wards a tiered-rates system. This is something that some of our 

 customers and certainly our public interest group constituents have 

 been advocating for some time. We're fully confident that the tier- 

 grade structure, combined with the amount of money that we're de- 

 voting to conservation, will achieve our intended goal. 



The rest of our programs are a mix of programs designed to ob- 

 tain that kind of balanced portfolio. We offer billing credits, where- 

 by we credit customers for developing their own resources. We ex- 

 ercise our competitive bid process, out of which we've selected the 

 Tenaska project and two or three other smaller projects on the gen- 

 erating side. We're still negotiating with some on the conservation 

 side. 



We have just completed our Resource Contingency Plan, whereby 

 we are trying to pilot the Council's options concept and put it into 

 operational form. In this process we can acquire resources, pay 

 preconstruction expenses, get the permitting out of the way, and 

 have these resources readily available when needed. So, instead of 

 taking 4 to 6 years to build a new generating resource, we can in 

 fact do it in 2 years and take it off the shelf, because all the per- 

 mitting and other associated activity has been completed. 



We think that those processes present a pretty balanced picture 

 of resource development. We think it is the lowest cost, the lowest 

 risk, and the lowest environmental impact portfolio of resources 

 that we could acquire, and we hope that it will stand the test of 

 scrutiny of this task force as well as the test of time in terms of 

 how we acquire those resources. 



With that, I'd like to turn it over to Sue and then return to make 

 a couple concluding remarks. 



Ms. HiCKEY. In the interest of time, I'm going to speak briefly 

 about some of our accomplishments in our plans in both the con- 

 servation and generation areas. In the interest of time, I'm going 

 to stick with the charts that everyone has copies of. 



The chart that's coming up now shows you a snapshot of the past 

 3 years and the next 3 years. I wanted to use that chart for context 

 because it really shows you a snapshot of an acquisition effort in 

 transition. 



During the 1980s, we were principally building capability be- 

 cause we had a surplus. We ran programs in every end-use and 

 every sector trying to experiment and had very low levels of acqui- 

 sition — about the 13 megawatts, in the 10-15 megawatt range — 

 throughout the 1980s. 



In our 1990 resource program, we saw a need to accelerate. So 

 you see that beginning to happen aggressively in 1992. During that 

 period, we decentralized our efforts and we also tried a whole se- 

 ries of new things, including billing credits, targeted acquisition 

 programs, and competitive bid programs. And as you will hear 

 today, some of these things worked, some of them didn't, and we're 

 still sorting out whether or not they are mechanisms that we're 

 going to use in the future. 



In fact, it's probably worth pointing out that that's been one of 

 the most difficult things in this conservation effort. Bonneville im- 

 plements its programs through over 120 different customer utilities 

 and qxiite often, with hindsight, I'd probably indicate that we've not 

 always been as effective as we'd like to be when we're making a 



