Consumer advocates, utility chiefs, regulators, and analysts offered conflicting visions of retail competition's future at NASUCA's 1996 Capitol Hill Conference.
The National Association of State Consumer Advocates ( NASUCA) conference, "Restructuring the Electric Industry: What Are the Costs and Benefits to Consumers?," was held on February 29 and March 1 in the Rayburn House Office Building. The event was co-sponsored by Rep.
A few weeks ago I picked up a copy of one of those law firm newsletters, this one published quarterly by Reid & Priest, titled the Utility Telecommunications Advisor.
Filings Against FERC's Pro Forma Tariffs
AS ONE MIGHT EXPECT, THE VARIATIONS REFLECT THE HISTORIC TENSION BETWEEN NATIVE LOAD AND WHOLESALE TRANSACTIONS.
Two power pools (em one existing, the other inchoate (em have announced that they will file tariffs to price electric transmission as the difference in spot prices in the generation and consuming markets.
On May 31, 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued its Statement of Policy in Docket No. PL94-4-000, Pricing Policy for New and Existing Facilities Constructed by Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines.1 In that decision, the FERC sought to provide upfront rate certainty, thereby giving pipelines and shippers a firm basis for making decisions on large-scale investments.
But is that objective realistic?
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. (NiMo) has asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to rule that a New York state law violates the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) by requiring ratepayers, in effect, to reimburse gas-fired QFs (qualifying facilities) for payments made under a state-imposed, 4.25-percent natural gas import tax.
NiMo says that the tax and the reimbursement mandate will add $7.2 million to the electric bills of its customers in 1996 (em a figure that could climb to $13.5 million by 2006.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has declined jurisdiction in a dispute between Montana Power Co. and Puget Sound Power & Light Co. over a firm purchased-power contract and the seller's obligation to exert "best efforts" to secure necessary firm contractual rights to transmission service to complete the firm power transaction. The FERC prefers that the matter be heard in the federal district court in Montana, where related litigation is already pending.
Speaking at the American Gas Association's Natural Gas Roundtable in Washington, DC, on February 13, FERC Commissioner William L. Massey called on parties within the natural gas industry to resolve the problem of decontracting (capacity turnback) on natural gas interstate pipelines. Nevertheless, he offered a bit of help from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
For its part, said Massey, the FERC will remain flexible, as shown by its order allowing Natural Gas Pipeline Co.
A unique force of 25 environmental and energy/utility companies have joined together and filed comments on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on open-access electric transmission (Mega-NOPR), and the subsequent draft environmental impact statement (EIS), asking the FERC to mitigate the air-pollution impact of plans to promote wholesale electric competition and open access to utility transmission lines.
The parties urge the FERC to link its open-access policy with an environmental strategy that reduces air pollution at the g
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has approved a series of orders clarifying that it will not deny or revoke market-based, wholesale electric rates for utilities or their marketing affiliates without first allowing them to correct defects in their open-access transmission tariffs (Docket Nos. ER94-1045-000 et al., Feb. 14, 1996).
Utilities with existing market-based rates (or affiliates with such rates) will have 15 days to refine their open-access tariffs after the FERC identifies a problem (em only then will market-based rates be revoked.