Discussion Paper: The role of the Northwest Power Planning Council
document 98-8
View transcripts of the panel discussions:
Background
The Northwest Power Act of 1980 gave the Governors of the four
Northwest states valuable tools for addressing regional energy, fish and
wildlife issues: an important voice in what is otherwise a federally and
utility-dominated hydropower system, significant influence over the
investment of ratepayer money in energy, fish and wildlife initiatives, an
open forum for public debate, and the capability to provide high-quality,
independent analysis of complex resource issues ? the Northwest Power
Planning Council. Since its creation, the Council has developed
significant expertise in finding integrated solutions for key economic and
environmental issues. It is arguable that no four governors and no region
in the country have such important tools for managing interstate
resources.
The Act also set a challenging agenda, however. For the Act to work,
the region has to face issues that are among the most complex, high-stakes
natural resource issues anywhere in the world. In dealing with these
issues, the region must find a perspective that transcends individual
state interests and respects the rights of the region's Indian tribes.
And this broader perspective must accommodate a disparate and sometimes
conflicting set of federal mandates.
The issues that face the region now are more complex and important than
ever before, and they arise in a much different world than that of 1980.
The advent of competition in the energy industry has eroded the relevance
of energy planning per se, which was one of the Northwest Power Act's
central features. Endangered Species Act listings have muted the regional
voice in federal hydropower operations that the Northwest Power Act had
amplified through the governors. The role of the Bonneville Power
Administration, principal financier of energy conservation and fish and
wildlife measures under the Act, is changing dramatically. In the midst of
these developments, Congress is considering energy legislation that will
shape national and regional energy policy for years to come.
These developments raise fundamental questions about the continuing
role of the Council. As a regional body, the Council has value if it can
address problems that the governors of the four states cannot solve
otherwise. There was broad agreement on the need for regional solutions to
the problems of 1980. Is this still true in 1998 and beyond? Do regional
solutions for a deregulated energy system and conflicting uses of the
Columbia River still make sense? Are these problems that can only be
effectively addressed through a regional body? Or can the governors deal
with them individually?
The Power Planning Council in a time of transition
The Council begins with the proposition that a debate over the
continuing role of the Northwest Power Act and the Council is already
underway, and that the Act may be amended over the next few years. The
region needs to understand the issues that arise in the current transition
and determine how its common interest should be represented in the future.
The Council takes the view that one of the primary ways it can add
value during this transition is by continuing to provide high-quality,
objective analysis. By clarifying regional choices and impacts, measuring
them against the purposes of the Northwest Power Act, and generating open,
informed debate, the Council can lay a foundation for regional consensus.
The Council's work under the governors? auspices in facilitating the
Comprehensive Review of the Northwest Energy System, the Transition Board,
and the Bonneville Cost Review are examples of this kind of work.
Similarly, the Council has undertaken pursuant to congressional request
reviews of proposed federal capital investments at the dams, hatchery
investments, and fish and wildlife governance. The Council's analysis of
Bonneville's potential stranded cost exposure and development of a
multi-species framework for fish and wildlife policy are additional
examples of these kinds of activities.
Although this work may tend to be analytical and informational, the
Council will also continue play an active role in finding regional
consensus on these issues. It is true that many of the questions that face
the region ? how the region fits into national energy restructuring
legislation, the configuration of Snake and Columbia River dams, and the
region's future influence in energy and fish and wildlife policy ? are
likely to be determined by federal agencies or Congress, not just by the
region. However, it is also true that the Northwest will play a powerful
role in this debate if it develops an informed consensus on these matters.
The Council intends to help the region forge and maintain this consensus
so that these issues are not decided without the region's voice.
At the same time, the Council must continue to examine the region's
investment in energy alternatives and fish and wildlife recovery. In
recent years, the Council has become more and more involved in examining
Bonneville Power Administration energy and fish and wildlife costs. The
Council sees these activities as valuable both to the region and to
Congress.
These observations, together with specific requests from Congress and
the Council's statutory responsibilities, suggest several important
areas of work:
1. Fish and wildlife
The Northwest Power Act requires the Council to develop a program to
?protect, mitigate and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the
development, operation and management of [hydropower] facilities while
assuring the Pacific Northwest an adequate, efficient, economical and
reliable power supply.? The program, ?to the greatest extent possible,
shall be designed to deal with that river and its tributaries as a system.?
Moreover, 1996 amendments to the Northwest Power Act require the Council
to take advice from an Independent Scientific Review Panel regarding
annual Bonneville fish and wildlife funding.
Pursuant to the 1996 legislation, the Council, the region's Indian
tribes, fish and wildlife managers, Bonneville and the Council's
independent scientific review panel have made progress in establishing a
system for ensuring that fish and wildlife funds are well spent. The
Council's Independent Economic Analysis Board has helped to ensure the
cost-effectiveness of recommended measures. This process will continue to
need refinement, including sounder footings in science, clearer policy
direction, and wise choices among competing proposals.
Congress has asked the Council to oversee major reviews of proposals
for federal capital investments at mainstem dams, and funding for
artificial production of anadromous fish. The Council puts a high priority
on conducting these activities in an open, public process.
Two major scientific reports on Columbia River fish and wildlife policy
have been completed in recent years: the Independent Scientific Group's
Return to the River, commissioned by the Northwest Power Planning Council,
and the National Research Council's Upstream: Salmon and Society in the
Pacific Northwest, commissioned by the U. S. Congress. The Council is
working on a scientific and analytical framework for the fish and wildlife
policy in the Columbia River based on these reports. The framework would
be a system of goals, objectives and strategies that guide fish and
wildlife recovery in the Columbia River Basin. It should help provide a
scientifically credible way for policy-makers to choose among fish and
wildlife recovery strategies; guide the allocation of fish and wildlife
funds; and establish yardsticks with which to measure progress and compare
effectiveness. Both the Independent Scientific Advisory Board and the
Independent Economic Analysis Board could help in this work.
The Northwest governors, the federal agencies and the Basin's Indian
tribes are investing considerable time and effort in developing new,
collaborative ways to address Columbia River fish and wildlife issues. No
process has been formalized, and public review of the specific
arrangements for this collaboration needs to take place before any
arrangement can be approved. However, if a process is initiated by
federal, state and tribal governments, the Council is prepared to help
make such a process work.
In addition to these major areas of work, the fish and wildlife
division is expected to spend significant amounts of its time providing:
- Analysis and facilitation of the annual operation of mainstem dams;
- Staff for the Council-National Marine Fisheries Service Independent
Scientific Advisory Board;
- Analysis of long-term fish and wildlife budget issues; and
- Facilitation of wildlife, resident fish, and research activities.
2. Energy
The Northwest Power Act requires the Council to develop a power plan
?for implementing conservation measures and developing resources . . .
to reduce or meet the Administrator's obligations with due consideration
by the Council for (A) environmental quality, (B) compatibility with the
existing regional power system, (C) protection, mitigation, and
enhancement of fish and wildlife and related spawning grounds and habitat,
including sufficient quantities and qualities of flows for successful
migration, survival, and propagation of anadromous fish, and (D) other
criteria which may be set forth in the plan.? In 1998, the Council is
wrapping up a major amendment of the power plan. While the Council
believes that power planning, as historically practiced by the Council,
will not be useful or necessary in a competitive power market, some
elements remain important in the transition to a competitive industry.
During this transition, the Council sees several important areas of
activity:
The region is taking different approaches to funding and developing
conservation and renewable resources than it has taken in the past. The
Council was instrumental in establishing the Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance to focus efforts on transforming markets for promising energy
efficiency products and practices. In the future, these activities may be
supported by ?public purpose? funding established by the states, local
utilities or perhaps federal legislation. The Council's traditional role
in establishing benchmarks for cost-effectiveness, identifying market
barriers and ways to overcome them; and tracking results is needed to help
ensure the effectiveness of ?public purpose? funding.
The Northwest is just beginning the transition from the current
vertically integrated, monopoly structure to an open, competitive market.
This transition promises to be difficult and drawn out. The changes and
institutional shifts are complex. It seems likely that for several years
the region may have partial deregulation ? competitive markets for some
customers, and continued monopoly service for others. The timing and
extent of retail access will differ from state to state. Some issues in
this region are unlike those faced by most of the rest of the country. For
the Northwest, the challenge is to preserve the benefits of past
investments in low-cost resources while creating conditions for efficient
markets in the long term. In this environment, the analysis and
information the Council can provide can help state and local policy makers
ensure that electricity markets are fair, efficient and reliable.
In recent years, the Council has become more involved in examining
Bonneville Power Administration energy costs. There is still a debate
whether the Council should have an ongoing role in this connection, and
there should be further discussion of this subject.
In addition, the Council expects specific work in 1998 to focus in the
following areas:
- Resolving issues surrounding Bonneville and its marketing of power
for the 2002-2006 period and beyond. These issues include the
subscription process; implementation of the cost review
recommendations; evaluation of fish and wildlife costs; stranded costs
and stranded cost recovery; and the nature of regulation of Bonneville
transmission.
- Monitoring the role and operation of the Bonneville Power
Administration from a regional perspective.
- Analyzing power system implications of fish and wildlife measures to
help policy makers faced with major system configuration and
operations decisions.
- Providing regional representation in the development and
implementation of new arrangements for efficient and reliable
electricity transmission.
3. Public involvement
The Northwest Power Act requires the Council to ensure widespread
public involvement in fish, wildlife and power policies by maintaining
comprehensive programs to inform the public, obtaining public views
concerning major issues and consulting with Bonneville's customers. The
Council remains one of the few places where parties from all parts of the
spectrum can stay informed and involved in critical, regional energy and
fish and wildlife issues. Public involvement was one of the specific roles
identified for a future Council or other regional body by the 1996
Comprehensive Review of Northwest Energy System.
Accordingly, the Council maintains an active and regular outreach to
citizen groups, utilities, Indian tribes, fish and wildlife agencies and
others. The Council's Public Affairs Division, in concert with state
staffs, communicates regularly with these governments and interests, as
well as with the news media and members of Congress.
Providing for public involvement in regional energy and fish and
wildlife issues, communicating with the public and the news media and
disseminating public information will continue to be important objectives
for the Council.
Questions for commentors
[The comment period ended August 12, 1998.] The
Council invites comment on this paper, and particularly on these
questions: Does the overall direction the Council is proposing ?
clarifying regional choices and impacts stemming from changes in the
energy industry and fish and wildlife policy, evaluating them in light of
the purposes of the Northwest Power Act, actively seeking regional
consensus, and encouraging active public involvement in these issues ?
make sense? If not, how would you recast this direction? Are the specific
activities a sensible way to pursue this overall direction? Are there
other activities the Council should pursue?
Are the problems that face the region in 1998
problems the governors can best address through a regional body? Or should
the governors deal individually with the challenges of a deregulated
energy system and a Columbia River that is increasingly driven by federal
mandates and prerogatives?
Does the region need a stronger voice in regional
energy and fish and wildlife matters? Is it clear that the region's
voice would be strongest if it included the region's Indian tribes? If
so, how should such arrangements take shape?
Please send your comments, titled ?Council Role?
to: Mark Walker, Director Public Affairs Division Northwest Power Planning
Council 851 S. W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Portland, Oregon 97204 or
e-mail comments@nwcouncil.org. Please submit comments by August 12, 1998.
The Council will also provide an opportunity for
oral comments at its June 30-July 1, 1998 meeting in Helena, Montana.
^ top
|
home