According to Robert Bloom, a commissioner at the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer regarding the release of the 1996 report card on Pennsylvania utilities contained "misinformation" and was "distorted."

That article reported the PUC refused to issue the 1996 report card because the commissioners disagreed on the amount of performance information that should be released in the new competitive environment (see "Headlines," FORTNIGHTLY, 3/15/97).

Competitive electric provider Electric Lite has drawn the attention of the South Carolina Public Service Commission with its promises of guaranteed rate reductions of 20 percent.

Electric Lite intends to compete against South Carolina investor-owned utilities for customers when the Legislature opens the market to competition.

The proposed "Competitive Power Act," if approved by the Legislature, would open the state's electric markets to competition in January 1998.

According to a new study by Resource Data International, the annual Outlook for Coal and Competing Fuels, U.S. electric load growth is accelerating, with actual utility generation growth expanding at rates comparable to the nation's real economic growth rate for the past two years.

Several electric measures suggest that in the mid-1990s, the nation is becoming more electric intensive. The 1996-1997 report suggests the nation's coal producers should see firm prices and strong demand growth in most producing regions in 1997.

In the first order under a 1995 law designed to increase competition in the electric wholesale market, the Texas Public Utilities Commission ordered Central Power & Light Co. to cut rates.

Meanwhile, Moody's has predicted that legislation introduced in the Texas Senate and House giving choice to small ratepayers is unlikely to pass.

Rate Cut. On March 31, the PUC ordered a $32.3-million rate cut for Central Power & Light Co. retroactive to May 1996. An additional $16.4-million rate cut must be implemented annually in 1998 and 1999 (Docket No. 14965).

Electric restructuring at the state and federal levels is moving forward fast (em too fast for some. Utilities, unions, consumers and even legislators are making their opposition known by filing lawsuits to block or slow down various restructuring initiatives, from New England to Dixie to the Desert Southwest.

Rolling Back Legislation

Pennsylvania and New Hampshire already have enacted legislation to guarantee customer choice in retail electric markets. Even so, some parties are asking for a rollback.

A new study takes a look at using the benefits of electric utility deregulation to increase trade and investment between the U.S. and Mexico. Published by the Salt River Project, or SRP, and the Comision Federal de Electricidad, the study aims to help companies understand the legal and regulatory regimes of the two countries and the potential opportunities to buy and sell power across the border via high-voltage interconnections. Others involved with the study included the

U.S. Agency for International Development, Price Waterhouse and Bechtel.

El Paso Energy Marketing hired Kathy Eisbrenner as senior v.p. Eisbrenner previously was with LG&E Natural Inc.

Cameron Raether, XENERGY senior consultant, was elected to the board of the Power Association of Northern California. Raether serves as chair on several boards and specializes in market evaluations for large electric and natural gas end users.

Robert G. Edwards was elected v.p. at Columbia Division of SCANA Energy Marketing Inc. Edwards joined SCANA in 1992 as a gas sales representative and has held various marketing positions.

Regarding the Hanser, Wharton and Fox-Penner article on real-time pricing ("Real-Time Pricing (em Restructuring's Big Bang," PUBLIC UTILITIES FORTNIGHTLY, March 1, 1997, p. 22), the authors state that RTP programs will defer capacity needs and reduce peak loads. I doubt it. People don't mind paying high prices per kWh for a few hours each year. On the other hand, there is nothing like an old-fashion ratchet to get people to reduce their peak demand.

I am writing to express my concern over the Feb. 1 publication of the article, "Why Applicants Should Use Computer Simulation Models to Comply With FERC's New Merger Policy" (p. 22). The authors, Mark W. Frankena and John R. Morris, have used the editorial pages of PUBLIC UTILITIES FORTNIGHTLY to deliver a highly commercial message promoting their preferred computer model at the expense of several other software packages, which they specifically name.

When the phone rang it was Tom Mathews, director of mechanical and energy services at Hannaford Bros., the grocery chain that has become better known for shaving utility bills than trimming pork chops.

Mathews made news two years ago when Hannaford had threatened to install generating plants on site at some or all of its 140 or so retail stores, clustered in New England and the north and southeast states. Now he was calling to tell me about his new plan.