Enron Mail

From:jeffery.fawcett@enron.com
To:jeff.dasovich@enron.com
Subject:CPUC special session 6/7/01
Cc:steven.harris@enron.com, lee.huber@enron.com, drew.fossum@enron.com,kimberly.watson@enron.com, lorna.brennan@enron.com, glen.hass@enron.com, mbaldwin@igservice.com
Bcc:steven.harris@enron.com, lee.huber@enron.com, drew.fossum@enron.com,kimberly.watson@enron.com, lorna.brennan@enron.com, glen.hass@enron.com, mbaldwin@igservice.com
Date:Tue, 5 Jun 2001 01:48:00 -0700 (PDT)

Jeff,
Are you planning on being at the CPUC on Thursday?


Expanding SoCal Supply, Transport on CPUC Agenda
California regulators this week could start to remove some of the uncertainty
surrounding the in-state markets in the first of a series of natural gas
infrastructure decisions that ultimately could greatly expand the two major
utility intrastate transmission/storage systems.
When the California Public Utilities Commission meets in a special
continuation business session Thursday, it will consider allowing Southern
California Gas Co. to free up about 24 Bcf of cushion gas at its idle
Montebello Underground Storage Facility slated to eventually be abandoned.
However, a bigger move by the CPUC would be to act on the long-stalled
comprehensive settlement to open up the SoCal's intrastate transmission and
storage system.
The CPUC held an en banc information hearing for its five commissioners
earlier in May to hear arguments for and against the settlement. Indications
are the commissioners are ready to move, but it would still take several
months of processing before a comprehensive settlement could be okayed by the
state regulators.
"It appears to be back on (the CPUC's) radar screen and we're still hopeful
that they will do the right thing," said Lad Lorenz, gas operations director
at SoCalGas. "They are apparently taking a fresh look at the whole thing, but
they haven't given any indication when they might act."
SoCalGas has been criticized by a coalition of Southern California generators
for having little incentive to expand its pipeline capacity because of
current rules that allow it to re-sell supply and related services in a tight
market. Added pipeline capacity could hurt SoCal's storage business, some
critics charge.
"The uncertainty of what the ultimate regulatory structure is going to be on
a going-forward basis is causing everyone in the market, including us,
concern, making it difficult to make decisions," said Lorenz, noting that
SoCal since last August has had a proposed global settlement before the
regulators.
Part of the provisions of the overall settlement, Lorenz said, would make it
easier for determining when system expansions are necessary because it is
based on customer commitments and contracts for capacity on the system.
"Absent that, we're in the current regulatory system and we build the system
based on consumer needs," he said. "We've always done that, and we haven't
had any curtailments in 10 years now." (He added that SoCal doesn't expect
shortages when things get tight this summer.)
Under the current scheme, however, SoCal determines new construction on a
least-cost basis and then tries to recover the costs in the next rate case.
Another problem with the current design is that SoCal cannot sign up
customers for firm backbone transmission with guaranteed receipt and delivery
points.
The proposed settlement would allow SoCal to hold open seasons for specific
points to determine customer interest. Customers could either commit to new
capacity on an incremental cost basis or SoCal could seek rolled-in rates for
expansion projects. This is the system the state's other major gas utility,
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has in place.
Despite the rigors of the bankruptcy court, the PG&E utility has scheduled an
open season for expansion of its backbone and storage system in a proposal it
intends to make to the CPUC later in June (see Daily GPI, May 31
<http://intelligencepress.com/subscribers/daily/news/d20010531i.html<;).
While its pipe and storage infrastructures are thought to be "adequate" for
this year, the PG&E utility is expecting continued high load factors and
prices over the summer and winter periods.
Of concern to both utilities is the current interest among elected officials
and regulators to increase reserve margins to the double-digit levels. Their
question is who is going to pay for maintaining the excess capacity; the same
question applies to the electric side, too.
In implementing current plans to add 375 MMcf/d of pipeline capacity,
SoCalGas would increase its overall capacity to about 3.9 Bcf/d. "Our
indications are that is going to be more than adequate and will add
substantial excess capacity," SoCal's Lorenz said (see Daily GPI, May 29
<http://intelligencepress.com/subscribers/daily/news/d20010529e.html<;).
The existing expansions now before the CPUC but not part of the global
settlement struck last year would be re-evaluated in light of the settlement
should it be adopted in the next two or three months, Lorenz said.