Energy Policy Act of 1992

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued an order denying rehearing, effectively allowing Mojave Pipeline Co. (MP) to construct and operate its Northward Expansion Facilities in California (Docket No. CP93-258-007). The FERC has already issued five substantive orders in the proceeding.

Especially contentious was the clash with the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) over jurisdiction, leading to a February 1995 FERC order holding that the Northward Expansion was an interstate pipeline subject to federal oversight.

What are the essential characteristics of the system of governance that will be required for a new, North American electric industry with interconnected and interdependent transmission networks and trading areas?

Electric transmission networks are natural monopolies, as are the many independent network

control systems that coordinate the use of generators and loads and preserve system reliability.

Merger Menace: Holding Companies and Overcapitalization

States remain as powerless to control holding companies as they were

in 1935, when PUHCA was passed.

During the 1970s and 1980s, diversification swept the gas and electric utility industries. One byproduct of this craze was the formation of a large number of new public utility holding companies, exempt not only from regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), but from state regulation over security issues.

The United States Enrichment Corp. (USEC), after consulting with the U.S. Treasury Department, has selected investment bankers for its proposed privatization. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 called for USEC to prepare two paths to privatization: an IPO and a negotiated mergers and acquisition transaction with a third party. USEC supplies 86 percent of the domestic uranium enrichment market, and 37 percent of the world market.

Based on competitive bidding, Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc. has been chosen as transaction manager.

allow choice between price, reliability, and scheduling.

Customers with a choice are demanding, and getting, lower electric bills. These customers generally include municipals and large industrials. Municipals, as wholesalers, gained access to alternative suppliers via the Energy Policy Act of 1992.

Investigations of changes in the structure of the electric utility industry are growing at the state level.

The beleaguered Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) has a new assailant (em U.S. Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL). Stearns's bipartisan legislation, H.R. 2562, the "Ratepayer Protection Act," proposes repeal of section 210 of PURPA, which requires electric utilities to purchase power at avoided costs.

Speaking last fall in New York City, Rep. John D. Dingell (D-MI), the ranking Democratic leader of the House Commerce Committee, questioned the need for federal legislation on electric utility restructuring, and even warned the audience that passage of any federal legislation in the 105th Congress to require electric competition was far from guaranteed.

The occasion for the talk was a conference entitled, "Deregulation (em The Changing Electric Utility Industry (em Opportunities and Risks," sponsored by the financial house of Bear, Stearns & Co.

Bunker Hill. Gettysburg. Pearl Harbor. Iwo Jima. The Cold War. Each of these famous conflicts resonates in our history books. Despite the end of the Cold War, we may face another battle, this time between the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the states over jurisdiction.

For the partners in a utility merger, the celebration must wait. After opening the most delicate of dialogues, and then negotiating the price and closing the deal, the merger partners must yet gain the approval of regulators. The application may lie sealed in its FedEx pouch, safely on its way to Washington.