14 



Bonneville has announced a program to contain costs, seek e£Bciencies and 

 become more conq)etitive. We believe that this program, coupled with decisions in 

 the cturent rate case, will delay the need to increase Bonneville borrowing. 

 Although we have not seen the most recent capital investment projections, it is 

 clear that Bonneville will have adequate borrowing authority beyond Fiscal Year 

 1998. Sometime after the year 1998. Bonneville may need an increase in its total 

 $3.75 billion treasiuy borrowing cap to maintain TVeasuiy bonds as a viable 

 flnancing option. 



While the Coimcil supports adequeite federal borrowing levels, we continue to 

 push for increased use of cost sharing and third-party debt financing, particularly 

 tax exempt financing, to help reduce capital program costs and delay in^position of 

 federal debt ceiling limits. There is a need to closely examine Bonneville's new 

 projections for capital investments over the next ten years in order to better gauge 

 the need for eidditional borrowing authority. For exanq)le. development of 

 cogeneration, increased conservation zmd new technologies in distributed 

 generation may reduce the need for euiditional transmission investments. 



QOVBRNMBNT CORPORATION 



The remainder of our comments for this hearing concerns Bonneville's 

 competitiveness project and the plan to change Bonneville into a government 

 corporation. We have not seen much detail, nor specific legislation on these 

 undertakings. Most of otu- comments will be based on the brief outline provided to 

 the Congress, the Council and customer groups last month and on our 

 conversations with various Bonneville officials. 



