as the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U. S. Forest Service and others, under the 

 same obligation that now applies to the Bonneville Power Administration. 



COMMENTORS: Would these amendments strike an appropriate balance 

 between planners and implementers? Between planners and fish and wildlife 

 managers? Would the lack of accountability that workshop participants identified 

 in current arrangements be lessened or worsened by these amendments? Should 

 states and tribes be subject to the same requirement of consistency? Would the 

 potential benefits of such legislation justify the effort required to obtain it? By 

 opening up the Northwest Power Act, would the region risk losing more than it 

 might gain? 



2. Other limited legislation : ' 



Workshop participants discussed several other areas in which limited legislation 

 could be useful: 



Establish an action-forcing dispute resolution process. As mentioned above, 

 there is considerable interest in processes using technical and policy panels to resolve 

 disagreements where possible, and creating an "action-forcing" mechanism. Examples of 

 such processes include: 



• The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission licensing process for the Mid-Columbia 

 projects has standing technical and policy committees to address issues and, where 

 possible, resolve disputes. Where disputes cannot be resolved at technical and policy 

 levels, disputes can be submitted to an Administrative Law Judge in an evidentiary 

 hearing. Appeal from the Administrative Law Judge can be taken to the Federal 

 Energy Regulatory Commission itself and to the federal courts. 



• The U. S. V. Oregon litigation has a series of technical and policy panels that have been 

 used to reach broad harvest settlements and to manage harvest allocations each year. 

 The federal court maintains continuing jurisdiction over the litigation and has retained 

 a technical advisor to advise the court on technical matters and to assist the parties in 

 settlement. When disputes cannot be resolved by the parties the court can hold 

 hearings and issue binding orders. 



Legislation could specify an analogous process for Columbia River fish and 

 wildlife issues. For example, Congress could require federal agencies to submit planning 

 or implementation disputes first to technical and policy panels and then to a neutral 

 arbitrator. Such an arbitrator could be given authority to enter a binding order subject 

 only to limited judicial review. 



Alternatively, section 4(i) of the Northwest Power Act could be amended to give 

 Council additional authority to oversee implementation of its fish and wildlife program. 

 The Council could be authorized to make a finding of consistency or inconsistency with 



11 



