH~\n\u00a9 \u00a9\n\u00a9 \u00a9\n\u00a9 to \u00bbs\nc\nOC\n\u00a9\nT-t If\n\u00a9\nd\n&5^\nco \u00a9\nrH CM\n\u00a9 \u00a9\nCO CO\n00 \u00a9 \u00a9\nrH CO -^P\nCM\nc\n0!\nCO\nCO\nrH O\neo' \u25a0*\nCM\ncm'\n\u25a0f\u2014\n\u00a9 \u00a9\nCO \u00a9\ntr- \u00a9 xa\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u25a0* CO\nUS\nd\nCO\n\u20ac\u00a3\u25a0\nCM lO\nr-I r-l\nCO \u00a9\nCM CO\nCO [> r-\nrH CM \u00ab\nCs\n\u00a9\nit-\ncm'\n00 t-\nCM CO-\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 \u00a9\n(M tD\nhh* \u00a9 ec\nc\nCC\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 CM\n\u00a9\nd\nCN\nC\/3-\nCO \u00a9\n\u00a9 r-\nCP rH\n*H CM\n\"^00 r-\nH rl DO\no\n00\nlO US\n(N CM\n\u00ab\ne\nc\nc\no\nHJ h->\nsd cd\n\u00bbH tH\no o\n& B\no o\nU O\ntH\n.\u00b0 .u\nCO\n-4-3\n*c \"d\nP\n[P\n-p +>\n*\u25a0\n\u2022\n'\u00a3\nd c\npel W\n0\nQ\ns\n>> >\n\u00ab cc\nje j\n'3 '\u00ab\no o\n\u20229 xi\nr? >\u00bb\na w\np p\n.2 .2\ncS\na)\nP5\nO C\nJg ^3\nJh t-\no3 03\nP P\nCJ\nO fl\ncS cS\nCU\n3 K\nH-3 -r>\n0\nd c\nKl CO\nd\nCQ CC\nIS f\u00a3\nm\noi\nCO\nS\n|\n1\nP\n0\n,X\nC\n>\nT3\nP\ncS\nP\nea\n-e\np\np\n03\ns\np\no\n1\ncS [\/\u25a0\n03 cc\na\n\u25a0^ *-\n1 \u00b0\n13 tn\nP C\n50\nS e\ns\n^ 1\n3 ^\nrej\nP\nr^\nCO\nO\nPh\nt)\nfl\nBi\nre, Kaleden, Nara-\n. Hedley, Oliver, Oso-\nOkanagan Mission,\nm\ncS\nO\n^C *\nr- A\ncS tf\npi2\no\nH\n\u2022s\n!\n1\nB*\nSt\nCJ\ng\no\nr\na\np\nM\no\na>\n1\ntH\nV\ne\np\no\no\njig\n> -5\nc\nI\nCC\n(-\n1\n1\n^ .\nI s\nRt\nO\nH->\n'cl\nB -H\n<\n0)\ns\ne\nO\n>\n5\n- 'C-\n60 C\n\u00a7 \u00b0\n*CS\nHi\np (5\n\u2022a x\no *\nB\n0\n5\n,2\nB\nB\nO\nCQ\np t;\nCJ rt\nt- a\nw 5 t\n\u00ab s c\nS CO\nto t\nH s\na\ne\n\u00a7 >\nhJ cc\n^ (2\n>\n-\np\n0\nt\nc\ncs\nr>\nP u\ntH H\n5\nc\n0\ne\n>\nto p\n<\n0\n-4-\na\np\ncS\n&\nG\na\n3\nO cS - \u00a3\na 1 81\nm P >> W\nO\nb i\no\nc\"\no\nH^\nV)\nV\nU\nr\n0\nD\ne\nq\nrl\no\nbo\nto\ncd\nO\n.3 t-\nCS cS\np e\nc\n#p\na\na\nC\n> RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE.\nV 47\nc\nir\nir\nir\n<-\nr\no\ner\nT\n\u00a9\nC\nIf)\n\u00a9\ncc\nt-\nOC\nir-\nt-\nc\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\ner\nor\nM\na-\nt-\ne^\nt-\nCS\n\u00ab* US\nlfl\nt-\nt-\ncc\nt-\nOC\nCO\n\u00a9\nc-s\n0-\n\nCC\nCO\n00\no\ncs\n\u00a9\ncc\nc^:\nc^\nOC\nCM\nC\/5- ^,\ni*\nIf\ncc\n1C\nIC\nc\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\no\nc\n\u00a9\nc\n\u00a9\nCN\nCC\nCC\n\u00a9\nlf>\n& ^\n-<*\nu:\nut\n\"\"*\nCC\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\ncn\nffl\nif)\na\ncc\n\u00ab\nOC\n\u00ab\nCV\n\u2022\u00bb CO\nCO\n*\u25a0*\n\u2022*\nCO\nTf\nIf\nIf!\nh<\n\" r-\n\" c\n\u00a9\n^\nc>\nCO\nrH\n\u00a9\nIC\n\u00a9\nW CO\neo\neo\n<*\nCQ\neo\n\"Ct\nLO\n\u00a9\ne\nin\nus\n(T\n\" \u00abg\nc\n\u00a9\ncn\nc\ncc\nOC\nOf\nCN\n\u00a9\nC* co\nCO\neo\n93\nCN\nCO\n\u2022^\n\u2022\u00ab#\non\non\n\u00a9\nJO\n\\r\n\u00a9\n\u25a0\"3\ne>\nb-\ncv\n\u2022d\nfc-\ncc\n\u00a9\nW CM\nCM\nCM\nCO\n(M\nN\nec\nCO\no\n\u00a9\ncc\n1\u2014\n\u00a9\ncc\n1C\nCN\nb-\nCC\na\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nri\nB\nCM\n\"\nH\nec\nCM\nu\nc<\nK\nu\ncq\np\ncr\ni\nc\nc\nC\nc\n\u2014\nHJ\nH-\ntH\nE>\n>\n|-\na\np\n|t\n\"v-\nt\nP\nr=\nH\nP\nB\n6\nB\nP\na)\n3\n(2\n1\nc\nc\ncd\nc\ne\nE\ncd\nP\nCC\nt\nP\n*\nt,\nc\n!\nE\n=\nfc\nk-\n?\nC\nR\nQ\nc\nu\nd\na\n(L\nc\nE\nE\nE\nE\n0\nIS\nw\noi\ncr\ne\nA\nC\nc\nE\nP\nc\ne\ncc\ncc\n*\na\nSB\nSZ\niz\nr5\nfl\nsh\n^:\no3\nw\n3\n0\no\nE\n13\n\u00a7\nc\nX\na\nX.\nr\nCO\nM\n\u25ba-i\nK\ns\n^\nE\nc\nj\na\nc\n0\np\nPP i\n\u2014| c\n\"S\n$\n. o\nri\nCJ\n-p\n<\nc\n<\ns \u00a3\n2 S\ns o\ne w\n>\n0\nt;\nc\nn\nr\nL\nc\n0\ne\n1\n5\nr\n\u2022\u00bb\nr\na\nc,\nr\n6\n\u00ab\nf\n0\nj\n7\n' a\nI\n\"1\n1\no\nJB\nP\n0?\n1 o\"\n>\nH [fl\n15\nX\nc\nc\nr\nc\nO\nO\nc\ne\n!*\nSz\n0\ni fk\n-2 .2\nCS -M\nS ^\u00ab B\nS c .S\nn 35 o |\nSS\u00bb\u00ab\n10 | ^*\n1 i \"g 3\n1 \u00b0\n05 \" -O\nP rr, fi \u00a9\nD1 3 H |0\nS ^ w o\n\u00b0 fl\nif . fl j-j\nr-T K co Ph\nTJ.M 3 M\n1 \u00b0 \"* S\n\"\u2022si's\nIlls\ni1 111 03 01\n1 SM |\ng 8 . .S -e -S\nB H\ncd c rt fl\nft O ft tO\nS S ^ 3\no p. s a\nO S 5 S\n. P B\nW g cj p\nW u p a\nOr-llrH\nCQ < \u00a3 < V 48\nPINAL REPORT.\nH\nO\ni\u2014i\n>\n03\nw\nt\/2\nw\n03\nW\na\nfee\nTO\n<:\nH\n03\n<\n03\nW\nW\nO\nTO\nZ\no\ni\u2014i\nH\nPh\n\u00a7\nP\nTO\nz\no\nU TO\n. w\nH H\n\u00a3 ri\nM p\ng a\nco\nH |\nTO Z\nfx|\na \u00a3\np\nS o\nPh\n<\nSs\nH\n\u00a7 P\no\nh B\ns\n<4 X\na a\n\u00ab \u00a7\nH\nz\nO\nz\nm\nTO\nH\n03\nPh\nBh\nc\nH\nZ\nP\no\na\nPh\nP\nO\n03\nO\n\"*\n00\n! \u00a9\nS CM\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\nLO\nCM\no\nCM\n00\nCM\n\u00a9\no\n\u00a9\nCM\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\nLO\nCO\no\no\nLO\n00\nso\n\u00a9\n00\nto\nen\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n00\nCM\n\u00a9\nCM\nO\nCO\nCM\nb-\nCO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\no\nt-\nb-\nLO\n\u00a9\nCM\nCM\nCM\n! \u00b0\u00b0\nCM\n\u00a9\nCM\nCM\nCM\n00\nCM\n\u00a9\nCM\n00\n1-4\n\u00a9\nLO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nCO\nCO\nid\nLO\nCM\n00\nC2\nLO\n-d<\nc-\n3\nH\nffl\n-r\nCM \u00a9\nCM i-H\nto\nLO\no\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\n5\n00\neo\nLO\nto\nCO\nLO\nb-\nlO CO\nCO CM\nLO\nt-\nLO\n00\neo\n\u00a9\nCO CO\n\u00a9 \u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\n00\nCO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nCM\nCM\nLO\nLO\nb-\nb-\n00\nLO\nLO\n1-H \u00a9\nt-\n\u00a9\nLO\n\u00a9\n00\n2\nb-\n\u00a9\ncn\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 CO\neo\n\u00a9\nLO\nLO \u2022*#\nCM\nt-\n2\nLO\nCO\nt-\n\u00a9\n\nt\u2014\n00\nLO\n\u00a9\nlO\nIO\n00\nLO\n\u00bb0\neo\nCO\n00\nIO\n00\n\u00a9\nCM\nt-\nID\nlO\nh-\nIO\nTp\n-cp\nb-\n\u00a9\no\nb-\nLO\nb-\nb-\nCM\nb-\n\u25a0*p\n00\n\u25a0*-\"\nCM\neo\nCM\nCD\n\u00a9\n*=p\nLO\nLO\n\u00a9\n00\nCO\neo\n10\nCO\nLOI\n\u00a9\nt-\n00\nLO\nLO\neo\nCM\ns\neo\nCO\nCO\n\u25a0rp\n\u25a0*\nCO\niO\nCO\nr\u00bb\nIO\n00\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\no\no\nIO\neo\neo\n\u00a9\n00\nIO\n\u00a9\nCM\nm\n\u00a9\nIO\nb-\nIO\n\u00a9\nCO\nb-\nLO\n\u00a9\nLO\nCM\n-tf\n00\nLO\nb-\nLO\nCO\n\u25a0*p\nLO\n00\n00\nrH\nLO\n\u00a9\neo\n00\nIO\nCM\nCO\n\u00a9\nt\u00bb\nLO\n\u00a9\neo\"\n\"\u25a0CP\n\u00a9\nCO\nCO\nl-O\nCM\n**\n-cP\n\u25a0**\nb-\nCO\nCM\n\u2022*\no\n01\nCM\nb-\nCM\n\u2022*p\nCM\n\u25a0*P\neo\neo\nIO\n\u25a0\u25a0sp\ntO\n\"*P IO\neg eg\no\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n10\n10\nCM\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nCM\nLO\n\u00a9\no\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\n10\n00\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\n-=P\nb-\nLo\n00\nL0\n\u00a9\n00\no\n\u00a9\nCM\nLO\nLO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\"CP\nCM\nLO\no \u00a9\n-HH \u00a9\nLO\n-eP\nJ-^ LO\n\u00a9 \u25a0**\nh* LO\neo\n\"<*\n00\nL0\nIO\n10\nCM\n\u25a0*p\n\u25a0\u25a0*\n*cp\n\u00a9\nLO\n\u00a9\n\u2022*\nCO\nCM\n1-1\nCD\nCM\n\u25a0\u25a0*\nCM\neo\nCO CO\n**\nrp ^p\n00\nLO\n\u00a9\n00\n\u00a9\n10\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n10\n10\nCM\nLO CO\n\u00a9\nto\n\u00a9\nIO\n\u00a9\nLO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nCO\no\n10\n10\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nCO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n10\n\u00a9\nLO\n\u00a9\nCM\nLO\n\u00a9\nO\nLO\n10\nCD\nLO\nCO\nLO\nCO\neo\n hh k\n^j o OJ\nfe Sh O\n\u00b13 cj Pm\n1 s |\nCJ r-* CJ\n3 .2 1\na a\u00ab\nB\n+->\nC\nrH\nc\np\ntH\nH->\nhi\n0\nP\nh2\nB\n3 *\n-tH O\nP Ph\nE3 S! .0 3\n\u25ba, hh \u00bb\n\u00ab 0 \u00ab\nw o w\nw h2 a\ni\u2014i cc 3\nis \u00a33\n P\nS 6\niSiSpE\ns\nh8\ne .J \u2122 SI L O\np> a pp. Js s.c\nk hJ P< -S -,\n| S s s.*\nR fl C3 3 M\nHJ \ny;\nnp\nJ3\nS3\nh\n0>\nft\nr-J\n3 iS\nB Ph\nB\n0\no\nP\no\nO\nB\nB\nQ\na tn\n\u00a3\n0\n\u00a3\nSB <1 > O P SB P3 V 50\nFINAL REPORT.\nH\nO\ng\nH\nm\nH\n03\nW\nX\n<\n03\n<\nTO\nz\no\nH\nPh\ns\np\nTO\nZ \u2022\no ?3\no a\nH\n. I-H\nPh P\n. i\u2014i\n*.\u00a3\n\u00ab B\ngl\nTO l>\nH O\nco\na |i\nH\no p\np J\nP\nM <\nK\nTO Ph\ng 3\n<\nH\n03 3\n< P\n>\u00a3\n03 ^\nO CQ\nPh\na\nTO W\np P\nPP g\nEh\nz\npa\nTO\npa\n03\nPh\nPh\nO\nEh\nZ\nP\nO\nS\nPh\nP\no\n03\no\n\u00a9 o \u00a9 \u00a9 o\nCO CO t- cc o\nb- CM LO \u00a9 \u00a9\nt> H t- H \u00ab\nCO t- d rH \u00a9\n\"* \u00a9 \u00a9 LO 10\nCM LO I-H t- b-\nus d \"\u25a0* d d\nLO \u00a9 \u00a9 \u00a9 \u00a9\niOLO\"*coco thloco;\n^ \u00a9 \u00a9 \u00a9 \u00a9\n\u00a9 LO CO hHh lo\nhcP \u00a9 IO \u00a9 00\nLO Tp CO t- \u00a9\nLO -^ CO CO \"^\n*H\" LO \"*f \u00a9 b-\nLO LO LO \u00a9 LO\nCM t-; C-hH^ 00\nM IO CO CO CC\n-* \u25a0* CO CC IO\n00 \"* LO CO CO\n\u25a0\u00ab* co eg co \u25a0\n\u00a9 cm eg cm co\nco eo cm -^ \"^P\n\u00a9 \u00a9 \u00a9 \u00a9 o\no LO \u00a9 \u00a9 \u00a9\n\u25a0^ co \u00a9 \u00a9 rH\n\u25a0\u00ab* CO CM CM CO\nCO CO CM \u25a0\"*\u2022 \u25a0*\nb- CO CO CM CM\nCO CM CM CO CO\n\"* eo CO CM CM\n\u00a9 \u00a9 \u00a9 LO \u00a9\nLO CO \u00a9 CM \u00a9\nco cm rH eg eg\n\u00a9 LO \u00a9 \u00a9\nCN N CM \"* \u00ab LO\u00a9t-tMCg COCMi-HCOCM\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u25a0*p\no\n10\n\u00a9\n10\nCM\no\n\"*p\nCM\nLO LO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nLO\nLO\nCM\nin\niO\n\u00a9\nb-\nCM\n10\n\u00a9\n00\nCM\n\u00a9\nIO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\no\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\no\n*cp\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nCO\nCM\n1-t\nH\nCM\nCM\nCM\nCM CO\nCM\n*tf\n10\nlO\ni-l\nCM\nCM\neg\nrH\nCM\nCM\nCO\nCM\nCO\ni-t\nCM\nO t- O CO o\nM H H \u00ab N\nCO CQ CQ .H C*3\nM H \u00ab ,H\n\u25a0a \u2022* \u00a5 ft\no o ^\nk k a a a\n3 3 a rt k\nO O k k QJ\nHH \u00a3 5\nm o .-J3 .\"3, u\n\u25a0% >, O O jj\n1 i I I \u00a3\nCC W \u00a3 \u00a3 T3\n1h CS Q CJ cS\nJ \u00b0 \u00b0 o g\n> S .15 * hQ\nCD \u201e .. w\nrg HJ +J J -\n\u2022 w HJ -4J fl fl\nouOuP-h c3 M W M J\nw & t- ^2,2\nja jj\nSSSS;S!\nSB SB\nS E\n\u00a3 \u00ab c\nCJ a; CJ\n2 Ph Ph\nB w CJ 3 -^\n\u25a0c 5 % 3 J\n0. 03 Ph CO P\np\n3 t\n2 t\nC O k k 01\nO O O O Ph\nS 6 s\nSh o3 CJ CJ cS\nO M W M r3\nPh E \u00a3 J r9\nO CJ flj OJ QJ\nsb S | -3 \u201e\n_ CJ CJ M o\nI \u25ba * 11\ncj cj oj s 5J\n^ Z \"A Ph Ph\nC o o u %\nQJ cn w c j,\nliii.\nPh 03 PS CO S\np RURAL ELECTRIFICATION COMMITTEE.\nV 51\npq\n>\n03\nH\nm\npq\n03\npq\nX\nTO\n<\n03\n<\nZ\no\nH\nPh\nB\nP\nTO\nZ TO\nO h\nU P\nI-H\na d\n\u2022 E-i\n\u00a3P\n\u00ab|\nn Z\nH *\nTO O\nco\na 3\nW\no p\nP\np g\nra\n M\n\u00a7 B\n& B\nP B\nP TO\npq Z\n03\n(H P\nP Ph\nB\nH\nZ\no\n\u00a7\nH\nZ\npq\nTO\npq\n03\nPh\nPh\nO\nH\nz\np\no\nPh\nP\no\n03\nO\nC\nc\n\u00a9\nir\n\u00a9\na\nc\n\u00a9\nc\n\u00a9\nc\n\u00a9 \u00a9 -t OC\n\u00a9 eg\n\u00a9 !\nCM\nw\n* **\n\u00a9\n\u2022cp * b^ d \u00a9\n\u00a9 CO\n\u00a9 !\nCM\neg\n1-1\n\u00a9\n1 \u00a9\n\u00a9 \u00a9 CO CC\nO \u00a9 !\n\u00a9 !\nIO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 CO Oi CN\nIO t-\n\u00a9 !\n^|\n60^\n* CO\nT\nr-I * d -yi a\ntr-J eg'\nOS !\nCM\nrt\n\u00a9\n! C\n\u00a9 lo co c\"\n\u00a9 \u00a9 !\n\u00a9 !\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 LO CO \u00a9\n\u00a9 CM\n\u00a9 :\n,_,\n&$\n* co'\nc\\\nco * d -\u25a0* oc\nd cm\n06 i\n^\nd\n\u00a9\n! \u00a9\n\u00a9 \u00a9 i-H t-\n\u00a9 \u00a9 !\n\u00a9 !\nLO\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 00 CO C\nlo b-\n\u00a9 1\nrH\n60-\n* CM\n\u00a9\nd * \"* io cc\ncg tA\nfr! 1\nz\no\nH\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\nc\nLO LO -^ OC\n\u00a9 \u00a9\n\u00a9 !\nCh\n\u00a9\nc\ncm \u00a9 eg \u00ab\n\u00a9 CM\n\u00a9 !\nS\nee-\n* CM\ncc\nH * ^ W t-\n\u00a9 rH\nd i\np\nto\no\nu\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 \u00a9 CO CC\n\u00a9 \u00a9\n\u00a9 !\nLO\nc\nlo eo co t-\nLO b-\n\u00a9 !\nW\nb-\n\u00ab\u00ab\ncc\nt-^ * eo' eg cc\nt~ O\nd 1\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 LO i-H CC\n\u00a9 \u00a9\n\u00a9 :\n\u00a9\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 IO i-t r-\n\u00a9 CM\n\u00a9 !\nLO\n\u00bb\u2022\n* i-i\n\u2022\u00ab:\nd * CM CM CC\nd \u00a9\n*** i\n\u00a9\n! C\n\u00a9 LO Oi CC\no i :\n\u00a9 !\n\u00a9\nCN\n00 CM 00 CC\n\u00a9\n\u00a9 :\n\u2022\u00ab*\ne^\n* i-5\n'\u00a9!\nTf * N H 1C\n*<*\nCO i\n\u00a9\n! \u00a9\no \u00a9 co eo\n\u00a9 ! !\n\u00a9 !\n\u00a9\n\u25a0*\n\u00a9 \u00a9 CO \u00a9\n\u00a9\ncm ;\nCO\n69-\n* i-H\n0\nCO * CM i-H LO\nCO\n\n-P H-\n.s<3\nj\nc\n\u25baH\no\no\nHH rJ c\niJ\n!^\nU C\n1 p-\n'3 eg\n$1\nrl \u00ab\nco a\n60 j\nIJ\nailway Co.,\nailway Co.,\nlors Hotel C\ns i\np Cd\nbo 1\nd\nO\nCC\n1\n'3\nt:\nc\nc\n<3\nS\nCO\n10\nE\nS\n61\nC\nt\u00ab\n5\n1\n>\nH-\nP\na\n03 e\nii\nP r-\nB *-\nP\na\ns\nPacific R\n3ns. M.S.\nPacific R\nPacific R\nHot St>rii\nted Minin\nCJ *c\nphs!\nk &\n| B\nBS S\n3 1\nc3\ntH\n>\nI\nk\nc\nc\nC\n-2 '\no3 +\n+. PC\n9^\nm i-H\n.a ^\ns s\ns 1\n0 sC\nfl Q f\na p\n.5 c\np .\u00a3\nP X\ncc! cc\nadian\nadian\nrison\nsolida\n\\Hc. Gi\n3*\n'it\nPi n\n*1\n1\n3 go t\nn S 0 c\np \"3\no3 *g\n\u00ab1\na \u00a3\n\u00a7 g<-\n\u00a3 C\nfl fl a p t\no3 o3 \u00ab O cc\nB c\n0 p\ntH CC\nri e\n\u25a0 C\nc\n. p a f-\ns a\n0 p\no g cc\nffl C\no o W o p-\nO P. cq c\np.\n\u00ab P Ph P-\nfl\ncS\n\u2022B\nB\ns\nP\nt\n\u25a0\n.5\nu\n5\ns\nC3\nc\n>\nE\nS\nc\nt\n0\nk\nCJ\na\n0\nO J!\nA cc\na\nw c\npC\nt\nG\nC\n1\n|\nt-\nk\na\n>\nB\na\n2\nc\n'C\ne\nc\nX\np\nH-\nc\nP\nc\n'E\ncc\ni\ni\nk\na\n|\nE\nc\nC\nB\na\ncc\nt\nc\nrC\nP\n5\nc\na\nc\n<\nH-\nk\nc\na\nc\np\n'a\nc\nP\nc\nt\nSI\ncc\nk\na\na\nc\nB\n\u2022E\nft\nCO\n\u2022B\n0\nH x\ns 1\nB E\nid n\n^ =\n83 E\nfl\nB\nC\nP\nCC\nt-\nCO H-\nk. C\n& I\n1 s\n1 >\ntt *\nE\nC\nB\n4:\n<\n<\nPC\npc\nff\n\u00a3\n5\ntC\n\u00bb\nfc\nC\np.\nCl\nPL\nPh\nP3\n