The Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) has approved special discount rate tariffs to help Illinois Power Co., an electric utility, meet ongoing competition from municipal electric utilities within its service territory.
The Kentucky Public Service Commission (PSC) has moved closer to full competition in the telecommunications intraLATA market by approving an implementation schedule, monitoring rules, and cost-recovery methods for intraLATA equal access. It had established the equal access, or "dialing parity," goal in a 1991 order on competition in the telephone market.
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has denied applications for rehearing and a request for a stay of its recent decision to expand intraLATA competition and redesign rates for local exchange carriers to prevent revenue losses and ensure the proper pricing of bundled competitive services. Re Alternative Regulatory Frameworks for Local Exchange Carriers, I.87-11-033; Application Nos. 85-01-034 et al., Decision 95-01-047, Jan 24., 1995 (Cal.P.U.C.). t
Phillip S. Cross is an associate legal editor of PUBLIC UTILITIES FORTNIGHTLY.
By Wallace Edward BrandWallace Edward Brand practices law in his own firm in Washington, DC, where he represents small electric systems.
Eugene P. Coyle works as an energy analyst for Toward Utility Rate Normalization (TURN), a consumer advocacy group in California that claims 30,000 members.
t t t t t
The January mini-forum failed to discuss a key underlying assumption made by PoolCo proponents. The assumption is that price competition will really exist in tomorrow's wholesale electric market.
Alex Henney is associated with Energy Economic Engineering Ltd. in London, and has consulted in many countries. As early as February 1987, Henney advocated competitively restructuring the electricity supply industry and incorporating a pool as a real-time spot market. He is the author of A Study of the Privatisation of the Electricity Supply Industry in England and Wales.
t t t t t
Last year, the Norwegian Market Co. decided to stick with bilateral trading and a spot market.
By Seabron AdamsonSeabron Adamson is senior consultant with London Economics Ltd., a consulting firm for the private sector. A native of Georgia, Mr. Adamson joined London Economics in 1992 and currently resides in the United Kingdom.
t t t t t
The debate over "PoolCo" vs. bilateral contract markets is a question of market mechanism, or how transactions can be made while recognizing the realities of power systems.
After 40 years of wandering in the wilderness as a minority party, House Republicans are ready to slash and burn what they see as a bloated federal bureaucracy. The next two years will demonstrate just how powerful the legislative branch can be when both House and Senate are controlled by a strong-willed party on a mission. Electric industry officials seem optimistic, but cautious, about this Republican revolution.
The governments of most Latin American countries have yet to establish clear policies about the future ownership of existing generation assets, but they do expect future capacity to be largely developed by the private sector. This has created friction in some countries between governments, which are eager to limit the role of the state in electric supply, and national utilities, which feel threatened and continue preparing traditional expansion plans.
This fight is for the heart and soul of regulation everywhere. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) won the first round on February 22, but I think there's more to come.
The fight involves incentives for nonutility generators (NUGs). It also touches on PURPA (em the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (em which guarantees a market to cogenerators or power producers (QFs) who qualify. But more important, this battle involves regulatory philosophy.