Regulators in Michigan and Florida have taken steps to expand programs for transportation of customer-owned gas.

In Michigan, the state public service commission will test the idea of expanding transportation service to residential and commercial users for two gas distribution utilities, plus allowing some aggregation to meet volume requirements. In Florida, the PSC will explore the idea of aggregating facilities owned by different customers.

Michigan. Tests in Michigan will involve Michigan Consolidated Gas Co. and Consumers Power Co.

The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities has approved a proposal by Jersey Central Power and Light Co., an electric utility, to meet its short-to-medium-term power needs by purchasing power from utility-owned generating facilities located in New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Under the agreement, the utility will purchase a total of 700 megawatts of power over an eight-year period from Pennsylvania Power and Light Co., Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. and Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.

While approving a

three-year settlement on electric rates for Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., the New York Public Service Commission has accepted a highly controversial increase in minimum charges for low-use residential customers.

It also approved a plan to establish an

$11-million, ratepayer-supported fund to promote additional sales to large, alternate-fuel customers, but warned the company that the court would closely monitor relations between the utility and its energy marketing affiliate, Plum Street Energy Marketing.

The California Public Utilities Commission has rejected a request by Pacific Gas and Electric Co., for a waiver from scheduled rate reductions mandated under a three-year base-rate plan approved in December 1995.

The court said the company has shown no "extraordinary circumstances" to support breaking the three-year rate contract.

The utility had claimed it would incur greater-than-expected maintenance and service expenses in areas such as tree trimming, meter reading and meter repair.

N.H. Discovers What Residents Really Want (em And Don't

While electricity consumers are interested in lower bills, they're unlikely to change suppliers even though they could save money.

That's one of the seemingly conflicting results of a survey of 400 people who participated in the New Hampshire electric pilot program. The program, started in late May 1996, targeted 17,000 customers, and still is under way.

The electric industry hasn't seen so much upheaval since Thomas Edison threw the switch at the Pearl Street Station. Full retail access to competitive markets in generation and supply will challenge traditional ways of doing business. But no change will prove more dramatic for electric utilities than setting a competitive price (em that most fundamental of business decisions.

In anticipation of competition, utilities have been experimenting to discern what forms of the "product" (em electric power (em customers might want, and at what prices. One such experiment is real-time pricing.

Myth 1. RTP increases the utility's costs and revenue requirements. %n1%n

Reality 1. A well-conceived RTP program reduces the utility's costs and revenue requirements.

RTP programs can reduce peak demands for power, increase off-peak demands, and reduce the need for additional peak-load capacity. This increase in efficiency can lead both to higher company profits and greater customer savings. As the electric industry becomes more competitive, these savings will flow to those customers most responsible for lowering the utility's costs.

RTP assumes that price spikes will deter load. But how will customers behave if they've hedged against that risk?

Tomorrow's electricity industry promises a wealth of pricing options as wholesale generation becomes more like a commodity. Spot pricing marks one example. And with spot markets will come a greater need for price derivatives (em hedge contracts that will permit customers to trade or shed risk to achieve a higher degree of price certainty.

I was amused and concerned by the allegations of marketing warfare that Mr. Krebs felt compelled to address in his December 1996 article.

One of these days you may see a former chairman of the American Gas Association become the new chair of the Edison Electric Institute. Or maybe the other way around.

I broached this subject the other day when I found myself downtown at EEI headquarters on Pennsylvania Avenue, talking with some association reps.