|
|
Enron Mail |
Please see the following articles:
Sac Bee, Tues, 5/22: Rate hikes bigger worry than blackouts, poll says Sac Bee, Tues, 5/22: Energy Digest: Half-hour warning for blackouts? Sac Bee, Tues, 5/21: What's the hang-up? Sac Bee, Tues, 5/20: Dan Walters: One year later, we know it wasn't just a= =20 simple game of golf Sac Bee, Tues, 5/22: Daniel Weintraub: Energy crisis sapping California's= =20 confidence (Editorial) SD Union, Tues, 5/22: Panel pulls the plug on county utility plan=20 SD Union, Tues, 5/22: Business customers criticize proposed 29% SDG&E rate= =20 hike=20 SD Union, Tues, 5/22: State sends $533.2 million to company, part of April= =20 bill=20 SD Union, Tues, 5/22: 75% say power woes 'very serious'=20 SD Union, Tues, 5/22: Governor told to try seizure in power war=20 SD Union, Tues, 5/22: Head of PUC unveils evidence of power plant manipulat= ion LA Times, Tues, 5/22: State to Issue Warnings of Power Outages LA Times, Tues, 5/22: Businesses May Seek Blackout Exemption LA Times, Tues, 5/22: Legislators Set to Sue Federal Energy Agency SF Chron, (AP) Tues, 5/22: California will forecast blackouts and warn the= =20 public SF Chron, (AP) Tues, 5/22: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron , Tues, 5/22: How blackout warning plan works SF Chron , Tues, 5/22: Davis licenses 8th emergency power plant SF Chron, Tues, 5/22: PAY UP: Rate increases to hit more users than first= =20 reported, PUC says SF Chron, Tues, 5/22: Energy crisis not real, state's residents say=20 But poll results show most expect more blackouts SF Chron, Tues, 5/22: Power plant 'ramping' to be probed State senators als= o=20 expected to file suit,=20 charging federal regulators with failing to ensure fair rates SF Chron, Tues, 5/22: Half-hour notice of blackouts planned FAST ALERTS:=20 Power grid operator may send voice, e-mail messages SF Chron, Tues, 5/22: Time-of-use power pricing may be the answer SF Chron, Tues, 5/22: The mouth that roared=20 Mercury News, Tues, 5/22: Blackout alerts, forecasts proposed OC Register, Tues, 5/22: Blackout season may be heating up OC Register , Tues, 5/22: Cheney: Forget price caps, OPEC pressure OC Register, Tues, 5/22: A nuclear rebirth? (Editorial) Individual.com, Tues, 5/22: Mexico Seen As Medium-Term Solution To Californ= ia=20 Power Shortage ___________________________________________________________________________= ___ ______________________ Rate hikes bigger worry than blackouts, poll says=20 By Dan Smith Bee Deputy Capitol Bureau Chief (Published May 22, 2001)=20 The vast majority of Californians expect to be inconvenienced by power=20 blackouts this summer, but two-thirds continue to be far more concerned abo= ut=20 higher electricity rates they believe are unjustified, according to a Field= =20 Poll released Monday.=20 Meanwhile, 85 percent of the state's residents say they have cut back their= =20 energy use since the crisis began, and nearly two-thirds believe they can= =20 conserve an additional 5 percent to 10 percent.=20 As they were at the outset of the crisis, poll respondents remain skeptical= =20 of the power shortage's root cause. Nearly six out of 10 say the crisis is = an=20 attempt by energy companies to increase rates, rather than the results of a= =20 real market imbalance.=20 "As the seriousness of the issue has gone up, the cynicism has remained=20 high," said Mark DiCamillo, director of the San Francisco-based poll. "The= =20 public still doesn't buy the claim that it's supply and demand. They think= =20 it's an artificial crisis."=20 The poll results, obtained by interviewing a cross-section of 1,015 adults= =20 between May 11 and Sunday, are part of a special survey the Field Institute= =20 undertook to measure public opinion about the energy crisis. Subsequent=20 releases will survey attitudes about the available policy options and the= =20 policy-makers who might exercise them.=20 Monday's results show Californians are reacting negatively to higher=20 electricity rates, even though the most recent increase has yet to appear o= n=20 their monthly bills.=20 In a finding nearly identical to Field's January survey, 67 percent are mor= e=20 concerned with higher rates than power blackouts.=20 And that does not bode well for the elected officials trying to solve the= =20 problem, DiCamillo said. Pocketbook issues such as rate increases, he said,= =20 "focus more public opinion on the actors in this drama -- the politicians."= =20 A majority (52 percent) believes the $5 billion rate increase approved by t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission last week for customers of Pacific Gas an= d=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison was not justified, and an=20 identical proportion believes the rate increase will cause a "somewhat" or= =20 "very serious" problem in their households.=20 The proportion of people who believe the increases will cause "very serious= "=20 problems corresponds to their family income. Among those earning $20,000 or= =20 less, 27 percent believe the increases will cause very serious problems. Te= n=20 percent of those earning $80,000 or more believe very serious problems will= =20 occur.=20 In contrast, 27 percent say blackouts have caused a "great deal" or "some"= =20 inconvenience thus far, although 71 percent believe expected blackouts this= =20 summer will cause the same degree of inconvenience. More low-income residen= ts=20 (45 percent) say they will experience a great deal of inconvenience from=20 summer blackouts, compared with just 26 percent of those in the $80,000 and= =20 above category who feel the same way.=20 The poll shows that the 85 percent of respondents who estimated they have= =20 conserved power have cut back, on average, about 8 percent. Gov. Gray Davis= =20 has asked all residents and businesses to reduce power use by=20 10 percent, although Davis' plan assumes a 7 percent reduction. Eighty-five= =20 percent also say they can conserve even more, with additional savings, on= =20 average, amounting to 4 percent.=20 Six out of 10 believe the state can avoid blackouts this summer through=20 conservation.=20 "These numbers are a good guess as to what real conservation is being=20 achieved and what is likely to be achieved, and it's not a huge amount,"=20 DiCamillo said.=20 The Bee's Dan Smith can be reached at (916) 321-5249 or smith@sacbee.com.= =20 Energy Digest: Half-hour warning for blackouts? (Published May 22, 2001)=20 Grid operators are hoping to issue power blackout warnings a half-hour in= =20 advance, but the new alerts would be educated guesses and blackouts might n= ot=20 follow.=20 The proposed warning system is expected to be approved Thursday by the boar= d=20 of the California Independent System Operator, the Folsom-based organizatio= n=20 that runs most of the state's high-voltage transmission system.=20 Although an unknown number of the alerts will turn out to be false alarms,= =20 "this would be a huge step forward" for businesses, said Carl Guardino, hea= d=20 of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group and a member of the ISO board.=20 "For employers, a half-hour is the time needed to fire up a major generator= ,=20 to power down an assembly line, to have your employees save what they have = on=20 their computers," he said.=20 By comparison, the last two rounds of rotating blackouts came with two- and= =20 six-minute warnings, Guardino said.=20 The new system could be put in place by June 1, and might also include=20 expanded systems for giving e-mail notifications of power alerts or potenti= al=20 blackouts, ISO officials said.=20 --Carrie Peyton=20 Connell plans to borrow=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell says Gov. Gray Davis' energy plan doesn't= =20 add up.=20 Connell said at a news conference Monday that the state will spend money on= =20 electricity at a faster rate than anticipated by Davis, a fellow Democrat.= =20 As a result, Connell said, she expects to borrow about $4 billion this fall= =20 to avoid state budget cash shortages in the coming fiscal year.=20 "We are virtually in the same kind of fiscal environment that we were in a= =20 bad budget year," Connell said.=20 In recent years, the state has regularly borrowed money through one-year=20 revenue anticipation notes to avoid cash-flow problems. The notes are paid= =20 off within a year when enough tax money flows to the state treasury.=20 But Connell didn't have to resort to borrowing this year because of plentif= ul=20 revenue and a healthy reserve.=20 Connell said the state's energy purchases have changed the picture, and=20 called into question Davis' assumptions. The governor's plan calls for 11= =20 percent of the power purchases in the first half of this year to be covered= =20 by lower-cost, long-term contracts. As of last week, only 1 percent of the= =20 purchases were under contracts, Connell said.=20 But Joe Fichera, Davis' financial adviser, said that seven more long-term= =20 contracts for electricity during peak demand periods this summer will be=20 delivered to Connell's office today.=20 --John Hill=20 Suit to seek price caps The state Legislature plans to file suit today in federal court in a bid to= =20 force the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose caps on power=20 prices.=20 The lawsuit will argue that the commission has failed to ensure that=20 Californians are paying just and reasonable rates, as required under the=20 Federal Power Act.=20 The suit is being filed by Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San=20 Francisco, and Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Sherman Oaks. Hertzberg= =20 said consumer groups and others are also expected to join the suit.=20 As evidence, the suit will cite reports earlier this year by the California= =20 Independent System Operator that the state's electricity market was not=20 resulting in just and reasonable rates. The ISO is responsible for running= =20 the state's transmission grid.=20 The suit will cite evidence of how high power rates are causing harm to=20 society, Hertzberg said.=20 --John Hill=20 U.S. attacks special rate Before the idea goes any further, the federal government Monday asked state= =20 utility regulators to junk a proposal for a special, high-priced federal=20 energy rate.=20 In an emergency appeal, federal officials asked the state Public Utilities= =20 Commission to take a special vote Thursday to drop the idea of even=20 researching a pilot program, calling it discriminatory and a waste of time.= =20 As part of a vote last week that created new electricity rates, the PUC als= o=20 launched a study into charging all federal facilities market-based prices f= or=20 power -- a move widely seen as a dig against federal authorities who have= =20 refused state pleas to cap wholesale prices.=20 But three of the five PUC commissioners said at the time that they disliked= =20 the idea and would consider other options.=20 Given their reluctance, it would be a waste of utilities' scarce resources = to=20 even begin researching how to assess the special rate, the Department of th= e=20 Navy wrote the PUC on Monday, arguing on behalf of all federal executive=20 agencies.=20 --Carrie Peyton What's the hang-up? Clotheslines save energy and money, but they are considered unsightly by so= me=20 and are banned in many areas By Mary Lynne Vellinga Bee Staff Writer=20 (Published May 21, 2001) Rising electricity rates have prompted Stacey Swett to seriously consider= =20 taking a step she finds somewhat distasteful: hanging a clothesline in her= =20 back yard.=20 "I don't really like the looks of them, but you have to get past that; we= =20 have a huge issue here with our SMUD bill," Swett said.=20 The California Energy Commission touts clotheslines as a nearly cost-free w= ay=20 to conserve electricity. Statewide, clothes dryers burn about 1,000 megawat= ts=20 of electricity on a hot summer day, which could be enough to avert a blacko= ut=20 on days when state power supplies are tight. An electric dryer costs about= =20 $130 a year to run. A retractable clothesline will set you back about $14.9= 9.=20 People appear to be getting the message. Hardware stores report a sharp ris= e=20 in clothesline sales since the energy crisis hit. People are "going back to= =20 the old way of doing things," said Dave Haskin, owner of Broadway Hardware = in=20 Sacramento.=20 But the old way of doing things doesn't sit so well in some newer=20 neighborhoods. Where Swett lives, in midtown, she can decide for herself=20 whether to take the plunge and pin up the bloomers. But in many newer=20 neighborhoods -- those governed by homeowners associations -- the practice = is=20 not allowed.=20 Swett works for the management company that runs the homeowners association= =20 for the gated, Pocket-area subdivision of Riverlake. In Riverlake, it is=20 against the rules to hang your laundry where your neighbors can glimpse it.= =20 The same is true in Gold River, Rancho Murieta, Laguna West and Los Lagos,= =20 the mansion-studded Granite Bay enclave where Sacramento Kings stars Chris= =20 Webber and Jason Williams live.=20 "People think (clotheslines) are unsightly," said Dan Kocal, owner of the= =20 Folsom-based Kocal Management Group. His company manages the homeowners=20 associations for 70 communities in the Sacramento region. Not one of them= =20 allows clotheslines unless they are shielded from neighbors' views below th= e=20 fence line or behind a special enclosure.=20 When people buy into planned communities such as Gold River, Los Lagos or S= un=20 City, they agree to certain rules designed to keep the neighborhood looking= =20 neat and uniform, Kocal said.=20 "You agree that you're only going to park in the garage, that you're not=20 going to hang out clothes and that you're not going to paint your house=20 purple," Kocal said.=20 Clotheslines that can be seen from neighboring yards are banned by virtuall= y=20 all the 35,000 California subdivisions and condominium complexes governed b= y=20 homeowners associations, said Richard Monson, president of the Pasadena-bas= ed=20 California Association of Homeowners Associations.=20 "We choose to live in neighborhoods that don't hang these things out," Mons= on=20 said.=20 A few weeks ago, Monson was quoted as saying that the sight of hanging=20 laundry is "akin to graffiti in your neighborhood." Cartoonist Garry Trudea= u=20 since has devoted an entire week of his Doonesbury strip to lampooning=20 neighborhoods that don't allow clothes to be hung out to dry.=20 Now, Monson chooses his words more carefully. "When we talk about areas of= =20 communities that are less desirable, we often associate those with=20 undesirable items that are in proximity to the buildings," he said. He stan= ds=20 by his assertion that the sight of clothes flapping in the breeze could kno= ck=20 15 percent off property values.=20 Brian Rosebrock, a supervisor at the new Home Depot in Elk Grove, doesn't= =20 understand the stigma. When he was growing up in a rural area outside New= =20 York City, his mother always dried the family's clothes on the line.=20 Rosebrock, 40, still likes the smell of sun-dried clothes. He hangs his=20 jeans, socks, sheets and other cotton items in the back yard of his Rosemon= t=20 house.=20 "It's just laundry. Everybody is a little uptight here," he said of=20 Californians.=20 He may have a point. Bruce Hackett, professor emeritus of sociology at the= =20 University of California, Davis, said Californians harbor more negative=20 attitudes toward clotheslines than do people in the Midwest, where line=20 drying is more of a tradition.=20 About 10 years ago, Hackett did a survey of 45 UC Davis students and 35=20 single-family households in Green Bay, Wis. At the time, some students livi= ng=20 in married housing on the UC Davis campus were upset that they had to walk = to=20 an isolated, screened area next to the trash bins to hang their laundry.=20 "The housing office said clotheslines make the place look like a tenement,"= =20 Hackett said.=20 The attitude in Wisconsin was markedly different.=20 "On wash day, there were just clotheslines everywhere, which is something y= ou=20 don't find here," Hackett said. "One woman told me that when you move into = a=20 new home it's not really your home until your clothesline is up and your=20 clothes are on it."=20 In the wake of student complaints, the university eventually changed the=20 policy to allow the use of retractable clothes lines in the housing area,= =20 Hackett said.=20 Leaders of several Sacramento-area homeowners associations said they couldn= 't=20 think of any instance in which a homeowner has asked permission to hang a= =20 clothesline or has gotten in trouble for using one.=20 "I don't know of anyone who has a clothesline," said David Brickell,=20 president of the Los Lagos Estates Homeowners Association. He said the Los= =20 Lagos neighborhood is very concerned about the energy crisis and thus "woul= d=20 certainly consider" allowing clotheslines.=20 To save energy, the subdivision has started turning off its entrance founta= in=20 at night and is considering buying a smaller fountain pump.=20 Monson, head of the statewide association, argued that there are many ways = to=20 conserve energy without resorting to the public airing of laundry. Wet=20 clothes can, for instance, be hung in the garage or the utility room, he=20 said.=20 "The issue is not clotheslines, the issue is conservation, and hom=0F'eowne= rs=20 don't have to hang their clothes out of doors," he said.=20 But some energy-conscious citizens think discouraging the use of outdoor=20 laundry lines is ridiculous, given the state's energy situation.=20 Jennifer Putnam, 41, recently purchased a large umbrella-style apparatus to= =20 dry clothes in her Jackson back yard.=20 "We were standing outside by the (electric) meter at one point, two or thre= e=20 months ago. My husband said, 'Look at how fast that thing is going around.'= I=20 said, 'The only thing on is the dryer.' "=20 "During World War II, we had to do certain things," Putnam continued. "Now,= =20 we're looking at a power crunch, we're looking at saving an economy in=20 California. That's critical. That's important. =06? I really don't think Gr= anite=20 Bay is going to turn into a slum because people put up things to dry their= =20 clothes on."=20 The Bee's Mary Lynne Vellinga can be reached at (916) 321-1094 or=20 mlvellinga@sacbee.com.=20 Dan Walters: One year later, we know it wasn't just a simple game of golf (Published May 20, 2001) California will mark -- but certainly not celebrate -- an anniversary this= =20 week. It was exactly one year ago that a late spring heat wave swept over S= an=20 Diego, and as air conditioners began drawing heavy amounts of power, San=20 Diego Gas & Electric Co. began charging its customers high, market-oriented= =20 rates for juice.=20 It was the beginning of the California energy crisis, or at least of public= =20 and political awareness that something was wrong. And a year later, every= =20 aspect of the crisis continues to grow worse. We are paying 10 times as muc= h=20 for power as we were two years ago. We have amassed more than $20 billion i= n=20 private and public debt that will grow even with sharp increases in consume= r=20 power rates. And we face potentially life-threatening summer blackouts.=20 Certainly the roots of the crisis extend much further than one year. They g= o=20 back to decisions in the 1970s to stop major power plant construction and= =20 rely on conservation and alternative generating sources. And they include a= =20 momentous decision in the mid-1990s to adopt a "deregulation" plan that was= =20 an unworkable hybrid of open markets and price controls that left us at the= =20 mercy of out-of-state generators. Of more currency is what was and wasn't= =20 done in the last 12 months to fan that spark into a uncontrolled, and perha= ps=20 uncontrollable, firestorm.=20 Gov. Gray Davis once said that he was approaching energy just as he plays= =20 golf, "one hole at a time." Unfortunately for Davis, and for the state, it= =20 was not a golf game, but one of three-dimensional, and perhaps=20 four-dimensional, chess. To manage the crisis effectively, the Democratic= =20 governor needed the ability, either personally or through trusted aides, to= =20 pull together its disparate elements into a cohesive whole.=20 The golfing approach was evident from the beginning, as Davis dealt with on= ly=20 the most immediate aspects of the situation as they evolved, rather than=20 embracing it wholly and actively. Private and public energy experts warned= =20 that what was happening in San Diego was a harbinger of a larger crisis and= =20 proposed that the 1996 "deregulation" be suspended, that rates be raised=20 slightly and that private utilities be given broad authority to enter into= =20 long-term supply contracts to stabilize the market. But Davis and his=20 handpicked state Public Utilities Commission president, Loretta Lynch,=20 stalled for time.=20 Less than a month after the crisis first surfaced, the PUC voted 3-2 to=20 authorize long-term supply contracts at about 5 cents a kilowatt-hour --=20 slightly higher than wholesale prices had been, but ridiculously cheap by= =20 contemporary standards. Publicly owned utilities saw the looming price=20 escalation and quickly locked up long-term supplies, but Lynch denounced th= e=20 commission action as "a wrong turn" that could lead to higher consumer bill= s,=20 and within days it was scuttled in legislation signed by Davis.=20 Rather than face the issue comprehensively and proactively, Davis, Lynch an= d=20 the Legislature opted for an expedient fix in San Diego, rolling back retai= l=20 rates without addressing either supply or cost issues. Within weeks, privat= e=20 utilities were beginning to take on billions of dollars in debt as wholesal= e=20 costs skyrocketed.=20 Last summer's failure to act was compounded by other errors of judgment. It= 's=20 clear now, for example, that it was a mistake for the state to continue=20 buying power at sky-high rates when the utilities had exhausted their credi= t.=20 Having a new deep pocket encouraged the generators to charge whatever the= =20 market would bear.=20 A year after he could have nipped the crisis in the bud, but didn't, Davis = is=20 busily rewriting history and blaming others, principally Republicans, for t= he=20 dilemma. But the governor cannot, or should not, escape the responsibility= =20 for approaching this very complex situation like a game of golf, or like so= me=20 routine political dispute, and thus failing to apply the aggressive and=20 sophisticated managerial touch that this crisis demanded from the onset.=20 As Gen. George McClellan discovered at the Battle of Antietam during the=20 Civil War, the unwillingness to take risk often leads to greater carnage.= =20 The Bee's Dan Walters can be reached at (916) 321-1195 or dwalters@sacbee.c= om . Daniel Weintraub: Energy crisis sapping California's confidence (Published May 22, 2001)=20 California's energy crisis is becoming a crisis of confidence. As electrici= ty=20 rates rise and blackouts mount, residents are losing faith in their=20 government's ability to deal with the one issue underlying this crisis and= =20 almost everything else that happens in the state -- population growth.=20 Energy and growth, in fact, are intertwined in the minds of everyday=20 Californians to an extent not yet reflected in the debate inside the Capito= l,=20 according to the results of a new poll from the Public Policy Institute of= =20 California.=20 More than three-quarters of those surveyed statewide said they believe=20 population growth contributed to the electricity shortage. And even if the= =20 energy crisis fades, people expect other problems associated with growth to= =20 worsen.=20 The crisis, in other words, has only heightened a sense that many people=20 already had, a feeling that California's famous quality of life is threaten= ed=20 by rapid growth and our failure to provide the public works and services=20 needed to make growth tolerable.=20 For the first time since the mid-1990s, more people say the state is headed= =20 in the wrong direction (48 percent) than in the right direction (44 percent= ).=20 And 56 percent said they expect bad economic times in the year ahead. That'= s=20 a quick decline from January, when a majority said they thought the state w= as=20 on the right track and 62 percent expected good economic times ahead.=20 "There is some deep-seated anxiety about the way government works, the way = we=20 plan for the future, the way we make law, the way big decisions are made by= =20 the governor and the Legislature," said Mark Baldassare, a Public Policy=20 Institute researcher who conducted the poll. "People didn't have a great de= al=20 of confidence in local and state government to begin with, and now they hav= e=20 even less."=20 Asked to cite the most important problem facing the state, 43 percent named= =20 energy. But fully one-quarter of those surveyed said growth or related=20 problems -- the environment, housing, and transportation -- were on the top= =20 of their list. Just 6 percent named schools as the top problem, a big drop= =20 from a year ago, and the same number cited the economy. Other perennial=20 favorites -- crime, health care, taxes -- barely registered on the scale.= =20 By a wide margin, Californians view growth as inevitable, but that doesn't= =20 mean they have to like it. More than 8 in 10 said the state's anticipated= =20 climb from 34 million people to 45 million by 2020 will make California a= =20 less desirable place to live.=20 Six in 10 said traffic congestion is already a big problem in their=20 community, and 23 percent said it was somewhat of a problem. Nearly=20 three-quarters said the availability of housing was a problem. Sixty-four= =20 percent said air pollution was a problem, and 61 percent complained about t= he=20 lack of opportunity for well-paying jobs.=20 The poll's respondents were conflicted about how best to deal with these=20 problems. A large majority favored local control rather than letting the=20 state taking a more active role in guiding growth and development. Yet an= =20 astounding 89 percent said local governments in a region should work togeth= er=20 rather than each city and county deciding growth issues on its own.=20 But in a reflection of their lack of confidence in government, 63 percent= =20 said local citizens should make growth decisions by voting on ballot=20 initiatives, while 35 percent said it would be better for local officials t= o=20 make those calls after thorough planning reviews and public hearings. A=20 little more than half -- 51 percent -- said they would vote today for an=20 initiative to slow the pace of development in their community even if it=20 meant having less economic growth.=20 What does all this mean for the political world? It's been clear for months= =20 that the energy crisis was sapping Gov. Gray Davis' popularity in the state= ,=20 and this poll confirms that trend. Six in 10 say they disapprove of the way= =20 Davis has handled the energy crisis, and his overall approval rating has=20 slipped to 46 percent, from 63 percent in January.=20 Conventional wisdom has been that if Davis could somehow find his way throu= gh=20 the energy crisis, he still could cruise to re-election. But that may no=20 longer be the case. Sixty-seven percent of residents say the crisis has mad= e=20 them less confident in the state government's ability to plan for the futur= e.=20 Gone is the optimism Californians once had that growth would produce a more= =20 vibrant economy and make life better for us all.=20 Californians have a vaguely uneasy feeling that things are slipping out of= =20 control, that no one really has a grip on where this state is going and how= =20 we are going to get there. The energy crisis is only the most vivid example= =20 of our failure to cope with change. People are worried. Davis should be, to= o.=20 The Bee's Daniel Weintraub can be reached at (916) 321-1914 or at=20 dweintraub@sacbee.com. Panel pulls the plug on county utility plan=20 Backers blame SDG&E for bill's demise in Assembly committee By Bill Ainsworth=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 May 22, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- An Assembly committee yesterday thwarted a bipartisan effort = to=20 ease the way for San Diego County to form a municipal utility district that= =20 backers say would bring residents cheaper and more reliable power.=20 Proponents of the plan said San Diego Gas & Electric and its parent company= ,=20 Sempra, engineered a political power play that ensured defeat of the=20 proposal. The utility was the main opponent.=20 "Their lobbyists just got on this thing and killed it," said Bill Horn,=20 chairman of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, who attended=20 yesterday's hearing before the Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee.= =20 "They did a tremendous disservice to residents of San Diego County."=20 But a lobbyist for Sempra told the committee that forming a municipal utili= ty=20 wouldn't solve the energy crisis because it would do nothing to increase th= e=20 supply of electricity.=20 "We're not in the middle of a utility crisis," said lobbyist Cindy Howell.= =20 "It's a generation crisis."=20 The bill, which would have applied only to San Diego County, had strong=20 bipartisan support from local officials, including state Sens. Steve Peace,= =20 D-El Cajon, and Dede Alpert, D-Coronado, who took the unusual step of=20 personally testifying before an Assembly committee.=20 But the proposal earned just three of the 10 votes needed to clear the=20 committee. All of the votes came from Republicans.=20 The bill's author, Assemblyman Mark Wyland, R-Escondido, blasted the=20 stockholder-owned utility company for opposing the bill.=20 "They simply don't want a threat to their ability to make as much money as= =20 they can on the backs of San Diego ratepayers," he said.=20 Proponents say forming a public utility would allow residents to tap cheape= r=20 sources of power, especially future hydroelectric power planned by the San= =20 Diego County Water Authority.=20 They argue that controlling some power plants could reduce the county's=20 dependence on expensive electricity now purchased by SDG&E on the wholesale= =20 market. That, in turn, could lead to lower utility bills.=20 During the current energy crisis, communities with publicly owned power,=20 including Los Angeles and Sacramento, have paid much lower energy bills tha= n=20 communities served by investor-owned utilities.=20 But current state law makes it difficult to create a local municipal utilit= y=20 because it requires a majority of voters to endorse the plan in an election= =20 in which at least two-thirds of registered voters turn out.=20 As a practical matter, that means approval likely would occur only during a= =20 presidential election when voter interest is high.=20 Peace said the current law was written for a reason: to protect privately= =20 owned utilities.=20 "The law was written on purpose by this Legislature to make it almost=20 impossible to form a municipal utility district," he said.=20 Wyland's legislation, Assembly Bill 206, would have changed the law to allo= w=20 majority-vote approval in the new district, without regard to how many vote= rs=20 turn out.=20 A proposal to create a municipal utility would have to go through months of= =20 local hearings before it could be placed on the ballot. Wyland said he didn= 't=20 expect the new agency to replace SDG&E but merely to give residents more=20 options over the long term.=20 Initially, Sempra opposed the bill because it would have given the new publ= ic=20 agency the power of eminent domain to take over transmission lines and othe= r=20 facilities owned by SDG&E.=20 At the hearing yesterday, Wyland offered to strip eminent domain power from= =20 the new agency.=20 But Howell, the Sempra representative, still opposed the plan and argued th= at=20 there is no reason to change the voting requirement in the current law.=20 Forming a utility district, she said, is a significant step that should=20 require high voter turnout.=20 The bill also drew opposition from unionized employees of Sempra.=20 Committee chairman Rod Wright, D-Los Angeles, voted against the bill, sayin= g=20 it was vague and that San Diego legislators should get a better idea of wha= t=20 they want to do.=20 He left open the possibility that he would support a proposal to allow the= =20 county to buy power but not to form its own utility.=20 Wright, widely considered an ally of the privately owned utilities, receive= d=20 $16,500 last year in contributions from Sempra, according to the Secretary = of=20 State's Web site.=20 Other members of the committee objected to the proposed structure of the ne= w=20 utility, which would be governed by a nine-member board of two supervisors,= =20 two San Diego City Council members, three council members from county citie= s=20 and two public members.=20 The proposal seemed to turn the political parties' positions on public powe= r=20 upside down.=20 The measure failed to win any votes from Democrats, who enthusiastically=20 endorsed a new state power authority that allows California to finance, buy= =20 and seize power plants.=20 But the plan was supported by three Republicans, including Assemblymen Jay = La=20 Suer of La Mesa, David Kelley of Idyllwild and Bill Leonard of Rancho=20 Cucamonga. Republicans opposed the state power authority, with some calling= =20 it socialism.=20 Wyland said he may try to resurrect the proposal later in the year.=20 Business customers criticize proposed 29% SDG&E rate hike=20 By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 May 22, 2001=20 SDG&E's commercial customers are attacking the prospect of paying an averag= e=20 of 29 percent more to cover the state's soaring cost of buying electricity.= =20 At a California Public Utilities Commission hearing in San Diego yesterday,= =20 some business customers also noted the irony that only in February did they= =20 win the same rate freeze as residential customers.=20 "We need rates we can depend on," said John Roberts, who owns an irrigation= =20 products business in San Marcos.=20 SDG&E customers were the first to bear the brunt of deregulation, and the= =20 utility's residential ratepayers were the first to win a reprieve when the= =20 state capped rates at 6.5 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 The SDG&E cap is expected to end for all customers in the coming weeks as t= he=20 commission moves to increase SDG&E's rates to levels now paid by customers = of=20 PG&E and Edison, which are about 3 cents per kilowatt-hour higher.=20 Yesterday's hearing, however, was for commercial rates.=20 Roberts said his San Marcos-based irrigation products company has withstood= a=20 tripling of power costs over the past year, while having to cut the cost of= =20 its products because of competition, he said.=20 Roberts added that socking businesses with high costs in order to spare=20 residential electricity customers from expected rate hikes could be=20 counterproductive.=20 "If businesses leave the state, they'll be without jobs, and a $30 savings = on=20 their power bills won't mean much," Roberts said.=20 The hearing at the County Administration Building was attended by about 30= =20 people. An additional hearing is scheduled at 7 p.m. today in the Community= =20 Rooms at the Oceanside Civic Center, 330 N. Coast Highway.=20 Larger crowds are expected for hearings on residential rate increases. Date= s=20 for those hearings have not been set.=20 State sends $533.2 million to company, part of April bill=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 May 22, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- One of the biggest single checks ever issued by the state of= =20 California, $533.2 million, went to an Atlanta-based firm Friday for power= =20 purchased for California utility customers during a single month, April.=20 Mirant, formerly Southern Energy, says more than half of the power came fro= m=20 three plants in the San Francisco Bay Area that it purchased from Pacific G= as=20 and Electric for $801 million under a failed deregulation plan.=20 State Treasurer Kathleen Connell, who displayed a blown-up copy of the chec= k=20 at a news conference yesterday, said she thinks the state has failed to=20 obtain enough cheap long-term power contracts and will have to borrow more= =20 than the $13.4 billion planned.=20 Connell, an elected official who issues state checks, said the power bills= =20 she had paid by last Thursday, totaling $5.1 billion, provide no basis for= =20 assuming that the price of electricity "is dropping and that it will contin= ue=20 to drop through the summer."=20 But a consultant for Gov. Gray Davis said the state, which has more long-te= rm=20 contracts than Connell has seen, is on track to control power costs with th= e=20 aid of conservation and that it plans to meet its goals without additional= =20 borrowing.=20 "I think the public should have confidence that this is not a rosy scenario= ,"=20 said Joseph Fichera of Saber Partners, a Davis consultant. "It's the expect= ed=20 scenario."=20 The state plans to issue a bond of up to $13.4 billion in late August that= =20 will repay the general-fund taxpayer money used for power purchases, about = $7=20 billion so far. The bond will be paid off over 15 years by utility customer= s.=20 Davis has declined to reveal details of state spending for power, arguing= =20 that the information would be used by power suppliers to submit higher bids= .=20 A group of newspapers and Republican legislators have filed lawsuits to for= ce=20 disclosure.=20 Connell said she has received 25 contracts from 17 power suppliers. She=20 declined to release details of the contracts, saying they are complicated a= nd=20 have varying prices.=20 Connell said the check for $533,181,235 issued to Mirant Friday is one of t= he=20 largest she has written since taking office in 1995.=20 "This purchase was made entirely at spot-market prices," Connell said, "eve= n=20 though the Department of Water Resources (the state agency that purchases= =20 power) has an executed long-term contract with this company."=20 Mirant said in a statement that, at the request of the state, its marketing= =20 arm gave the state a "helping hand" by buying power from suppliers not=20 willing to sell to the state and then reselling the power to the state.=20 "We've done the state a tremendous service in purchasing power on its=20 behalf," said Randy Harrison, Mirant's Western chief executive officer, "an= d=20 it's wrong for the transactions to be misinterpreted and skewed in a negati= ve=20 light."=20 Mirant said its subsidiaries generated 1.377 million megawatt-hours in Apri= l,=20 while its marketing arm purchased enough additional electricity to boost th= e=20 total sold to the state during the month to 2.077 million megawatt-hours.= =20 The firm said the power was sold for an average of $256.87 per megawatt-hou= r.=20 That's below the $346 average that the state expects to pay on the expensiv= e=20 spot market during the second quarter of this year, from April through June= .=20 But it's well above the average price of $69 per megawatt-hour said to have= =20 been obtained in the first round of long-term contracts negotiated by the= =20 state.=20 Mirant purchased three power plants from PG&E capable of producing 3,000=20 megawatts during a controversial part of deregulation. The state Public=20 Utilities Commission ordered utilities to sell off at least half of their= =20 fossil-fuel power plants without requiring the purchasers to provide low-co= st=20 power to California.=20 The utilities sold nearly two dozen major power plants capable of producing= =20 more than 20,000 megawatts. The largest group of plants, 4,700 megawatts,= =20 went to AES Corp. of Virginia. Three Texas firms purchased plants producing= =20 7,000 megawatts.=20 The power supply situation in California remained sound enough yesterday to= =20 ward off blackouts, although temperatures are on the rise throughout the=20 state. More heat means more air conditioning, and a greater strain on the= =20 system.=20 But starting next month, the state's electricity grid managers plan to=20 provide businesses and consumers with better forecasts of potential rolling= =20 blackouts.=20 The California Independent System Operator will post on its Web site "power= =20 warnings" when there is at least a 50 percent chance that rolling blackouts= =20 might be required during the next 24 hours. The ISO will issue a "power=20 watch" when less-critical shortages are anticipated in advance of high dema= nd=20 days.=20 The agency also plans to give a 30-minute warning before it orders utilitie= s=20 to cut power to customers, posting information about probable interruptions= =20 on its Web site. Its Web site address is http://www.caiso.com=20 "There have been a number of requests from businesses and consumers alike= =20 that would like more advance notice and to be able to plan better. That's= =20 what we are trying to do," ISO spokeswoman Lorie O'Donley said.=20 O'Donley said many details about how notifications will occur still have to= =20 be worked out, including whether e-mails or pagers might be used.=20 In other developments in the electricity crisis:=20 ?About 1.5 million compact fluorescent light bulbs will be distributed to= =20 375,000 households as part of the "Power Walk" program that began during th= e=20 weekend. Members of the California Conservation Corps are going door-to-doo= r=20 in parts of some cities to distribute the bulbs as part of a $20 million=20 conservation program.=20 ?Republican legislative leaders sent Davis a letter criticizing the governo= r=20 for using taxpayer funds to hire two aides to former Vice President Al Gore= =20 as communication consultants for $30,000 a month. The Republicans said Mark= =20 Fabiani and Chris Lehane operate "a partisan, cut-throat political=20 communications firm."=20 ?The state Auditor General said in a report on energy deregulation that the= =20 state is not meeting some of its goals for conservation and for building ne= w=20 power plants. The auditor also said the PUC does not have a process for=20 quickly approving new transmission lines. The state has been importing abou= t=20 20 percent of its power.=20 Staff writer Karen Kucher contributed to this report.=20 75% say power woes 'very serious'=20 By John Marelius=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 May 22, 2001=20 The overwhelming majority of Californians now regard the state's electricit= y=20 crisis as a serious problem, but say they have not yet been greatly=20 inconvenienced by it, a new Field Poll has found.=20 The nonpartisan statewide survey found that while people believe the=20 electricity problem is real, they believe it stems more from an attempt by= =20 energy companies to drive rates up than from an actual shortage.=20 They are also far more worried about soaring electricity bills than the=20 threat of blackouts.=20 And Californians offered contradictory views as to whether electricity=20 conservation can head off blackouts this summer. They believe all electrici= ty=20 consumers -- residents, businesses and government -- can reduce their usage= =20 enough to avert blackouts. But they also say they already have cut back the= ir=20 own usage about as much as they can.=20 In January, the Field Poll surveyed public attitudes about the growing=20 electricity crisis. At the time, 58 percent characterized the situation as= =20 "very serious." Now, the percentage of the population that considers the=20 situation "very serious" has grown to 75 percent.=20 Californians also hold a rather cynical view of the crisis. Thirty-six=20 percent say they believe it is the consequence of an electricity shortage,= =20 but 59 percent say it was caused by energy companies seeking to increase=20 profits.=20 The Field Poll is based on telephone interviews with 1,015 California adult= s=20 conducted between May 11 and Sunday. According to statistical theory, the= =20 poll would be accurate 95 percent of the time within a margin of error of 3= .2=20 percentage points.=20 So far, the ill effects of the electricity crisis are ones Californians see= m=20 to be willing to live with. But they worry that will not be the case much= =20 longer.=20 Eleven percent said they had been inconvenienced "a great deal" by blackout= s.=20 But looking toward the summer, 34 percent said they expected blackouts to b= e=20 a major inconvenience.=20 Likewise, 19 percent said the electricity rate increases averaging 10 perce= nt=20 that have taken effect have been a very serious problem for them. If rates= =20 were to go up another 10 percent, 36 percent would regard that as a serious= =20 problem.=20 Opinion is divided over the merits of recent rate increases approved by the= =20 state Public Utilities Commission. Forty-one percent called them justified= =20 and 52 percent called them unjustified.=20 "It's not overwhelmingly panned, which I suppose is about as well as could = be=20 expected on an issue like this," said Mark DiCamillo, associate director of= =20 the Field Poll. "It's almost like a tax increase. The public doesn't want i= t;=20 it's just whether they think it's justified or not."=20 Looking ahead, 28 percent say blackouts are the greatest threat posed by th= e=20 electricity crisis. But more than twice as many, 67 percent, say they are= =20 more concerned about escalating electricity bills.=20 By a significant ratio, 61 percent to 34 percent, Californians believe=20 additional conservation measures by all electricity users can eliminate the= =20 need for summer blackouts.=20 But when it comes to their own electricity consumption, they say they alrea= dy=20 have cut back significantly and can't do much more.=20 Californians say they have reduced their household electricity usage by an= =20 average of 8 percent. They said they could cut back by another 4 percent in= =20 their homes without causing serious problems.=20 "If the state is looking and the governor is looking for redoubled efforts,= =20 it's going to be painful because the public thinks we can do a little bit= =20 more, but not a lot," said DiCamillo. Governor told to try seizure in power war=20 By Philip J. LaVelle=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 May 19, 2001=20 A major San Diego business group urged Gov. Gray Davis yesterday to take=20 emergency steps in the energy crisis, including seizing power plants -- an= =20 action the governor said may be in the cards.=20 Davis met over lunch for nearly two hours with members of the San Diego=20 Building Owners and Managers Association, overseers of about 250 commercial= =20 properties here.=20 The meeting, at the University Club at Symphony Towers downtown, was closed= =20 to the media.=20 In remarks to reporters later, Davis repeated his hard line against=20 out-of-state energy producers, relating a threat made to a dozen power=20 executives in a private meeting May 9.=20 "I told the generators face to face, as close as I am to you .?.?.=20 'Gentlemen, you are going to lose your plants, and I'm going to sign a=20 windfall-profits tax, unless you help us get through this summer without=20 blackouts and without staggering prices.'?"=20 Davis also said he told them: "You know you've been ripping us off, acting = in=20 a predatory manner. If you do it this summer, you leave me no choice but to= =20 take your plants and sign a windfall-profits tax. So the ball is in your=20 court, gentlemen."=20 Building association executive Craig Benedetto said the group had "a frank= =20 exchange" with Davis. "We want to do our fair share (on conservation), but= =20 we're also concerned about the supply side," he said. The group "strongly= =20 urged him to use his emergency powers to do whatever is necessary, includin= g=20 seizing plants."=20 Association President Cybele Thompson said Davis asked for a string of=20 conservation measures. Yet some cannot be implemented without state=20 intervention, she said. For example, Davis urged that air-conditioning=20 thermostats be set at 78 degrees, but "a lot of our leases don't permit it,= "=20 she said.=20 While in San Diego, Davis received an honorary doctor of science degree fro= m=20 Scripps Research Institute.=20 Head of PUC unveils evidence of power plant manipulation=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 May 19, 2001=20 LOS ANGELES =01) The head of the California Public Utilities Commission pro= vided=20 a state Senate committee with evidence showing three power generators reduc= ed=20 electricity production and then benefited from the resulting high prices.= =20 While testifying before the committee Friday, PUC President Loretta Lynch= =20 displayed charts that tracked electricity prices and power generation at=20 three plants on a single day last November.=20 According to the graphs, after the plants reduced production during the=20 middle of the day, the state was forced to declare two separate power=20 emergencies which indicate electricity reserves had fallen seriously low.= =20 After the shortfall in supply helped cause a spike in prices, the companies= =20 operating the three plants suddenly increased their electricity production = to=20 almost full capacity, allowing them to capitalize on the much higher rates.= =20 "We certainly see a pattern," Lynch told the committee, which is=20 investigating alleged manipulation of the state's wholesale power market by= =20 energy suppliers. "Many generators are playing on their experience and=20 playing, to an extent, California."=20 Maintenance records reviewed by investigators show that there were no valid= =20 reasons for the plants to cut back production, Lynch said.=20 She would not identify the power plants involved, however, Lynch did say th= at=20 they are owned by at least two companies.=20 Sen. Joseph Dunn, who heads the special committee investigating alleged=20 market manipulation, said Lynch's testimony, on its face, is "very damning.= "=20 He said his committee has uncovered additional preliminary evidence showing= =20 that several power companies have allegedly engaged in similar behavior.=20 During a break in Friday's hearing, a spokeswoman for a trade group of majo= r=20 power suppliers told the Los Angeles Times that there have been no=20 coordinated efforts to shrink supplies to increase profits.=20 "There has been no collusion," said Jean Muoz of the Independent Energy=20 Producers Association.=20 The PUC and state Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer are jointly investigating the=20 exorbitant wholesale power prices that have cost California billions and=20 brought major utilities to financial ruin.=20 State to Issue Warnings of Power Outages=20 Electricity: Cal-ISO says it will try to give residents and businesses=20 24-hour notice of probable blackouts.=20 By MIGUEL BUSTILLO and NANCY VOGEL, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????Californians will hear an expanded forecast on their morning commutes= =20 this summer, courtesy of the energy crisis: "The 405 Freeway is jammed,=20 there's a slim chance of showers, and oh, by the way, there's a 50%=20 likelihood of blackouts." ?????By the end of this month, the California Independent System Operator,= =20 the agency that manages the state's power grid, expects to issue 24-hour=20 forecasts generally detailing when and where blackouts can be expected. ?????It is also piecing together a high-tech system to give businesses,=20 government officials and the public at least a half-hour notice of a probab= le=20 blackout in their area. ?????Just how those notices will be issued remains somewhat up in the air,= =20 but Cal-ISO is talking with private companies capable of notifying more tha= n=20 10,000 customers a minute via fax and phone, and millions a minute via=20 wireless communications such as pagers. ?????Cal-ISO assembled the plan after complaints from businesses,=20 particularly those in the Silicon Valley, that last-minute blackouts were= =20 costing California millions. The plan also responds to growing political=20 pressure for the public to be kept informed of the barrage of outages that = is=20 expected to darken the state this summer because of insufficient supplies o= f=20 electricity. ?????If Californians' electricity use pattern is similar to last year's,=20 Cal-ISO has projected, the state could suffer 34 days of blackouts, making= =20 increased notification crucial. ?????With a shortage of hydroelectric power imports from the drought-strick= en=20 Pacific Northwest, and no new power plants coming online until July, the=20 agency calculates that there will be a supply-demand gap in June of 3,700= =20 megawatts--enough power to supply 2.8 million homes. A national utility=20 industry group painted a more dire scenario last week when it predicted tha= t=20 California will experience up to 260 hours of blackouts this summer. ?????"The weather report and traffic report are good analogies; people know= =20 they are not 100% accurate, but if [a blackout] really means a lot to them,= =20 they will check in," said Mike Florio of the Utility Reform Network, who=20 serves on the Cal-ISO board. ?????Details remain sketchy, and the programs may be altered when the board= =20 meets Thursday. But a Web page called "Today's Outlook" on the agency's=20 Internet site, www.caiso.com, will be created to illustrate, hour by hour,= =20 how much electricity is available during a 24-hour period and whether there= =20 is a predicted surplus or shortfall. ?????Media outreach will be expanded to provide news bulletins on electrici= ty=20 conditions a day in advance. They will not only include demand projections= =20 and the effects of weather, but they also will define the level of emergenc= y=20 that is expected. ?????A "power watch" will be sounded during stage 1 and stage 2 shortages,= =20 and a more serious "power warning" if there is a 50-50 chance of a stage 3,= =20 which often results in blackouts. (Stage 1 emergencies occur when power=20 reserves drop below 7%, stage 2 5% and stage 3 1.5%.) ?????Most important, Cal-ISO is pledging to provide 30-minute notice of=20 probable blackouts to people in the areas served by Pacific Gas & Electric,= =20 Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric, among others. In= =20 addition to giving the warnings on the Internet and through the mass media,= =20 Cal-ISO will sound alarms to select e-mail addresses and pager numbers on= =20 "blast lists," or massive computer databases that it will assemble. ?????"The technology is there. This is a war California is in, and we shoul= d=20 be deploying high-tech solutions," said Carl Guardino of the Silicon Valley= =20 Manufacturing Group, the Cal-ISO board member who had been pushing hardest= =20 for better notification. "Every time California goes black, the economy see= s=20 red." ?????Guardino said that businesses and public agencies are now receiving ju= st=20 two- to six-minute warnings before blackouts, not nearly enough to react. ?????"A two-minute warning may be sufficient in a football game, but it is= =20 insufficient to protect California businesses and the public," he said.=20 ?????Though businesses and government agencies are expected to make the mos= t=20 of the warnings, Florio said residents also will benefit.=20 ?????"It will be more of a challenge to get the information to individual= =20 homeowners, but if someone works at home, and sets it up to get an e-mail= =20 notice, they can take advantage," he said.=20 ?????In other energy news Monday, the woman in charge of paying California'= s=20 power bills warned that a $13.4-billion bond issue to cover electricity=20 purchases will be insufficient and that the state will have to borrow $4=20 billion more before it runs out of cash in February. ?????Calling a news conference in the capital, state Controller Kathleen=20 Connell questioned the key assumptions underpinning Gov. Gray Davis'=20 financial plan for overcoming the energy crisis. The plan assumes the $13.4= =20 billion in bond sales will repay state coffers for electricity purchases an= d=20 cover future power buys for the next two years. ?????Connell's opinion is notable because, as the state's chief check write= r,=20 the independently elected Democrat is privy to information about the prices= =20 the state is paying for electricity bought on the spot market and through= =20 long-term contracts--data that Davis has largely kept secret. ?????Davis' advisors and Department of Finance officials dispute Connell's= =20 warnings. Businesses May Seek Blackout Exemption=20 Energy: PUC will accept new applications, which would be granted only to=20 minimize danger to public health and safety.=20 By NANCY RIVERA BROOKS, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????The San Francisco Giants want one, and so presumably do most other=20 California businesses: an exemption from the rolling blackouts that experts= =20 say are all but certain this summer. ?????But whether operating on a baseball diamond or in more mundane venues= =20 far from the bright lights of pro sports, few businesses will be granted su= ch=20 waivers--and then only to minimize threats to public health and safety--und= er=20 a process detailed Monday by the California Public Utilities Commission. ?????"It would be nice in a perfect world if we could exempt everyone who= =20 asks from rolling blackouts. Unfortunately, we can't do that," Commissioner= =20 Carl A. Wood said in announcing the procedure for applying for blackout=20 exemptions. ?????The PUC already exempts a fairly lengthy list of those whose services= =20 are needed to protect public health and safety, including fire and police= =20 stations and acute-care hospitals. ?????Energy experts are predicting blackouts this year ranging from a total= =20 of 20 hours at the most optimistic to 200 hours or more, based on such=20 factors as historic patterns of electricity usage, forecasts for hot weathe= r=20 and expectations of diminished hydroelectric imports from out of state. ?????Any new business exemptions, which would start no sooner than August,= =20 would be granted only to minimize danger to public health and safety.=20 ?????That means a business would not be granted an exemption from outages= =20 just because it fears revenue loss, Wood said at a Los Angeles news=20 conference. ?????Residential customers will be unable to apply for the exemptions.=20 Nevertheless, many already enjoy blackout protection by quirk of location--= if=20 they share a circuit with an exempt customer--or if they are customers of t= he=20 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and municipal utilities such as= =20 those in Glendale and Burbank that do not rely on the statewide power grid= =20 for electricity. ?????The PUC can approve only a limited number of blackout exemptions, Wood= =20 said, because to maintain system reliability, a pool of customers=20 representing at least 40% of total system load must be available for rollin= g=20 power outages.=20 ?????Statewide, about 50% of system load is exempt from blackouts in the=20 territories served by the three big investor-owned utilities: Edison=20 International's Southern California Edison, PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas &=20 Electric and Sempra Energy's San Diego Gas & Electric. ?????"This is not an exercise in determining who is most affected=20 economically by rolling blackouts. Everyone is affected economically by=20 rolling blackouts," Wood said. ?????The PUC has set up a Web site, www.rotating-outages.com, and toll-free= =20 number, (888) 741-1106, for businesses seeking information and applications= .=20 The deadline to apply is 5 p.m. June 1. ?????Completed applications will be reviewed by an engineering consulting= =20 firm, Exponent Inc. of Menlo Park, Calif., which will develop a priority li= st=20 based on risk to public health and safety. ?????Only businesses that have applied would be considered for exemptions,= =20 Wood said, explaining that the commission will not excuse entire industries= . ?????The PUC is expected to vote on the exemptions by Aug. 2. ?????Wood said several companies already have applied, including the=20 operators of Pacific Bell Park in San Francisco, home of the Giants major= =20 league baseball team. Legislators Set to Sue Federal Energy Agency=20 Power: Lawmakers try a new idea: a lawsuit arguing that blackouts pose dang= er=20 to people, law enforcement and even water supply=20 By DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--Legislative Democrats today will sue federal energy=20 regulators, charging that their inaction threatens elderly people in nursin= g=20 homes, children in day care centers, law enforcement and its ability to fig= ht=20 crime, and the state's drinking water supplies. ?????Rather than focus on record wholesale energy costs, the lawsuit takes = a=20 new tack, homing in on the threat to health and safety posed by California'= s=20 energy crisis and the blackouts likely this summer. ?????A draft of the suit seeks to force the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission to set "just and reasonable" wholesale power rates as a way of= =20 ending the crisis before blackouts occur. The action is being filed by=20 veteran trial attorney Joe Cotchett on behalf of Senate President Pro Tem= =20 John Burton (D-San Francisco), Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman=20 Oaks), and the city of Oakland.=20 ?????"A crisis of unprecedented dimensions is already taking shape in=20 California," the draft says. "The public health, safety and welfare of the= =20 state's 34 million residents is in jeopardy due to the tragic consequences = of=20 rolling blackouts and punitive prices." ?????Suit Says Blackouts Pose Threats ?????Until now, most California officials, including Gov. Gray Davis, have= =20 been urging that the regulatory commission cap wholesale power prices as a= =20 way of limiting costs to the state, which has spent more than $6 billion=20 buying electricity since January. ?????In the lawsuit, Cotchett will be arguing that while higher bills will= =20 stretch the budgets of people on fixed incomes, frail elderly people "are= =20 left to wonder if their oxygen tanks, drip IVs, dialysis machines and=20 electricity-powered therapeutic beds will respond when they are needed." ?????"Rolling blackouts represent more than just an annoyance for the men,= =20 women and children with disabilities," the suit says. "They represent an=20 imminent threat to life, health and independence." ?????Cotchett said the suit will be filed in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of= =20 Appeals in San Francisco, bypassing the federal trial court. Cotchett said= =20 the circuit court has direct jurisdiction over FERC. ?????Joining Cotchett will be Clark Kelso, a professor at McGeorge Law Scho= ol=20 in Sacramento who briefly was insurance commissioner last year after Chuck= =20 Quackenbush resigned. Kelso said he initially was skeptical that lawmakers= =20 had legal standing to sue. But after Cotchett spoke with him, Kelso said he= =20 became convinced the suit had merit. ?????"Let's face it," said Kelso, a Republican, "this is the single most=20 important issue that the state faces for the next six months." ?????Watching the Water Supply ?????The suit cites warnings from governmental agencies about the=20 implications of blackouts, including one the state Department of Health=20 Services issued earlier this month to public water agencies statewide. The= =20 warning
|