Keep up with CUB!
sign up for e-news

What have we done for YOU lately? Since 1984, CUB has saved Oregon ratepayers more than $3.4 billion dollars.

>> read more

« Clean Energy Bill Going to Become a Law! | Main | Governor Signs Renewable Bill, CUB Still Has Pots on the Stove »

May 31, 2007

We need a new system for sharing BPA benefits.

Loss of BPA Benefits Means Rate Increase

When we urge our children to share, whether toys, food, or time, we're teaching a lesson against greed, and one that hasn't been learned by some members of the Northwest power community. Not content with merely being 40% of the Pacific Northwest population receiving 85% of the low-cost hydropower benefits of the Bonneville Power Administration (in Oregon this is about 25% of customers), a very few publicly-owned utility leaders and industrial customers sued for more.

At issue was the Residential Exchange settlement, a process which has given residential and small farm customers of investor-owned utilities a share of the federal hydropower system for almost 30 years. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on the suit a few weeks ago in such a way that the Exchange settlement was invalidated. In reaction to the ruling, BPA has suspended the Residential Exchange program and, as a result, 75% of Oregonians are no longer receiving any BPA benefits.

If you are a customer of PGE or PacifiCorp, that includes you, and it means that you can expect to see your rates go up 13-15% next month (Idaho Power customers will see an increase of 6%). According to a statement from the Public Utility Commission yesterday, the average household can expect to pay about $10 more per month (Idaho Power customers, look for an increase of about $6.50).

No Added Value
CUB often fights against rate increases (and usually succeeds in trimming them considerably), but our usual rate increases of 2% or 5% can be linked to a higher market price for fuel, or the investment in a new power generation plant, or even rising personnel costs at the utilities that provide us with electricity. The large increase we are facing as a result of BPA's reaction to the court ruling, however, gives nothing in return (no gains in infrastructure or long-term stability), and is due only to the shortsighted unwillingness of certain industrial customers and public utility leaders to share.

Minority of Publics Fighting Against Fair Allocation
Now, we realize that every group of people has its moderates and its radical extremes, and we don't want to tar everyone with the same brush. Only two publicly-owned utilities, along with industrial customers, opposed a settlement signed by more than 100 other public utilities, as well as investor-owned utilities and advocacy groups such as CUB. It is therefore a relatively small bunch of people who have shifted the economic reality for 75% of Oregonians, who will face large electricity increases of 13% (for most residential customers) to 90% (for some farmers).

Some Publics Also Oppose Sharing with New Publics
A similar group fought the Oregon Community Power bill a few years ago in the 2005 Legislature; the bill would have allowed for the purchase of a private utility by a regional public entity using state bonding authority. Nobody fought the bill harder than advocates of existing public power utilities. They did not stop the fight until the bill was amended to guarantee that the new utility could not exercise its right under federal law to access the lowest cost power from BPA. In other words, existing public power did not want any new public power if it meant sharing the finite benefits of the system.

Likewise, in negotiating a long-term policy with BPA, public power representatives have succeeded in excluding newly created publics from receiving BPA benefits when they form. They currently want new contracts from BPA that will lock out any new public power utility from federal hydropower benefits for 20 years. It is also important to note here that Oregon law prohibits new publics from condemning a utility's generation assets, and so without the access to BPA benefits, it becomes impossible to form a new public utility, effectively closing off the ability of any other Oregonians to ever benefit from the financial advantages of a publicly owned utility.

Many of CUB's members are either customers of public power utilities or strong ideological advocates for public power. CUB believes in public power, too, and has fought for it in tangible ways (for example, we helped write the Oregon Community Power bill). What we cannot support is some publics attempting to block other Oregon customers from receiving the federal hydropower benefits that should rightfully be theirs, whether those customers are public or private or residential or agricultural. And that's exactly what some public utilities have been doing for years -- trying to block others from receiving any BPA benefits. Mine, not yours, not ours -- that's the message they're sending. But this time they may have opened a can of worms they cannot control.

Economic Effects
This issue is not, unfortunately, a small economic matter. The value of BPA power, as measured against market-priced energy, is between $2 and $2.5 billion dollars every year (that figure could rise). So while residential customers of private utilities get $300 million per year in benefits, customers of public utilities are getting 6 times that amount every year. Two facts about BPA power to put the benefits into perspective: BPA's hydropower is currently selling for less than half of the market price of power, so that public power customers can pay $27 a megawatt hour for power that everyone else must pay $60 to buy. These benefits ought, under the law, to be accruing to all residents of the Pacific Northwest; publicly-owned utility customers receive their benefit in the form of cheap power and privately-owned utility customers (at least until recently) in the form of a check figured through the Residential Exchange that reduced their own utility bills.

On top of that, public power customers have had the option to leave BPA and buy power on the market, if the market should ever dip below BPA prices. This unusual situation did occur in the late 1990s, and the desire of industrial customers and some publics to leave was a problem for BPA, who tried to solve it by shifting benefits from IOU customers to industrial customers, in order to induce those businesses to stay. The option to leave your contracted power producer's system would be an expensive option on the market and only adds to the value of what public power customers are already receiving. These are tremendous benefits, and yet these publics and industrial customers are saying it isn't enough.

Oregon Hit Hard
Moreover, private utilities serve about 75% of Oregonians. The suspension of the Exchange translates into a transfer of wealth in the amount of over $100 million per year from residents of Oregon to residents, businesses and industry in Washington State.

This situation has caught the attention of six Northwest Senators, representing Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, who sent a joint letter to BPA Administrator Steve Wright. In it, the Senators said: "Everyone in the region has an interest in reaching a legally sustainable compromise that fulfills the public policy goals of the NWPA and allows BPA to enter into new power supply contracts with public agencies before the current contracts expire. This requires that all stakeholders -- public and private utilities, BPA and consumers, states and public utility commissions -- join together in good faith in an effort to negotiate a mutually agreeable and legally sustainable compromise." CUB welcomes a genuine compromise from all parties which results in a fair allocation of benefits; however, we are committed to going beyond the negotiation table, where we already have spent years, should that become necessary.

Northwest Power Act Demands Sharing
So, despite serious trepidation from politicians and utility leaders alike, it may be time to go back to the source. The source of authority for allocation of BPA Benefits is the Northwest Power Act, which requires that the cheap hydropower sold through BPA be shared with customers throughout the region, public and private. If the Residential Exchange no longer works to effect that sharing, then we may have to ask Congress to look again at the Power Act and devise a way to fairly allocate the benefits of the system. The trepidation is due to a very real risk that other regions will now fight for a piece of the pie. CUB says it may be time to take that risk. After all, the way it stands now, most Oregonians don't have any pie on the table to risk. Somebody else has it all on their plate and is refusing to share. We wouldn't allow that in our families and shouldn't accept it in the debate over the BPA system benefits.

CUB Executive Director Bob Jenks spoke at a PUC hearing and a meeting with the Governor yesterday, saying, "The Federal Power Act requires a sharing of federal hydro resources between publicly-owned utilities and investor-owned. This makes sense, since both groups of customers spent decades helping to support the hydro projects, both by buying output and by protecting this resource for the benefit of Northwestern customers. But as of today, there is no longer any sharing of the federal hydro system." Publicly-owned utilities and industrial customers have become accustomed to thinking of the federal hydropower system managed by BPA as belonging to them alone, and not to the region as a whole. CUB believes this is a flawed perspective, and will no doubt be speaking regularly about a fair allocation of BPA benefits for all Oregon customers, well into the foreseeable future.

What You Can Do
Call your members of Congress. Tell them that the implementation of the Northwest Power Act, which requires a sharing of benefits, is not working. As our federal elected representatives, they need to be working to ensure that the federal hydropower system is fairly allocated and no one left out.

Posted by Oregon CUB at May 31, 2007 04:04 PM

Comments

The problem with your argument is that it ignores the most important aspect of CUB: without privately-owned utilities, CUB has no thing to do; it only works for customers of investor-owned utilities. That is why CUB has fought true public power in Oregon. No IOUs, no CUB.

Posted by: michtom at May 31, 2007 11:30 PM

Not to mention, the public power coops in Oregon all fought like hell to get exempted from or weaken the renewable electric standard (SB 838), apparently because they like living off the investments made in the 1930s but don't plan on making the same kinds of investments for the future.

I'm a staunch public power advocate, strongly backing the idea that PGE ought to be condemned and turned into a true public utility--but the point of public power is having leadership to do the right thing, not to protect their little slice of pie and to hell with everyone else.

Rather than reopen the Act, which risks having the benefits leave the Northwest entirely, Governor K and the Democratic leaders ought to get all the public power interests together and tell them that they have one last chance to come to an agreement over the residential exchange and, if they don't, they will not get the lower requirements of SB 838, which will be amended toot sweet to make them meet the 25% by 2025. That's still not enough (check out what Minnesota just passed that their Gov will sign: 80% greenhouse gas reduction across ALL sectors by 2050), but it's a start.

Posted by: George Seldes at June 1, 2007 12:25 AM

Actually, CUB has fought hard for public power, most recently at the 2005 Legislature (in drafting and advocating for the Oregon Community Power Bill), and by serving on the Mayor's Task Force regarding a City of Portland purchase of PGE (where CUB Executive Director Bob Jenks was one of only a few who actively supported such a purchase). In addition, CUB worked with several counties on a proposal called Willamette Valley Power that would have allowed PGE's counties to purchase utilities. For 20 years, CUB has supported public power as common sense public policy, and we enjoy good working relationships with such Oregon public utilities as EWEB and Emerald PUD.

Finally, CUB is one of the only entities in the region that has opposed BPA locking out new public power utilities from accessing the federal hydro system. BPA and the existing public power utilities are trying to prohibit new public power utilities from forming and getting access to federal hydro power. BPA wants to sign 20 year contracts with its existing public power customers that would lock out any new public power utility of significant size from its share of the federal system. If your goal is to form a new public power utility, the first thing you should do is join CUB and call on Bonneville to not lock new publics out for the next 20 years.

The idea that CUB would have no work to do without for-profit utilities is silly. Global warming requires that we change our energy policy regardless of who owns the wires. Our recent work as a leader of an alliance that organized, wrote, and passed the Renewable Energy Standard is only one example of this. Beyond energy policy, CUB handles telecommunications utility issues, an area that includes an ever-expanding array of services (such as wireless and Internet) and becomes more complicated every year.

We work to protect customers of privately-owned utilities because there is a conflict between shareholder profits and the best interests of customers. However, much of our work benefits ALL Oregon utility customers and if IOUs should disappear tomorrow, we would simply redouble our efforts in these other areas.

Posted by: Oregon CUB at June 1, 2007 02:00 PM

There's a glitch here--I didn't see MichTom's comment when I posted mine, so my "not to mention" appears to respond to his, rather than to the original post. I don't agree with anything in MichTom's post.

Posted by: George Seldes at June 1, 2007 11:07 PM

This huge article is much too complicated for me to grasp. I am no expert in this, and unless one is, most people would not be interested in wading their way through an article like this to find the kernel of fact.

I checked out CUB's website because I didn't "buy" PGE's argument that came with my current bill (May-June meter readings)that the government is responsible for PGE's huge forthcomig rate increase.

So....what is Bonneville's reasoning here? Has Oregon been getting benefits from Bonneville that other states were entitled to share in? Who or what entity/ies have pushed for Bonneville to make the decision to stop the lower rate-sharing?

Why is it the residential customers who are taking the hit? Usually that's the way it goes -- ever since the 1970s when the aluminum companies got price breaks, and residential customers got price increases from PGE. In cases like these, it's PGE's decision which customers get the rate increases -- not the Feds.

So, in a few simple sentences, can the CUB please get to the point here? Give us the "Who and why" of the both Bonneville's and PGE's decision for this humongous billing increase for residential PGE customers?

Posted by: Marian Drake at June 30, 2007 05:57 PM

Marian,

Its hard to explain this in a few sentences but let me try.

The Bonneville Power Administration markets the power from the federal hydro system. Publicly-owned utilities (PUDs, municipals and coops) get priority access (called preference) to federal hydropower. For-profit utilities get a small share of hydro benefits to pass through to residential and farm customers called the Residential Exchange, as specified in the Northwest Power Act. The level of benefits that get shared with customers of for-profit utilities has always been contentious. The last BPA rate case ended up with a settlement of the rates with customers of for-profit utilities getting about 15% of the federal benefits, but a small handful of publicly-owned utilities (and some industrial customers of those publicly-owned utilities) sued BPA believing the level of benefits in that settlement were too high. The federal court ruled that the methodology BPA used to justify the settlement was not consistent with the law, so BPA has suspended the benefits flowing to for-profit utilities. The courts did not rule that the benefits being shared were too high, only that BPA did not follow the required methodology. When BPA suspended the benefits, all of the for-profit utilities in the Northwest were forced to raise rates for residential and small farm customers.

The benefits that come from BPA are passed through directly (and fully) to residential and small farm customers, so when those benefits are suspended the increase falls to these groups of customers.

BPA is currently going forward with a rate case designed to provide the necessary methodology to support residential exchange benefits, but BPA was not prepared for this court ruling so they are starting from scratch and it takes them several months to conduct a rate case. Whether the benefits can be restored before the rate case is finished is the subject of a great deal of negotiation in the region.

Bob Jenks

Posted by: Bob Jenks at July 2, 2007 10:15 AM



consumer tips

Tired of telemarketing calls? Maybe it's time to put your number on the national Do Not Call list.

>> more information


multimedia

This 10-minute video, produced by Eric Stachon of Sky High Creative, gives a look at CUB’s history, why Oregon needed CUB to begin with, and goes on to talk to some of our current allies and key players in the world of utility regulation today.

>> click here for the video
(Right-click to save the video to your desktop before viewing)

     
©2005 Citizens' Utility Board of Oregon