There's still time to strengthen BPA’s clean energy commitments!

Bonneville Power Administration has released for public comment a draft of its Integrated Program Review, which will set BPA program budgets for fiscal year 2009 and 2010-’11.

Of concern to supporters of clean and affordable energy are the proposed budgets for Bonneville’s energy efficiency, renewables and fish and wildlife programs. The draft offers some positive proposals in those areas, but falls short on many levels.

Your help is needed to bolster the proposal’s positive aspects while pushing BPA to ramp up its investment in clean energy.

Please submit comments on BPA’s 2009 program funding to: comment@bpa.gov by tomorrow, Thursday, June 19. 

Please contact Jesse Stanley at the Coalition office for more information about submitting written comments.

Background

The Integrated Program Review process will establish BPA’s program budgets, first for the fast-approaching fiscal year 2009 and then for 2010-‘11. These budgets will affect BPA’s revenue requirements and thus set the stage for rate cases that determine how much its customer utilities (and ultimately their consumers) will pay for BPA power.

In order to quickly set its 2009 power rates, BPA is seeking comments on only the 2009 program funding levels at this time. (The other years’ program proposals will be considered later this summer. We will offer more details in July.)  Comments on the FY 2009 draft must be submitted by next Thursday, June 19, 2008.

Key Issues and Talking Points on the FY ’09 Draft

1. Energy Efficiency

Proposed:  BPA wants to spend about the same amount of money on energy efficiency in FY ’09 as it is spending in FY ’08. (BPA is, however, proposing a significant increase in funding and energy savings achievements in the FY ’10-’11 period.)

NW Energy Coalition Comments:

• Energy efficiency is the lowest-cost resource for meeting load growth and reducing greenhouse-gas emissions.  The region actually is significantly beating the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s current energy savings target.  A flat conservation budget reflects a failure to recognize the clear economic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency
• In fact, BPA should ramp up this program, beginning in FY 2009, to capture as much cost-effective energy savings as possible as quickly as possible.  The agency offers no rationale for not following the regional trend.
• BPA must expand its conservation efforts or risk leaving lots of cost-effective energy savings on the table.   It is vital for BPA to view its energy efficiency budget in relation to its overall budget.  The efficiency program area comprises about 3.5% of BPA’s power expenses and 10% of actual capital expenditure.
• The proposed funding for state low-income weatherization programs is appropriate at this time. I It is critical, however, that BPA work with the states to ensure the most effective and efficient delivery of weatherization services.  In addition, BPA should note that recent studies show that higher home energy costs are forcing low- and moderate-income households to make trade-offs between energy bill payments and food, health care and education.  These data highlight the need for more investment in weatherization and effective coordinated delivery of services.

2. Renewable Resources

Proposed:  For FY ’09, BPA has budgeted the purchase of output from the Klondike III wind project to augment the federal power system. It plans to maintain the $6 million allocation for the renewable rate credit but significantly reduce (by $10 million) facilitation expenses.

NW Energy Coalition Comments:

• BPA deserves strong support and congratulations for the power purchase from Klondike III. Revenues from selling the project’s power and renewable will offset project expenses.  BPA should use efficiency and renewable resources to meet all its power augmentation needs.
• The reduction in facilitation services and programs is shortsighted.  BPA’s justification is that the region’s utilities are meeting the Power Council’s renewable resource development targets without Bonneville’s help. This may be true for some utilities, but certainly not for all.  To keep down the costs of new renewables, BPA should be proactive in helping its customers take advantage of federal renewable credits (Investment Tax Credit, Renewable Energy Production Incentive, and Production Tax Credit in particular) that may expire or lose funding at the end of this year.
• As the back-up supplier for customers whose renewables achievements fall short of Power Council targets, BPA should actively promote and facilitate renewable project development rather than having to scramble to purchase higher-cost renewable power down the line.   Now is the time to capitalize on opportunities so BPA customers can more easily meet renewables standards in Oregon, Washington and Montana and acquire potentially lower-cost projects.

3. Fish and Wildlife

Proposed:  BPA has proposed adding $57 million in direct program expenditures to implement the new federal Biological Opinion (BiOp) and the non-BiOp components of its recent settlement with several tribes and states.  The capital budget would increases to $50 million from $36 million to cover the same new program needs.  The Columbia River Fish Mitigation capital budget (which applies to Army Corps of Engineers capital projects) has been somewhat increased.

NW Energy Coalition Comments:

• Since the funding increases for FY ’09 will help implement a BiOp insufficient to restoring endangered salmon and steelhead, the cost-effectiveness of this budget increase is highly questionable. Spending more on programs that cannot fulfill BPA’s legal obligations is a poor use of ratepayer dollars.

Comments on the FY ’09 draft are due June 19, 2008.

Mail:
Bonneville Power Administration
PO Box 14428
Portland, OR 97293-4428

Email: comment@bpa.gov

Fax: (503) 230-3285

Online: www.bpa.gov/comment