96 



going to be advantageous, unbundled or bundled services. Those 

 utilities that have the opportunity, we may not unbundle fish, but 

 they may unbundle fish. 



They may go to other resources and leave the full-requirements 

 customer in the Northwest, which is basically the rural customer, 

 to fund the costs of fish and wildlife mitigation, because they are 

 divorcing themselves from BPA resource requirements. 



Mr. DeFazio. You have raised another point in your testimony 

 that I would like you to expand upon. You said it was as important 

 to determine how to proceed with the discussion or the formulation 

 of a government corporation proposal as the substance. How would 

 you perceive that we would optimally proceed? 



Mr. Ramseyer. I guess I am not prepared at this point to answer 

 that question in its entirety, but we could sure get you the informa- 

 tion from the perspective of PNGC. 



[Editor's note. — The information was not received at the time 

 of printing.] 



Mr. DeFazio. I would be interested. I tried to engage Mr. White 

 in that discussion, and I think they have to understand the ex- 

 traordinary diversity of interests in the Northwest and need to 

 hear somewhat from that cacophony. Otherwise, they drop some- 

 thing in our laps. Since this committee, not the task force but the 

 committee itself, will be charged with legislating this as it comes 

 forward in the President's proposal. 



So I am interested in any and all ideas people have about how 

 we can develop the best possible proposal before the committee has 

 to engage in the legislative process, which always involves public 

 hearings and public markup, but how can we help the Administra- 

 tion develop something that is pretty much a good proposal from 

 the beginning. I am interested in ideas. 



Ms. Bodi, you had a little more of a reservation, shall I say, 

 about the government corporation. You didn't want the government 

 corporation, as I understood your testimony, until such time as the 

 fish obligations are satisfied. What does that mean? Does that 

 mean until we have recovered stocks on the Upper Snake, so that 

 you are talking about geologic time? 



Ms. BODI. We hope not geologic time. We hope before some of us 

 in the room die, maybe. We don't think Bonneville should be al- 

 lowed to restructure itself until the fish runs are recovered. I think 

 we should use this opportunity to push to resolution on two key 

 points, and I will emphasize the two I think that I recommended 

 that are the most important. 



One is, let's resolve the fish flow, fish passage issue. That can be 

 resolved through a negotiated settlement, I firmly believe. There 

 are no such negotiations going on at this time. For whatever rea- 

 son, we are in the far more inefiicient process of being in court on 

 those issues. I think that issue can be resolved. 



It may not be resolved for all time but at least we can put a basic 

 agreement in place that moves us forward. And so that is what I 

 am asking for. I don't think that has to take 10 years. I think it 

 might take many months to get that kind of a settlement com- 

 pleted. 



