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 |
|
« How many wizards does it take to screw in a lightbulb? |
Main
| Governor Vetoes Diversion of Ratepayer Funds »
August 02, 2007
CUB Speaks Publicly About Sharing of Federal Hydro System
Yesterday evening, Bonneville Power Administration held its first (and hopefully not last) public meeting to discuss the Residential Exchange, since the suspension of Residential Exchange benefits to customers of privately owned utilities, such as PGE and PacifiCorp, two months ago. Those private utility customers have seen increases of 13-14%, or an average of $10 per month, as those utilities pass along the costs to customers that once were covered by BPA as those Northwest residents' share of the federal hydropower system. The meeting room was packed, with public utility representatives (who had just finished a meeting in the building) and also with low income customer advocates, privately-owned utility staff representing their customers, and, of course, CUB was there too. As one of four invited speakers, CUB Executive Director Bob Jenks laid out his understanding of the situation as it now sits and where we need to go from here.
About a week ago, BPA Administrator Steve Wright signed the Record of Decision (ROD), a document laying out the 20-year policy for division of BPA power benefits, an agreement that resulted from many months of discussion. CUB was very disappointed that the ROD was signed without a clear message that a major factor in the implementation of benefits, the Residential Exchange, must be settled before the policy can be in any way made whole. There are, in fact, millions of residential customers, 60% of Northwest residents, who have not yet been made whole in this process.
Those customers have lost their access to financial benefits from the federal hydropower system because the Residential Exchange, which delivered those benefits, has been suspended. They have lost their ability to form a new public and receive the priority benefits from BPA that would have been their right as a public entity up to this time, because new BPA policy severely limits benefits to any newly-formed, publicly-owned utilities. And they have lost their seat at the table, since customer advocates such as CUB have not been invited into the process of reworking the Exchange policy in the months since the Exchange was suspended and rates have soared. The importance of the matter has prompted statements from state and national leaders, such as the op-ed in today's Oregonian by Senator Wyden and Representative Blumenauer.
Because the issue is so complex, Bob gave attendees a broader historical context. He spoke of his grandfather, who traveled the length of the Columbia River many years ago. As a region, we have all given up the freedom of a wild river and the ability to travel it as in years past. We all, and particularly the native peoples of the Northwest, have lost the former abundance of the salmon runs. The trade-off for what we have lost as a region has been inexpensive electrical power shared amongst all residents, to a greater or lesser extent. Now the majority of Oregon utility customers are receiving no benefits to offset the losses we all share.
The increase residential customers of privately-owned utilities have seen on recent utility bills comes on top of other recent rate hikes, and low-income advocates testified to the fact that this is a heavy burden for many families to bear. One public power representative answered this issue yesterday by saying basically that this issue is not about poor people, it's about the law. CUB does not dispute that federal law gives priority rights to customers of the publicly-owned utilities of the Northwest; however, we are certain that the law can also support a robust benefit for the millions of other households who do not happen to live in public power districts. A reasonable, equitable sharing of the federal hydro benefits with all the neighbors in the Northwest is a practical way to manage the system for the good of the region. We also think it's the right way to enact the law of the land.
CUB realizes our tone may get a bit frosty at times discussing the Exchange, as when we say: "The policy embedded in this ROD simply cannot go forward without a fair resolution to the Residential Exchange, period. Our frustration level is running high and our patience is running out." You see, we've been shut out in the cold on this issue and we're not ones to sit outside waiting forever. We've been shut out of the power benefits in the form of the Exchange that should rightly belong to all Northwest residents, shut out of the possibility of becoming public power customers and accessing benefits in that way, and shut out of the process at which these weighty matters are discussed and decided. We're going to go bundle up, grab a hot drink, and continue to examine our options for moving forward.
Posted by Oregon CUB at August 2, 2007 03:14 PM
So wouldn't this be an appropriate time for CUB to lead the charge to take the utilities into true public ownership so that the captive customers can enjoy the federal hydro benefits again? If we were served by a PUD rather than a profit-seeking utility, we'd be better off ratewise and we wouldn't be in this mess vis a vis the residential exchange credit.
What do the stockholders of PGE provide that we can't provide for ourselves? Why isn't this front and center for CUB?
Posted by: George Seldes at August 2, 2007 03:49 PM
Thanks for speaking strongly on behalf of all of us!
Posted by: William Wiest at August 2, 2007 03:51 PM
In response to George Seldes:
CUB has for years supported numerous attempts to create public power utility districts, most recently when the City of Portland was trying to buy PGE.
However, recent actions by BPA will make forming public power districts much more difficult. The issue is: where is the new public utility's electricity going to come from? State law prohibits the condemnation of generation assets, so that is one avenue closed.
This new BPA policy would keep new publics from receiving priority firm rates (the lowest cost federal hydropower, available to existing publics) in large enough quantities to serve the load of a major utility like PGE for the next 20 years. Without either owning the generating assets, or being able to get inexpensive hydropower through BPA, any new publics would have to rely on the wholesale market for electricity. This means that forming a new public would require a large rate increase for customers. Under such a scenario, it would be nearly impossible to form a new public.
CUB fought against the new BPA policy limiting new publics' access to the Bonneville system, and we did so because we wanted to keep the possibility of forming new publics alive. But we were one voice against many (including existing public power districts who have fought hard to prevent newly formed public power districts from sharing BPA power), and we lost that one. We will continue to advocate for cost-effective public power options when we can.
Posted by: CUB at August 6, 2007 01:13 PM
What is the legal basis for BPA's letting the existing PUDs hog the whole river system hydro benefit in perpetuity? The public power preference is (or at least, was) legally defensible because it goes to all similarly situated entities. When did it become legal for a government entity like BPA to pull up the ladder and create favored classes (existing publics) and disfavored ones (newer publics)?
Also, you could argue in the alternative that what might have been defensible when the residential exchange credit was being passed out is totally not defensible now that the IOUs are shut out.
Do you have a legal opinion letter saying that the sweetheart deal locking in the benefits to the existing PUDs and freezing out the customers "served" by the IOUs is unassailable?
Posted by: George Seldes at August 6, 2007 11:11 PM
Post a comment
|
|
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)
|
|