43 



the administrative overhead associated both with our own staffing 

 and contractor staffing; second, in some cases we have awarded 

 sole source contracts, particularly in the fish and wildlife area at 

 particular agencies because they are fish agencies; we are going to 

 compete some of those contracts. 



So I think this whole exercise will allow us to get at some of 

 those problems and get much more of a performance-based cri- 

 terion for delivery of services than we have had in the past. That 

 is true in a variety of areas, but the fish and wildlife area, and con- 

 servation area, are two where we have suffered fi"om the entitle- 

 ment mentality and we need to correct that. 



Mr. Kreidler. I might add that I think sometimes it may not be, 

 given the proportion of the discretionary section of your total budg- 

 et, the largest issue, but sometimes these issues become very sym- 

 bolic to the rate-paying public. A fair amount of distrust, anger and 

 frustration can develop when the public sees indications of mis- 

 management. This generates the kind of broad publicity that over- 

 shadows the many good things that Bonneville is doing. 



I think in the fish and wildlife area in particular some of the con- 

 tractors, such as State agencies, have not been accountable as they 

 could be because Bonneville monies are an additional revenue 

 source for them. Some of those examples come to Members of Con- 

 gress' ears, and undoubtedly are not going to be the only ears that 

 are going to hear this, and at some point they could be rather 

 broadly talked about — certainly in the media. 



In addition, I would like to get your thoughts, in the context of 

 the challenges that Bonneville faces right now and in the future, 

 regarding a longer-term solution which would address the oper- 

 ation of Bonneville as it relates to its customers. One long-term so- 

 lution would be to create a board of Bonneville's customers or to 

 perhaps expand the authority of the Northwest Power Planning 

 Council, to have more input, control and/or approval over Bonne- 

 ville's finances. What is your response to that proposal. 



Mr. ELahdy. I think those are fair questions to be examined. I 

 hope the committee will get into some of those questions. 



If I understand the chairman correctly, I think one of the things 

 the committee is intending to do is look at some of the repayment 

 and other long-term structural financing problems that we have to 

 deal with. Those are logical points of departure to getting at the 

 governmental structure questions that you are talking about. I 

 think everything is potentially on the table. 



I guess I would observe relative to the ideas that you have men- 

 tioned in your question, whether it is a board of customers or the 

 Power Planning Council, I think there are pretty substantial con- 

 stitutional problems with going much farther than we already have 

 gone with the Power Council. It is a State-appointed body, and we 

 are a federal agency. 



Now, that being said, it is logical to look at a TVA kind of model 

 where you have a federally appointed board of directors. That is 

 one model. Another model would be to look towards making Bonne- 

 ville essentially a government corporation. We act like a govern- 

 ment corporation now, but we are not, and that seriously con- 

 strains our ability to do business cost effectively in a number of 

 areas. Those are only two of probably several different alternatives, 



