HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 1227

BYRepresentatives Nelson, Hankins and Todd; by request of Washington State Energy Office

Furthering the state hydropower plan.

House Committe on Energy & Utilities

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendments. (9)

      Signed by Representatives Nelson, Chair; Todd, Vice Chair; Hankins, Ranking Republican Member; Cooper, Jacobsen, Jesernig, R. Meyers, Miller and H. Myers.

Minority Report:  Do not pass. (3)

      Signed by Representatives Brooks, May and S. Wilson.

House Staff:Fred Adair (786-7113) and Harry Reinert (786-7110)

Rereferred House Committee on Appropriations

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. (20)

      Signed by Representatives Locke, Chair; Grant, Vice Chair; Appelwick, Belcher, Bowman, Braddock, Brekke, Bristow, Dorn, Ebersole, Hine, May, Peery, Rust, Sayan, Spanel, Sprenkle, Valle, Wang and Wineberry.

Minority Report:  Do not pass. (7)

      Signed by Representatives Silver, Ranking Minority Member; Youngsman, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Doty, Ferguson, Nealey, McLean and Padden.

House Staff:      Nancy Stevenson (786-7136)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS FEBRUARY 27, 1989

BACKGROUND:

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is the hydroelectric project permitting agency.  Maintaining state interests in project cases before FERC has been uneven, at best. Additionally, state interaction in some cases has been costly through multiple interventions and other heavy legal expenses. The Electric Consumers' Protection Act of 1986 provided that states could present their interests through a state comprehensive hydroelectric project development plan.  FERC is directed to give careful consideration to a state's plan in the course of a processing a hydroelectric project application.

In 1987 a multiagency and interest groups task force was formed to evaluate the potential benefits to the state in preparing a comprehensive plan and what near term improvements in state agency practices and coordination could be effected.  The task force recommended that a state comprehensive plan be prepared and identified some immediate improvements that could be made.

Work to date has involved delicate balancing of varied interests and compromises.  The task force believes the same format offers the best chance of preparing a plan agreeable to the varied interests.

Funding is required to provide additional personnel needed to do the extensive work in preparing the comprehensive plan.

SUMMARY:

BILL AS AMENDED:  The state energy office shall contract with an independent facilitator to reconvene and coordinate the task force previously assembled to prepare a state comprehensive hydroelectric project development plan.  The plan shall be prepared by March 31, 1991. By December 15, 1989, the task force shall engage in a midpoint review to jointly appraise the progress of plan preparation.  If satisfactory, the extant organization shall complete the plan.  If not, executive agencies shall use their existing statutory authority to develop a plan.  By July 1, 1990, the task force shall recommend to the Legislature a lead agency for plan implementation.

AMENDED BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  The linkage to the current and future proceedings of the Joint Select Committee on Water Resources Policy is strengthened.  Also, it adds further to the specific areas or activities to be considered or accommodated in the preparation of the comprehensive plan.  The appropriation is added.

CHANGES PROPOSED BY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS:  The substitute bill reduces the total appropriated for the hydropower plan from $795,800 to $223,000, providing $153,000 to the State Energy Office and $70,000 to the Department of Ecology.

Appropriation:    $223,000.

Fiscal Note:      Available.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    (Energy & Utilities) Ed McGuire, State Energy Office; Ron Newbry, Pacific Power & Light; Michael Rossotto, Northwest Office, Friends of the Earth; Tom Mortimer, Washington Public Utility Districts Association; Henry Yates, Seattle City Light.

(Appropriations) Rod Sakrison, Department of Ecology; Ed McGuire, WA State Energy Office; Tom Mortimer, PUD Association; Ron Newbry, Pacific Power & Light; Henry Yates, Seattle City Light.

House Committee - Testified Against:      (Energy & Utilities) None Presented.

(Appropriations) None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (Energy & Utilities) The task force process brought diverse groups together and facilitated progress.  This arrangement should be continued and used for preparation of the state plan.  Funding is needed for state agencies to provide necessary personnel and to hire the facilitator.  There are extensive data requirements for doing the plan, some of which can be fulfilled with the assistance of the Northwest Power Planning Council and the Bonneville Power Administration.  The current electric energy resource surplus in the northwest is eroding.  A comprehensive plan will provide greater certainty for hydroelectric project development -- soon to be needed.  Opinions varied as to whether the task force composition should be changed slightly or kept exactly as is.  All agreed on the need to keep the task force process in doing the plan.

(Appropriations) The task force process avoids the cost of litigation. If the March revenue forecast increases, the Governor will recommend funding the plan.  Likely to be a diminishing energy surplus in the 1990's, alternative energy sources will be needed.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (Energy & Utilities) None Presented.

(Appropriations) None Presented.