163 



Alternatively, if BPA does succeed in jettisoning enough of its 

 mission to make room to avoid everyone else's nuclear obligations, 

 it will have eliminated most of the functions that distinguish it as 

 a uniquely valuable public entity. 



I would submit that this is singularly counterproductive behavior 

 in an era where many are beginning to question whether BPA 

 should continue to survive as a public entity. 



This current ad hoc shifting of costs is not, I want to emphasize, 

 competition. It forces BPA to operate at an unfair competitive dis- 

 advantage against competitors who are, when you think about it, 

 offering the illusory service of immunity from WPPSS, immunity 

 from the consequences of financial actions. 



We will submit our preliminary thoughts to the committee today, 

 and I would ask that they be entered into the record, on how to 

 accomplish this equitable allocation 



Senator Hatfield. They are accepted. 



Mr. Golden. Along with other recommendations as to how we 

 might relieve financial pressure on Bonneville without undermin- 

 ing its mission. 



We will also submit letters from the Washington Utilities and 

 Transportation Commission, the Washington State Energy Office, 

 the Washington members of the Power Planning Council, Oregon 

 members of the Power Planning Council, and a handful of utilities 

 in the Northwest who believe that solving this stranded investment 

 problem is the single most important thing we can do to make Bon- 

 neville competitive for the long haul. 



I would like to close by describing a little bit about how I think 

 Bonneville must approach the challenges ahead, especially the 

 long-term challenge of demonstrating why it continues to be a 

 uniquely valuable public entity. BPA can only rise to this challenge 

 by more decisively fulfilling its mission. 



Reducing waste and bureaucracy is obviously an important first 

 step in rising to that challenge, a step we all support, and a step 

 that we applaud Bonneville for undertaking rather aggressively. 



But Bonneville cannot rise to this challenge while abandoning 

 those parts of its mission that serve the mission best. 



Bonneville cannot rise to this challenge while it dismantles its 

 only successful resource acquisition effort, an energy efficiency pro- 

 gram that delivers saved energy to the regional grid at about one- 

 half the long-term costs of constructing new generating resources. 



It cannot rise to this challenge while reducing the reliability of 

 its world-class integrated transmission system. It cannot rise to 

 this challenge while, in order to prop up uneconomic nuclear oper- 

 ations, it scales back or abandons its renewable resource pilot 

 projects, projects that are designed to help the Northwest keep the 

 renewable edge that has made our power system the Nation's most 

 reliable and economical one. 



Nor can BPA rise to the occasion if it pits its own bottomline 

 against the bottomline of consumers of the region, as it has, by 

 eliminating funding for efficiency programs that keep our energy 

 dollars where they belong, in consumers' pockets. 



If Bonneville's survival depends on the proceeds of consumers' 

 wasted energy dollars, then Bonneville's survival, I think, will be- 

 come increasingly problematic. 



