Texas Gov. George Bush's (R) unexpected electric restructuring legislation that would have opened markets to competition in the state on Sept. 1, 2001 has died. The proposal would have slashed residential rates by 10 percent in the next three years, frozen industrial rates until 2001, and cut small-business rates by 4 percent.

The Bush plan, released on May 5, would have guaranteed that utilities would recover all stranded investment in generation plants at market rates of return.

The California Public Utilities Commission has ruled that it will not phase in direct access at different times for different customer groups, but will allow all customers, regardless of classification or amount of electricity used, to choose their energy supplier in less than two years.

"There will be no phase-in or pilot-program period for the opening of California's electricity market. In just eight months we go from a regulated monopoly to open competition in one big bang," said John Seidl, president and CEO of CellNet Data Systems Inc.

The PUC said that starting Jan.

Two studies examine marketers and direct-access pilots. Customers seen as "confused," dissatisfied," "frustrated."

The Edison Electric Institute has released two studies that examine increased competition in electric markets. One looks at the rapid growth of the power marketing industry, while the other examines the problems encountered by the first six retail access pilot programs in the U.S.

Power Marketers.

Central Vermont Public Service Corp. hired former Electrolux Corp. CFO Douglas D. Sinclair as its marketing and business development v.p. and general manager. In addition to his new position, Sinclair will oversee day-to-day activities at two power generation and technology subsidiaries. Also at CV, Robert G. Clarke, president of Vermont Technical College, and Patrick J. Martin, president of America's Customer Operations at Xerox Corp., were elected to the board of directors.

John F. Cotter, former PECO Energy Co. power trader, was hired by Pennsylvania Power & Light Co.

Speaking on June 11 in Washington, D.C., at a symposium sponsored by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Rep. dan Schaefer (R-Colo.) was heard to say that he would have his electric restructuring bill out of committee by the end of July. He said his bill would mandate electric competition by 2000--just the sort of deadline that Texas Public Utility Commission Chair Robert Gee likes to call a "Hong Kong" clause.

Will the millennium bring the dawn of customer choice? Here we are, halfway through 1997. Hong Kong is now Chinese, but in America we are still ratepayers.

How one Va. city squeezed through the cracks

Tennessee Valley Authority Chair Craven Crowell told the Tennessee Valley Public Power Association annual meeting in May: "We need to make sure our customers get the best prices and best service available in the electric power industry." But one customer's attempt to get lower prices has been 10 years in the making (em and TVA won't be selling to them for much longer.

Earlier this year, the Bristol, Va., Utility Board voted to end a tradition of 45 years of wholesale power purchases.

By unbundling usage from access, utilities can maximize contribution to margin and yet still retain load.

With deregulation and industry restructuring, energy utilities face price competition from marketers, brokers, independent producers and even other utilities. To succeed in this environment, utilities will need to develop innovative pricing strategies that better meet customer needs and respond more effectively to competition. The common response by utilities to competition calls for price discounting to retain "at risk"

customers by meeting the competition head-on.

Subsidies? Maybe. But how about reciprocity? Should Congress let PMAs, munis and co-ops decline open access?

Until recently, most congressional debate on utility deregulation has focused on the future of investor-owned utilities and independent power producers and marketers. Lobbyists for government-owned or cooperative-owned power companies have tried to downplay their clients or to seek exemptions.

Downsizing has trimmed the work force, but utilities may have given up those savings by going outside to purchase labor, goods and materials. Electric utilities might be overlooking the obvious (em the rapidly increasing costs of purchased goods and services (em while trying too hard to trim internal costs through downsizing and personnel cuts.

While utilities cut labor costs by less than 1 percent per year from 1992 to 1995, the costs of purchased goods and services rose by an average of more than 4 percent each year (see Chart 1), according to a study of utility economics by A.T.

The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission has authorized PG Energy Inc. to implement several tariff modifications

regarding balancing charges and transportation service requirements.

It permitted the LDC to impose a balancing charge of $0.66/Decatherm per unit of imbalance on transportation customers and aggregators whose actual daily deliveries of gas vary by more than 2.5 percent of requirements. The commission rejected a proposal to reduce the balancing charge to account for the offsetting nature of usage among transportation users as a whole.