66 



• Second, we support BPA's efforts to streamline many of their processes and reduce costs. 

 The power market is changing and the pace of change will accelerate. BPA's efforts to 

 become more efficient can benefit us all. 



• Third, we believe BPA is and will remain a very competitive provider of electricity and 

 power services. Some of this strength will come from decisions we make; some is inherent 

 in the value of a hydroelectric system. 



• Fourth, tiered rates and unbundled services can help achieve the goals of the Power Act. 

 However, there remain many issues to be articulated and resolved in moving from the 

 concept of tiered rates and unbundled services to a workable, widely supported proposal. In 

 particular, rate restructuring must work with efficient programs to achieve conservation and 

 fish and wildlife goals. 



• Finally, uncertainty costs us all. BPA needs to develop clear proposals on tiered rates and 

 unbundling soon, so that all parties are dealing with real numbers, rather than their imagined 

 best or worst case scenarios. As BPA moves forward, we pledge to work closely with the 

 agency to implement proposals that improve administrative efficiency and help achieve the 

 goals of the Power Act 



Background 



The 1980 Power Act envisioned BPA playing the dominant role for the Pacific Northwest in 

 developing new cost-effective energy efficiency and high priority generating resources. The 

 Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC) was established to direct and oversee this resource 

 development to improve conditions for fish and wildlife and ensure least-cost electric power 

 services. Since the enactment of the 1980 Power Act, there have been profound changes in the 

 electric and gas utility industries. With implementation of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies 



O-R2-02W 2 



