52 



Because of the Northwest Power Act, electricity consumers here 

 have direct access to regional energy decision-makers and a public 

 forum in which to participate in decisions about energy and fish 

 and wildUfe. 



Before the Council was created, involved parties often had to re- 

 solve differences in court or take them to Congress. The Act gives 

 the Northwest States, through the Council, a check and balance of 

 Bonneville's authority, albeit a narrow one. If the Council finds 

 that any proposed major resource is not consistent with our power 

 plan, Bonneville must go to you, to Congress, to get the approval 

 for the resource. 



On the other hand, most of our authority in the Act to ensure 

 that Bonneville actually acquires resources in the plan is not clear- 

 ly defined. In fact, we can only encourage Bonneville and the re- 

 gion's utilities to acquire conservation and other cost-effective re- 

 sources. 



Frankly, progress has been slower than Congress probably envi- 

 sioned. We've included specific examples outlining this situation in 

 our written testimony. 



Your second question concerns Bonneville's resource acquisitions. 

 Bonneville has several strengths in acquiring resources. It can inte- 

 grate resources with its regional power system and can spread the 

 cost and risk of resource development across the region. 



Bonneville can also have a big impact on the market for energy 

 efficiency. The manufactured housing acquisition program is an 

 outstanding successful example. By dealing directly with the manu- 

 facturers and concentrating the market power of the utilities, Bon- 

 neville secured more energy-efficient manufactured homes at a 

 lower price. 



Similar opportunities exist with retail chains and fi*anchises 

 which are building new faciUties all over the region. Bonneville and 

 its utilities should be working closely with these fi*anchises to en- 

 sure that the new facilities use electricity efficiently. 



One pilot project for this group has been authorized this year, 

 but more needs to be done to capture these savings. Bonneville is 

 a large bureaucratic organization that avoids risk. Its processes are 

 cumbersome. Its decision-making is relatively slow. Its procure- 

 ment procedures cause delays and additional cost in the conserva- 

 tion programs. 



The size of its staff adds considerable overhead. BPA's present 

 management is working to change all that. Still, Bonneville's budg- 

 et process forces utiUty customers to operate on annual conserva- 

 tion budgets. If a utihty wants to negotiate a multi-year contract 

 with a large industry, it has no assurance that Bonneville funding 

 will be av^able the next year. 



Some of these problems come with the fact that Bonneville is a 

 public agency, but some of these problems should be alleviated. We 

 are heartened by the Administrator's efforts in this regard. 



There will always be differences between the way conservation is 

 acquired and the way generating resources are acquired. Generally, 

 however, the CouncU beheves the process for acquiring conserva- 

 tion should be more like the process Bonneville has used to acquire 

 other generating resources. The result would be a more business- 

 like and lower cost conservation process. 



