Page images
PDF
EPUB

There are a large number of projects under investigation and serious consideration by the utilities of the Pacific Northwest. At the same time, there are many obstacles in the path of the actual construction. If we are to meet the regional power requirements, it will be necessary that both the Federal and the non-Federal effort be coordinated and carried forward in a planned program.

The committee has reviewed the appropriation requirements for the various multi-purpose resources projects in the Pacific Northwest. These projects are the ones proposed and under construction by the Corps of Enigneers with the power which is generated being marketed by the Bonneville Power Administration. There are a number of projects involved in this year's budget that are very important to the region. Most of the projects have been adequately provided for in the President budget recommendations to the Congress. However, there are some projects that could usefully use slightly higher appropriations than requested by the President. These increases have been listed in exhibit II.

Green Peter Reservoir, Oreg., is an important flood control and power project. A minimum of $2,500,000 for construction will enable the Corps of Engineers to effectively initiate the relocation and land procurement program. This initial construction phase is most important if an orderly program is to be followed.

The President's budget recommended $11,800,000 for the John Day lock and dam, Oregon and Washington, for fiscal year 1961. As a result of very favorable bidding on the first major construction contract at the project, the division engineer now advises that the amount of $37 million will be adequate to keep the construction of the project on schedule. The revised amount of $37 million represents the masimum which can be utilized in the fiscal year 1961 from an engineering standpoint. With this in mind and with the assurance that this reduction will in no way delay the power-on-the-line dates or overall completion of the project, this committee recommends the reduced appropriation.

Lower Monumental lock and dam, Washington, is considered an important project in the development of the lower Snake River. This project is the next step upstream from Ice Harbor and is the second of a series of four projects which will ultimately proride slack water navigation to Lewiston, Idaho, and other tremendous production areas of southeastern Washington, northeastern Oregon, and central Idaho. The power produced at the project will be needed at the time of the scheduled completion of the construction. It is good business to carry construction of these Snake River projects to completion as early as possible in order that maximum benefits might be attained.

The importance of recreation facilities at the completed projects, or for that matter for projects under construction, is an essential part of development. It is highly desirable that such facilities be provided in order that the maximum benefits of the project can be attained. Recreation is rapidly becoming an important beneficial use of water resources. It is recommended that the committee give favorable consideration to the increases shown in exhibit II.

There is one additional project in the area which is of major sig. nificance, and that is Libby Dam on the Kootenai in northwestern

PA

Montana. You are aware that this project extends its reservoir into Canada and, therefore, agreement for its construmtion must be obtained from our northern neighbor. Fortunately, significant strides

have been made in recent months to resolve this matter and there is I! a good chance that construction of Libby may proceed in the near

future. The conference committee recommends that Congress authorize and appropriate $387,000 for advance engineering and design on the Libby project in order there would be no delay in the planning for this important project.

I would now like to discuss the budget requests of the Bonneville Power Administration. Bonneville Power Administration has requested $30,117,000 for fiscal year 1961. The Administrator has said that $19,142,000 of this amount is to be expended for construction and that the balance, $10,975,000, will be spent for operation and maintenance. This total budget is $1,335,000 less than the funds appropriated for 1960. We have studied these items and are in general agreement with Bonneville Power Administration's budget requests. The conference committee therefore recommends the total budget request for 1961 in the amount of $30,117,000 for Bonneville Power Administration activities.

At this time I would like to invite your attention to exhibit III which is the "West Group Forecast of Power Loads and Resources for the period July 1960-June 1971." This report was made by the Ttility Conference Committee's Subcommittee on Loads and Resources on January 29, 1960.

In summary, the conference committee, as it has in the past, would like to make it very clear to the Congress that the utility industry of the Northwest does not feel that the Federal Government has the sole responsibility to construct all the power facilities which our region may need. Our requests to the Congress are based on the principle of teamwork. While the Federal Government has an understandable interest in the multiple-purpose development of the Columbia River Basin, this conference committee does feel that the non-Federal agencies of the area should be permitted and encouraged to continue to construct their projects since the basic utility responsibility in the region naturally rests with the electric companies and public agencies which provide direct service to the customer. In meeting this responsibility, these utility agencies have undertaken what is, without question, the largest hydroelectric construction program in the history of the United States. Currently, and for several years ahead, power for all in our area is in good supply. This results from the construction of power production facilities of non-Federal as well as Federal agencies.

Our request to you is that the Government prosecute construction of the Federal projects in a manner which is consistent with the program undertaken by the region's non-Federal utilities. It is vital that the Congress keep pace with the development program by the construction of certain projects which have been authorized for Federal development. Our request for appropriations to you today is geared to that principle. Expenditures which we recommend will permit the Government to meet the responsibilities which have accrued to it by virtue of its authorization of certain power developments. We earnestly urge this committee to consider our recommendations.

The Columbia River fishery development program, which has been in operation for several years, has the full support of the Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee. This program is designed to counteract damage to fishery resources in the Lower Columbia River Basin caused by construction of dams. It is carried on cooperatively between the United States and the appropriate agencies in the States of Oregon and Washington. At the same time many of the non-Federal utility agencies of the area have likewise carried on estensive programs to conserve and enhance our fishery resource. The conference committee recommends that the Congress appropriate the sums requested in the President's budget for this program. The amounts requested are $1,915,000 for operation and maintenance and $1,400,000 for new construction. It is our understanding that this program is now approximately 65 percent

complete and that the money requirements to complete the program are $8,449,000. It is recommended by the conference committee that this program be continued on schedule and such appropriations be made in future years as are requested.

Again, on behalf of the conference committee and the four million people who look to us for electric service, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. As we have demonstrated over the years, the conference committee members are ready and anxious to cooperate with Congress in any and all ways which will promote the best interests of the electric power consumers in the States in which we operate.

(The exhibits follow :)

EXHIBIT I Members Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee, Sept. 1, 1959 to Aug.

31, 1960 Name and address :

Customers

serred 1. Cascade Locks City Light, Cascade Locks, Oreg

561 2. Central Lincoln PUD, Newport, Oreg

12, 114 3. Chelan County PUD, Wenatchee, Wash..

16. 474 4. Coos-Curry Electric Cooperative, Inc., Coquille, Oreg

5,774 5. Douglas County PUD, Bridgeport, Wash.-

5,577 6. Eugene Water & Electric Board, Eugene, Oreg-.

27, 378 7. City of Forest Grove, Forest Grove, Oreg

2, 838 8. Grant County PUD No. 2, Ephrata, Wash.

14, 043 9. Grays Harbor County PUD, Aberdeen, Wash.

22. 068 10. City of McMinnville Water & Light Department, McMinnville, Oreg

3, 884 11. Milon-Freewater Utilities, Milton-Freewater, Oreg-

2, 466 12. Pacific Power & Light Co., Portland, Oreg

249, 401 13. Portland General Electric Co., Portland, Oreg-

249,98 14. Puget Sound Power & Light Co., Seattle, Wash..

28, 927 15. Seattle City Light, Seattle, Wash.-

331, 307 16. Snohomish County PUD, Everett, Wash.

58, 237 17. Tacoma City Light, Tacoma, Wash--

63, 819 18. The Washington Water Power Co., Post Office Drawer 145, Spokane, Wash..

148, 390 10. Washington Public Power Supply System, Kennewick, Wash.

Member systems: 20. Benton County PUD, Kennewick, Wash.

10,034 21. Callam County PUD, Port Angles, Wash. 22. Ferry County PUD, Republic, Wash_ 23. Franklin County PUD, Pasco, Wash.. 24.

Kittitas County PUD, Ellensburg, Wash. 25. Klickitat County PUD, Goldendale, Wash_

5.027 Total, customers served ---

1, 352, 676

5, 366 1, 237 7, 137

Exhibit II
Fiscal year 1961 appropriation recommendations, Pacific Northwest

Conference Committee

Utilities

[blocks in formation]

EXHIBIT III

EXPLANATION OF PROCEDURE AND METHODS USED IN COMPUTING THE WEST GROUP

FORECAST OF JANUARY 29, 1960

Area included covers the utilities operating in and supplying the consumer demands for the State of Washington, the northern part of Idaho and the northwest area in the State of Oregon bounded approximately by Pendleton in the east and Bend and Coos Bay in the south. In addition, the Bonneville Power Administration load in the State of Montana is included in the West Group loads and the Hungry Horse and Noxon hydroelectric plants located in western Jontana are included in the west group resources.

Load estimates are made by each utility of the area or by their principal sup plier. No change in these estimates is made by the Load Resources Subcommittee. The total estimated load for the area is the sum of the utility estimates.

Resource estimates include facilities in operation, facilities under construetion, proposed Federal facilities authorized and for which money has been appropriated to start construction and non-Federal facilities for which license has been issued by the Federal Power Commission. Those projects actively being investigated and in many instances for which application to construct has been made are not included in the computed resources of the area.

Water years on which resources estimates are based are the historical critical year of the area which determines the amount of firm load which can be carried and a median month year which shows the amount of secondary energy avail. able in one-half of the years which can be used to conserve fuel in thermal plants and to supply interruptible loads (it should be noted that energy shown is not available in equal amounts throughout the year).

Capability of west group is limited by energy supply and the hydro dependable capacity is in relation to the energy limitations. Energy capability is related to the critical period September 1-April 15 of the 1936–37 adverse water year. Because of reservoir limitations the firm energy deficiency could not live held at a uniform level during this entire period, and the energy caleulations are based on the November through March period during which the maximum level of energy deficiency prevailed. Machine capacity is in excess of dependable capacity and, coupled with secondary resources in the median water rear and during the runoff season, can be partially utilized for interruptible load and replacement of fuel generation.

The tabulations include only that interchange with outside parties presently under firm contract although exhibits have been included in the main report to indicate potential interchange with outside parties. Thermal facilities of the west group are considered reserve resources.

Firm peakload growth for the area is at an annual rate of approximately 6.4 percent (energy 5.8 percent) which is slightly above that of the previous forecast. The initial total peakload level is about 50 microwatts (energy 90 microwatts) below the corresponding year in the previous forecast.

« PreviousContinue »