Council Home 
Energy
Comprehensive review archive
MONTANA
Montana has held one meeting on January 22nd. Thirty-two people, representing a diverse cross-section of Montana, attended the meeting. Representatives from environmental groups, local government organizations, state agencies, public and private utilities, the Public Service Commission, private industry, and tribes, as well as congressional delegates, state legislators and other interested parties were invited to attend.
A brief explanation of the regional review was presented by Bill Drummond, Bob Gannon and John Etchart and the meeting was then opened up for discussion.
At that time, the participants were generally unclear about the role of the comprehensive regional review; but all expressed interest in being involved as the process develops. Additional meetings will be held as the issues become better defined and the tradeoffs become more clear.
Areas of "Substantial" AgreementFootnote1
Suggested Goals of the Review:
- The review should result in recommendations
that serve as broad statements of principle. The benefits
associated with the changing utility environment must be
distributed fairly, including to isolated rural customers,
and reliability should not be sacrificed. The Pacific
Northwest states should develop principles consistent with
regional and/or national approaches. The entire Columbia
River Federal Power System and all purposes in the Power Act
should be included in the review. The review should look at
more than how to ensure competition. Structural changes
should produce an enduring improvement in economic efficiency
in a way that serves the broad public interest. The review
should consider how to maximize and distribute all the
benefits associated with the Federal Columbia River Power
System. The review should focus not only on BPA; it should
also evaluate what public purposes should be promoted and
whether the power system is the appropriate mechanism to
provide them. The review presents an opportunity to affirm
whether the purposes of the Act are still appropriate. If the
institutions in place are not the right vehicles to deliver
these values, the region needs to decide what vehicle(s) are
appropriate to ensure the purposes are achieved.
Public Involvement Suggestions:
- Initially, the review should rely more
heavily upon the input of advocacy groups. The general public
needs to be brought into the review through an educational
process. The responsibility for public involvement should not
fall entirely on the steering committee and the Council. The
leaders of advocacy groups have a responsibility to
communicate with their constituents about the issues.
Bonneville Power:
- It is no longer certain that BPA will be able to provide all existing benefits and continue to meet its financial obligations. BPA should return to its historic role of marketing Federal base system resources. BPA should not acquire new resources to compete for new loads.
Transmission:
- Transmission is a very important issue. Privately owned generation and transmission need, at a minimum, to be functionally separated. BPA transmission must also be functionally or organizationally separated (separate administrator) from BPA's marketing activities and be FERC-regulated the same as other utilities (this would allay many of the competitive concerns which surround BPA). Regional transmission rates should reflect transmission system costs and should not be used as a vehicle for recovery of stranded costs or for collecting revenues for other purposes.
Distribution:
- There needs to be a provider of last resort. Distribution utilities should be required to fill the roles of aggregator or portfolio manager if direct access proves impractical for small consumers due to market and/or technology failures.
Areas Where Substantial Agreement Doesn't Exist
- Whether movement to full retail wheeling is inevitable. Whether the power system should be (or can be) the principle provider for many of the public purposes which it has been supportive of in the past. At what price and to whom should BPA sell the Federal base system resources. Whether costs for conservation, renewables, low-income programs and other public purposes should be collected through a universal system benefits charge collected from all regional electricity consumers. If Federal base system costs (including fish & wildlife costs and nuclear debt) exceed BPA's power revenues, should stranded costs be collected from BPA customers that have previously purchased low-cost Federal base system resources. Whether the public and regional preferences and the residential exchange should be eliminated. Whether operational control of the regional transmission system should be consolidated under the auspices of an Independent Grid Operator (IGO). Should direct access and the ability to choose a power supplier be promoted for all regional electricity consumers. Whether there is a role for the Council, or any regional entity, to provide a forum for discussion and exchange of information on energy issues of importance to the region.
These are areas of substantial, but not unanimous, agreement. Other views were presented.
Please contact
feedback@newsdata.com if you have questions or comments
about this website or call 206/285-4848.
Last modified: March 6, 1996
http://www.newsdata.com/enernet/review/documents/mtmeet.html