The Bonneville Power Administration is finding a bit of a silver lining in a lawsuit that challenged its contracts with aluminum companies.

While the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled late last month that the contracts were void, it did affirm the Administrations right to sell power to aluminum companies, said BPA spokesman Scott Simms.

“That was a great amount of clarity provided by the court,” Simms said Monday.

A host of electrical cooperatives from the Pacific Northwest brought the suit, claiming - among other things - that BPA wasn’t entitled to sell power to aluminum companies. The court found that BPA could sell aluminum companies power, but it had to be at the correct rate, as spelled out by law.

In other words, the BPA can deal with the aluminum companies if it wants to, and at this point, it’s looking forward to more negotiations.

“We really want to try to find a way to reach a solution,” Simms said.

Simms said BPA recognizes that aluminum companies are important customers and they also provide important jobs to local economies.

CFAC’s shutdown here means the loss of 200 jobs on top of earlier job losses of 125 employees at the plant.

CFAC spokesman Haley Beaudry could not be immediately reached to discuss possible talks with BPA.

Simms said that BPA officials would engage in talks with the aluminum industry in the next few days.

BPA has already crafted a multi-million dollar agreement with Alcoa that could provide physical power to its Intalco plant. That plan is actually similar to the monetization plan, where the power cost is subsidized. In that plan, BPA, however, would physically deliver the power to the plant.

CFAC could be in the mix for a similar agreement.

That proposal has also brought criticism from the Public Power Council and isn’t finalized.

The Council claims, as it did in the lawsuit, that the agreement is unfair to other BPA power customers, because it results in a net increase to their rates. They also claim the BPA plan, which was unveiled earlier this fall, amounts subsidies greater than what the jobs are worth.

“The annual subsidy of over $140,000 per job is more than the average value of the jobs themselves,” the Council claimed.