|
|
Enron Mail |
Today's news, and some from the weekend, in the following order:
A year later, energy crisis shows no signs of cooling off, By Ed Mendel , San Diego Union Tribune April 30, 2001 (Quotes ??? ???Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Daily News of Los Angeles, April 27, 2001 Friday, Valley Edition, NEWS; ????Pg. N9, 275 words, PROPOSED LAW PUTS BOUNTY ON ENERGY MANIPULATORS, Staff ????And Wire Services (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) San Jose Mercury News, April 27, 2001, Friday, SJ-ELECTRIC-SUIT, 245 words, ????Santa Clara County, Calif., Joins Lawsuit against Electric Suppliers, By ????John Woolfolk (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) FERC Considers Imposing a Fee on Electricity Sales in California ????? ???Updated: Monday, April 30, 2001 12:40 AM?ET ????-- Dow Jones News Wire? ? Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2001, Monday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 792 words ????, CAPITOL JOURNAL; ?CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??How Sales Tax Is Falling ????Through a Loophole, GEORGE SKELTON, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2001, Monday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 1808 ????words, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS; ??LIST OF ????PG&E CREDITORS SHOWS FIRM'S WIDE REACH IN BUSINESS; ??BANKRUPTCY: IT ????INCLUDES SMALL AND BIG COMPANIES, GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND FORMER EMPLOYEES., ????TIM REITERMAN, TIMES STAFF WRITER, SAN FRANCISCO Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2001, Monday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 1228 ????words, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS; ??POWER WOES ????COMPLICATE DISCUSSIONS ON BUDGET; ??FUNDING: GOV. DAVIS' PLAN FOR NEXT YEAR ????FACES DEMANDS FOR BILLIONS AS A RESERVE AND TO CUSHION ELECTRICITY RATE ????HIKES., DAN MORAIN, TIMES STAFF WRITER, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2001, Monday,, Home Edition, Page 7, 839 words ????, COMMENTARY; ??WILL THE FERC SEE THE LIGHT ON THE LAW?, FRANK A. WOLAK, ????Frank A. Wolak, an economics professor at Stanford University, is, chairman ????of the Market Surveillance Committee of the California, Independent System ????Operator The New York Times, April 30, 2001, Monday, Late Edition - Final, Section ????A; Page 1; Column 5; Business/Financial Desk, 1444 words, While a Utility ????May Be Failing, Its Owner Is Not, By By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and LAURA M. ????HOLSON The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 30, 2001, MONDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A3, 1108 words, NEWSMAKER PROFILE; ???Nettie Hoge; ???Taking on power; ????Consumer advocate revels in uphill battle, Chuck Squatriglia The Washington Post, April 30, 2001, Monday, Final Edition, A SECTION; Pg. ????A03, 1669 words, Energy Forecast for Summer: No Blackouts but Price Spikes; ????Grid Managers Promote Conservation, Await New Plants, William Claiborne, ????Washington Post Staff Writer, CHICAGO The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 30, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, ????9:49 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 594 words, Developments in ????California's energy crisis, By The Associated Press AP Online, April 29, 2001; Sunday, Domestic, non-Washington, general news ????item, 1313 words, Geothermal Plants Need More Steam, JENNIFER COLEMAN, ????MIDDLETOWN, Calif. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 29, 2001, Sunday, BC cycle, ????State and Regional, 413 words, Guns in schools, deregulation delay on ????lawmakers' agenda, By BRAD CAIN, Associated Press Writer, SALEM, Ore. Idaho Falls Post Register, April 29, 2001 Sunday, News; Pg. a1, 530 words, ????Plenty of blame to go around for West's power woes, PAUL MENSER Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday,, Home Edition, Page 6, 1312 ????words, THE STATE; ??HOW KILOWATT SOCIALISM SAVED L.A. FROM THE ENERGY CRISIS ????, JEFF STANSBURY, Jeff Stansbury is a PhD candidate in American history at ????UCLA. His, dissertation is on the role of the labor movement in the building ????of, L.A.'s infrastructure Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday,, Home Edition, Page 4, 558 words ????, CONSERVATION SANDBAGS; ??THE DAVIS ADMINISTRATION NEEDS TO LAUNCH A CRASH ????EDUCATION COURSE TO CONVINCE CALIFORNIANS OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE ????ELECTRICITY CRISIS AND THE NEED FOR FAR-REACHING ENERGY-SAVING MEASURES. Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday,, Home Edition, Page 27, 1316 ????words, BUSH: THE FIRST 100 DAYS; ??BUSH IS OFF TO A ROCKY START IN HIS ????HANDLING OF ALL THINGS CALIFORNIAN; ??POLITICS: BUT WHY WOO THE GOLDEN STATE ????WHEN HE CAN'T CARRY IT IN AN ELECTION 'NO MATTER HOW HARD HE TRIES,' ONE ????ANALYST POINTS OUT., RICHARD SIMON, TIMES STAFF WRITER, WASHINGTON Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday,, Home Edition, Page 2, 1290 ????words, WEEK IN REVIEW; ??TOP 10 STORIES / APRIL 23-27, Lisa Girion and ????Terril Yue Jones and Sallie Hofmeister and James Bates and Peter Pae and ????Jeff Leeds and Nancy Rivera Brooks and Peter Gosselin The New York Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday, Late Edition - Final, Section ????4; Page 17; Column 1; Editorial Desk, 756 words, Reckonings; The Real Wolf, ????By PAUL KRUGMAN Sacramento Bee, April 29, 2001, Sunday, Pg. A1;, 1323 words, Diesel plants ????spark concern They're expected to generate big air-quality problems when ????predicted summer blackouts hit., Chris Bowman and Stuart Leavenworth Bee ????Staff Writers Sacramento Bee, April 29, 2001, Sunday, Pg. A1, 1544 words, Why Edison, ????PG&E split on strategy, Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer Sacramento Bee, April 29, 2001, Sunday, Pg. A3, 679 words, What will be ????fallout from California's energy meltdown?, Dan Walters The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 29, 2001, SUNDAY,, FINAL EDITION, ????INSIGHT;, Pg. D1, 1419 words, The energy crisis is good for you, Louis ????Freedberg Ventura County Star, April 29, 2001 Sunday, Editorials; Pg. B09, 704 words, ????Reality is what's needed for real policy ?GOVERNOR: Consumers deserve to get ????real facts from Davis., Dan Walters Los Angeles Times, April 28, 2001, Saturday,, Home Edition, Page 19, 679 ????words, OFFICIALS CALL PRICE STABILITY PLAN ILLEGAL; ??UTILITIES: AGENCY ????CHIEFS SAY THE FEDERAL PROPOSAL COULD ALSO CAUSE MORE BLACKOUTS THIS SUMMER. ????, NANCY VOGEL and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 28, 2001, Saturday,, Home Edition, Page 19, 688 ????words, BILL COULD FOIL DAVIS' ELECTRICITY OFFENSIVE; ??POWER: CONGRESSMAN ????WANTS TO LET SMALL PRODUCERS SELL ON WHOLESALE MARKET. BACKERS SAY PLAN ????WOULD BOOST SUPPLY, BUT FOES SEE IT COSTING CALIFORNIA DEARLY., JULIE TAMAKI ????and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 28, 2001, Saturday,, Home Edition, Page 2, 137 ????words, BRIEFLY / ENERGY; ??PUC ORDERS UTILITIES TO POST BLACKOUT DATA, Nancy ????Rivera Brooks Sacramento Bee, April 28, 2001, Saturday, Pg. A3;, 1109 words, Cities take ????new look at public power The state's uncertain electricity picture has local ????officials deciding it's time to revisit the idea of municipal utilities., ????Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer A year later, energy crisis shows no signs of cooling off By Ed Mendel San Diego Union Tribune April 30, 2001 SACRAMENTO -- The first anniversary of the California energy crisis is coming up next month, and as the Queen of England once remarked when the royal family seemed to deregulate, it's been an "annus horribilis." The horrible year for California began last May when electricity prices suddenly began to soar, triggering a debate about the cause of the mysterious price increase that is likely to continue for years. It started when a three-day heat wave, from May 21 to May 24, set records in some areas of the state and drove up the demand for electricity as Californians sought relief with air conditioning. More record heat June 14 in the San Francisco Bay Area strained the overloaded system of Pacific Gas & Electric and resulted in rolling blackouts, the planned temporary power outages that some fear may be routine this summer. The average price of electricity on the now-defunct Power Exchange soared to $120 per megawatt hour in June, five times higher than the same month the previous year, and remained roughly at that level until skyrocketing to $377 in December. San Diego sounded the statewide alarm last summer as San Diego Gas & Electric, the first utility to be deregulated, passed along much of the higher cost of electricity to its customers, until legislation rolled back and capped the utility's rates in September. The executive director of a San Diego consumers group, the Utility Consumers' Action Network, thinks the generators and the marketers of power, using sophisticated computer methods, learned something as the heat wave drove up the demand for power. "It was the first time the generators had an opportunity to see how high the price could go," said UCAN'S Michael Shames. "It was their primer. It was Gouge 101." State Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, who chaired a two-house committee that completed the deregulation plan in 1996, had seen routine monitoring data suggesting that the power market was being manipulated to drive up prices. Peace took the unusual step last June of personally urging the adoption of a much lower price cap by the board of the agency that makes last-minute power purchases to maintain the grid, the Independent System Operator. But the motion failed by a single vote. The consumer representative who cast the decisive vote against the lower cap resigned afterward with a blast at Peace, complaining of heavy-handed pressure. Peace is unapologetic. He believes that stronger action by the ISO last June would have sent a signal that might have discouraged market manipulation. "It's just like the Federal Reserve mis-timing an interest-rate move," Peace said. The former ISO chairman, who represents generators, cited an ISO report attributing the price increase last May to the heat wave, power plant outages, less hydroelectric power and higher prices for the natural gas used by power plants. "I think all of those things showing up at the same time resulted in significantly higher prices," said Jan Smutny-Jones of the Independent Energy Producers. Why power prices remained at high levels and even soared last winter, instead of dropping as usual, is more difficult to explain. The ISO contended last month that generators overcharged by more than $6 billion from last May through February. But federal regulators, who have their critics, have found only $125 million in overcharges, making it an "annus marvelous" for generators. Ed Mendel is Capitol bureau chief for the Union-Tribune. Copyright 2001 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. The Daily News of Los Angeles April 27, 2001 Friday, Valley Edition SECTION: NEWS; Pg. N9 LENGTH: 275 words HEADLINE: PROPOSED LAW PUTS BOUNTY ON ENERGY MANIPULATORS BYLINE: Staff And Wire Services BODY: ??California stepped up its war on the power industry Thursday as state legislators offered to pay millions of dollars to "bounty hunters" who provide information leading to the arrest and conviction of energy executives and others who manipulate the electricity market. ???California "is being plundered by an energy cartel," said Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamente, who is promoting a bill that would level criminal penalties for exploiting energy markets. ?"If what they are doing isn't illegal, it ought to be." ???Bustamente was one of a crowd of state leaders who went before microphones. ???On the floor of the Assembly, Speaker Bob Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, rallied his Democratic colleagues behind a bill to create a state power authority with equally blistering attacks on private power suppliers. ???But after Thursday's hearing before a Senate committee formed to investigate alleged price-fixing in the energy market, committee chairman Joe Dunn, D-Garden Grove, told a reporter: "I've never seen this much smoke when there wasn't a fire." ???Power generators insist they are operating fairly and say there is no evidence of them acting outside the law. ???Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association, dismissed the harsh rhetoric as unproductive. "Putting people in prison isn't going to encourage more generation," Smutny-Jones said, warning that the political posturing would make energy generators think twice about investing in California. ???Also on Thursday, experts said federally ordered caps on wholesale electricity prices won't necessarily mean California will escape rolling blackouts this summer. Copyright 2001 San Jose Mercury News San Jose Mercury News April 27, 2001, Friday KR-ACC-NO: SJ-ELECTRIC-SUIT LENGTH: 245 words HEADLINE: Santa Clara County, Calif., Joins Lawsuit against Electric Suppliers BYLINE: By John Woolfolk BODY: ??Santa Clara County agreed Thursday to join a lawsuit against power suppliers, alleging they conspired to raise prices and boost profits while subjecting consumers to higher bills and rolling blackouts. ??The county is the first to join the suit originally filed by San Francisco in January. ?The suit seeks refunds for consumers of more than $ 1 billion in alleged excess electricity profits. ??"The San Francisco suit contains significant allegations of manipulation and collusion by the wholesalers, resulting in the disastrous consequences we're all familiar with," said lead deputy county counsel Alan Tieger. "We looked at the evidence on which those allegations were grounded and found they were indeed supported by the evidence, expert and otherwise." ??The suit names a dozen electricity generating and marketing companies, including Duke Energy and Enron Energy Marketing. ??Similar claims have been filed by three water districts in the San Diego area, and two class-action lawsuits by private attorneys on behalf of consumers are pending against power suppliers. ??The companies have vigorously denied the charges. ??"I don't think there will be any evidence of illegal activity by anyone," said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association, when asked about various government probes. ??----- ??To see more of the San Jose Mercury News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.sjmercury.com FERC Considers Imposing a Fee on Electricity Sales in California ???? Updated: Monday, April 30, 2001 12:40 AM?ET ????? ? Such a surcharge, at least in the short run, would fall hardest on the state of California, which since January has spent more than $5 billion buying power because the utilities have been unable to meet their obligations. For now, the idea is nothing more than a proposal that occupies one paragraph buried in a 39-page order issued Thursday concerning changes to California's flawed deregulated electricity market. The commission is seeking public comment on the surcharge proposal for 30 days. After that, it will decide whether to implement it. The fee was proposed by Commission Chairman Curt Hebert, a Mississippi Republican, as a way "to stabilize the market," he said Friday, "since part of the problem in California has to do with nonpayment of bills by the utilities." But the provision also has the potential to funnel billions of dollars to energy suppliers at a time when those payments are the subject of intense negotiation. One of the utilities, PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PCG, news, msgs), filed for protection from creditors under U.S. bankruptcy law on April 6, hoping to settle its claims with power suppliers for something less than face value. Representatives of Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison International's (EIX, news, msgs) Southern California Edison declined to comment on the FERC proposal Friday. The surcharge idea faces stiff opposition from some state officials, one of whom said it amounts to an "unwarranted intrusion" into state jurisdiction. Loretta Lynch, president of the California Public Utilities Commission, said imposition of a surcharge would put pressure on wholesale-power costs that already are too high. Bulk power cost $7 billion in California in 1999 and topped $27 billion last year as prices careened out of control. Ms. Lynch said she opposes the surcharge provision and the entire order given Thursday, but that it will be up to the full commission to decide how -- or whether -- to file a challenge at FERC. A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis said "the governor would be strongly opposed to any attempt to siphon money away from the state" and expects to lodge an objection. Los Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 792 words HEADLINE: CAPITOL JOURNAL; CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; How Sales Tax Is Falling Through a Loophole BYLINE: GEORGE SKELTON DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Dot-coms are in distress and laying off. Silicon Valley is a home buyer's bazaar. The Nasdaq is nauseous. So is this any time to be siccing the tax collector on Internet retailers? ??You bet. Coddling these techie traders with tax favors doesn't seem to be helping them much anyway. So why not treat e-tailers like everyone else, like brick-and-mortar merchants? Treat everybody evenhandedly. ??That's the view of Assemblywoman Carole Migden (D-San Francisco), assertive chair of the Assembly Appropriations Committee. For the second straight year, Migden is pushing a bill she says will close a loophole that benefits some Internet retailers. She insists it's about fairly enforcing existing law, not about a new Web tax, as critics claim. ??Present law requires Internet e-tailers to collect the sales tax if they have a physical presence in California, such as a traditional brick-and-mortar store. But some big outfits have created separate out-of-state subsidiaries to handle their Internet orders. Same goods, same ads--with a large tax loophole because the subsidiary ostensibly does not have a physical presence in California. ??Never mind that an unsatisfied customer of bookseller Barnes & Noble dot-com, for example, can return the Internet purchase to the local Barnes & Noble store. ??Many e-tailers with dual "bricks-and-clicks" operations do collect the sales tax from Internet customers. Migden cites Macy's, Wal-Mart, REI, Hewlett-Packard and Eddie Bauer. Others refuse, she says: Barnes & Noble, Borders Books, KB Toys, Gateway Computers, Radio Shack. ??Her bill simply "clarifies" that the sales tax applies when the e-tailer is affiliated with a California business, sells identical products, and they market jointly. ??"Right now," Migden contends, "certain big businesses blatantly violate the tax law and put hard-working, honest small business people at a disadvantage." ??* ??Gov. Gray Davis is miffed at Migden, she hears. He vetoed her bill last year, declaring "it would send the wrong signal about California's international role as the incubator of the dot-com community." Internet marketing "must be given time to mature," he maintained. ??Now Migden's at it again. "The governor's exercised. He thinks I'm jamming him," she says. "But I'm moving the bill. He can veto it if he wants. I'm putting it on his desk." ??It already has cleared the Assembly tax committee and will shoot out of her panel Wednesday, headed for the Assembly floor. Last year, Democrats backed the bill. Republicans opposed it, siding with the Democratic governor. ??Davis fears some future opponent will claim he signed a bill to tax the Internet. Migden is frustrated by that Internet tax tag, calling it "a lazy misinterpretation." ??"I'm not picking on e-commerce," she protests. "I'm picking on the multinationals who are arrogantly evading the law in complicity with the state Board of Equalization." ??That would be, in particular, Republican board member Dean Andal of Stockton. "It's the usual liberal nut case bill," Andal says. "Just a bill chasing no problem." ??* ??The BOE administers the sales tax. And Andal does agree that if an Internet purchase can be returned to a store, the e-tailer legally must collect the tax. "We've been looking into that," he says. ??The board shouldn't have to look far. Barnes & Noble tells e-customers right on its Web site that "you can return purchases to ANY Barnes & Noble store for in-store credit." ??But other than that, Andal contends, a company has a constitutional right to create an out-of-state subsidiary to avoid taxes. ??And, he notes, we're talking about relative pennies: $ 17 million annually, the BOE estimates, compared to $ 39 billion in total California sales tax collections. That lost revenue would cover only about seven hours worth of electricity the state now is buying for utilities. ??But e-tailing is bound to grow. Tax avoidance could become significant, benefiting dot-coms while discriminating against small retailers and the poor who cannot afford Internet access. ??Migden will be in a strong position to change sales tax policy if she wins her race next year for the five-member BOE. She's the early front-runner. ??Her concern--her reverence--is for the local booksellers, the mom-and-pop merchants, the neighbor shopkeepers who can be smothered by the big tax evaders. "The little guy with the books stacked in the back," she says, "sweeping the sidewalk, putting on extra locks, obeying the law and collecting taxes--trying to make a go." ??Davis wants to be seen as a futuristic, New Age pol, worthy of campaign donations from wealthy Web masters. But he can manage that without tromping on his Democratic roots as protector of the little guy. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 ?????????????????????????????13 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????????Copyright 2001 / Los Angeles Times ??????????????????????????????Los Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1808 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS; LIST OF PG&E CREDITORS SHOWS FIRM'S WIDE REACH IN BUSINESS; BANKRUPTCY: IT INCLUDES SMALL AND BIG COMPANIES, GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND FORMER EMPLOYEES. BYLINE: TIM REITERMAN, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO BODY: ??It reads like a phone book: Able Auto Body, Able Building Maintenance, Able Fence Co., Able Printing, Able Termite & Pest Control. . . . ??These companies are among about 50,000 entries on Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s roster of creditors recently filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court. ??Another company, A&J Electrical Cable Corp. of Hayward, has supplied PG&E with utility cables since 1980. But now the unpaid bills are hitting the $ 100,000 mark--and that is a big deal to a relatively small business. ??"Who would ever think that PG&E would be in bankruptcy?" said owner Magdalene Reilly. "This is something affecting people. I've got a lot of paychecks on Friday. ??"We have orders for the rest of the year from PG&E ," she added. "It is a question: Do you decide to ship? . . . We probably will. They are a good customer." ??When PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors April 6, businesses from California to Canada were caught by surprise. The names of the 20 biggest creditors, some with billion-dollar claims, were filed with the court. The utility also submitted a list of potential creditors--more than 3,500 pages worth. ??The roster speaks to the remarkable economic clout and reach of a company that prospered for almost a century before plunging into the third-biggest bankruptcy case in U.S. history. It provides a glimpse into the relationships between a giant utility--the state's largest--and businesses of all sorts and sizes. And it underscores the high stakes as a bankruptcy judge reorders PG&E's financial affairs and decides in the coming months, if not years, who should be paid and how much. ??The case, said U.S. bankruptcy trustee Linda Ekstrom Stanley, "has a ripple effect. . . . Creditors are affected, and they can't pay their bills either." ??There are small companies and conglomerates that sold power to PG&E. ??There are financial institutions from Wall Street to San Francisco's Montgomery Street that lent money or provided services. ??There are government agencies at all levels, even the California Public Utilities Commission. ??There are some retired PG&E employees and officers, including at least one of the company's former chief executive officers. ??But there also are vendors that have provided goods and services to PG&E for years: tree trimming around power lines, bodywork for the utility's truck fleet, fencing for its vast land holdings, calibration of meters, fans to cool electrical transformers, printing of brochures, signs for office doors, flight suits for aviators who patrol power lines, limousine service for traveling executives. ??No dollar amounts are attached to names on the master list. But records and interviews with dozens of creditors show that the sums owed range from hundreds of millions of dollars to very little--or nothing at all. Many of the smaller creditors were unaware they were on the roster until contacted by The Times. ??PG&E used to buy pump filters from California Pump & Supply in Sacramento. ??"We just closed out their account because they owed us $ 29," said office manager Lisa Giordano. "It's a hassle to get anyone over there. I just wrote it off." ??The utility bought $ 38 worth of plants from Forest Nursery in Los Osos, west of San Luis Obispo. "It's nothing to go to court about, especially since they paid it," said bookkeeper Lori Parsons. ??A wine wholesaler, an ice cream company and a coastal hotel are listed. So is Sing A Long Productions in Burlingame, which supples disc jockeys and karaoke. ??"I am sure we have done business with PG&E and other companies that have parties from time to time," said owner Nick Foster. "Maybe somebody forgot that we did not get paid." ??PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the list includes everyone to whom the utility wrote a check in the last two years, such as homeowners who received energy conservation rebates and retirees who received checks related to benefits. ??"It was an attempt to notify anybody who possibly could have a claim against the company and to cast the widest net possible," he said. ??Several PG&E retirees, such as Robert W. Oliver of Berkeley, were baffled by their inclusion on the list. "I draw a little pension," said Oliver, who was a personnel executive and left the company in 1980. "It's a vested pension." ??Another retiree on the list is former Chief Executive Richard A. Clarke. ??He and about 10 other former high-ranking PG&E executives or their survivors have retained an attorney to help ensure that their retirement benefits are protected during the bankruptcy case. ??"We don't want someone to get the idea that this is a bunch of well-heeled executives trying to get a piece of the action," said the attorney, John T. Hansen. "Some in our group are widows of former executives who depend on the pensions they receive as survivors." ??Hansen said some retired executives have deferred-compensation packages that might be considered a general unsecured bankruptcy claim. ??One concern, he said, is that PG&E Chairman Robert D. Glynn Jr. wrote recently in a San Francisco Chronicle op-ed article that health care plans and other benefits "for employees and most retirees" will continue. ??"We would want to know what 'most' is," Hansen said. "We want to sort it out." ??Low of PG&E said fewer than 100 retired employees, most former officers, "have a portion of their pension that is unsecured." That means their claims will be handled in Bankruptcy Court with those of other unsecured creditors whose debts are not backed by utility assets. ??The spokesman emphasized that ex-employees could be on the list because they received a check from the company for something. ??Companies and individuals on the list, PG&E said, will be contacted and given an opportunity to state their claims, which the utility will file with the court May 11. ??Meanwhile, the effects of the bankruptcy filing continue to ripple beyond the utility. ??PG&E's action hit AA Safe & Lock Co. in Santa Cruz particularly hard. The firm replaces keys and locks for PG&E offices and trucks. ??"We are a small business, and it is a big account," said owner Paul Bing, who declined to say what the utility owes. "We haven't been doing as much for them since the whole crisis started." ??A Hayward firm that conducts environmental testing when PG&E remodels or razes buildings is out money too. Ken Byk, president of Forensic Analytical, would not provide a figure but said: "I am obviously concerned. . . . They are a good customer, but any time you run into these problems, it's disappointing." ??California Steam Inc. of Sacramento services PG&E pressure washers and water recyclers at its truck-cleaning facilities. "I have just a couple of invoices out," said service manager Bruce Amlin. The debt, he said, is less than $ 500. ??A similar amount is owed to California Turbo Inc. in Ontario. Sales manager Cam Young said the utility has not paid for eight fans used to cool electrical transformers. "We're a small business," Young said, adding with a laugh: "We might have to eat peanut butter and jelly for four or five months." ??Within days of the bankruptcy filing, PG&E sent about 12,000 creditors letters that began: "Valued Goods and Services Provider: . . . Unfortunately, the bankruptcy code precludes payment for goods and services received prior to the date of filing. Payments on this pre-petition debt will be settled as part of the plan of reorganization." The company assured vendors that they will be paid for any future purchases. ??Some are not only forgiving, they are outspokenly loyal to PG&E. ??The relationship between the utility and AG Signs of Stockton spans two decades. When Tony Guebara was starting his company, PG&E gave him business. "They try to help the little guy," he said. "Just about everybody in town is a vendor. They have people here who paint their trucks." ??AG Signs now has five employees and supplies PG&E with door lettering for trucks, name plaques for office doors and signs and flags for construction sites. ??Guebara said the utility's debt does not worry him: "PG&E has treated me real well. If I lose a couple of bucks because of this adversity, that is OK. . . . I don't think we've seen the last of PG&E." ??Many businesses and individuals said they had no idea why the company believes it owes them money. ??Being included on the creditors list left the Vallejo Camp Fire Girls & Boys and other charitable organizations somewhat confused. Officials of one Berkeley church could only speculate that it was listed because PG&E stock was bequeathed to the congregation decades ago. ??Twylah Lemargie, manager of the Cancer Aid Thrift Shop in Grass Valley, said the utility is not even a customer. "PG&E did come in and replaced lots of our ceiling lights with the long tubes," she said. "But it was done free as an energy saver." ??A number of vendors said PG&E's account is paid up. ??The utility rented temporary housing units for workers on a hydroelectric project about two years ago, but California RV Rentals in Rio Lindo is still named as a creditor. "They don't owe me money," said Sandra Weaver, the manager. "If they want to give me some, it's OK." ??Many creditors are health clubs and health care providers: medical and dental offices, foot and joint specialists, pharmacies, chiropractors. ??When informed that the Castro Valley Chamber of Commerce was on the creditors list, the woman who answered the phone laughed uproariously. Then Executive Director Bonnie Dettmer came to the line. ??"I'm going to guess it's membership dues," she said. "They are a member and they have been very supportive. I would bet they belong to every chamber of commerce." ??One creditor is the state agency that PG&E says drove the company into insolvency by not allowing full recovery of its wholesale power costs. ??"They owe us $ 5.9 million . . . for environmental impact reports on PG&E projects," said Paul Clanon, director of the Public Utilities Commission's energy division. "It's a serious amount of money but currently is not having an impact." ??Top 10 Creditors ??The creditors owed the most money by Pacific Gas & Electric Co., according to the company's Chapter 11 filing: ???Creditor ???????????????????????????????????Money owed ???Bank of New York ????????????????????????$2.20 billion ???California Power Exchange ???????????????$1.96 billion ???Bankers Trust Co. ???????????????????????$1.30 billion ???California Independent System Operator ??$1.12 billion ???Bank of America* ?????????????????????????$938 million ???US Bank ??????????????????????????????????$310 million ???Calpine Gilroy Cogeneration LP ????????????$58 million ???Calpine Greenleaf Inc. ????????????????????$49 million ???Crocket Cogen ?????????????????????????????$48 million ???Calpine King City Cogen LLC ???????????????$45 million ??* Heading a group of banks ??Source: U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Northern DIstrict of California GRAPHIC: GRAPHIC: Top 10 Creditors, Los Angeles Times PHOTO: Magdalene Reilly, owner of A&J Electrical Cable Corp. of Hayward, says her company has supplied Pacific Gas & Electric with utility cables since 1980, and that their unpaid bills are now hitting the $100,000 mark. ?PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times PHOTO: "They try to help the little guy," says Tony Guebara, owner of AG Signs in Stockton, of PG&E. He has been doing business with utility for two decades. ?PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 ?????????????????????????????14 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????????Copyright 2001 / Los Angeles Times ??????????????????????????????Los Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1228 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS; POWER WOES COMPLICATE DISCUSSIONS ON BUDGET; FUNDING: GOV. DAVIS' PLAN FOR NEXT YEAR FACES DEMANDS FOR BILLIONS AS A RESERVE AND TO CUSHION ELECTRICITY RATE HIKES. BYLINE: DAN MORAIN, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Jockeying over the state's next spending plan, a tradition that usually takes place in the summer, already is turning intense as the energy crisis casts a pall over what otherwise might have been relatively painless budget squabbles. ??A key state senator, worried about the slowing economy, is looking for places to pare as much as $ 4 billion from Gov. Gray Davis' proposed $ 104.7-billion budget. And Republicans are beginning to demand that the state spend billions in general tax money to cushion electricity rate hikes of up to 40% being imposed on consumers and businesses. ??Davis won't sign the budget for the 2001-02 fiscal year into law until late June at the earliest. But with California mired in the energy crisis and the economy slowing, the new budget is shaping up to be especially vexing. ??California's largest utility and a major private employer, Pacific Gas & Electric, is in bankruptcy. The state has spent $ 5.2 billion in general tax money to buy electricity, with no end in sight. Even before summer temperatures hit, Sacramento shelled out $ 90 million to buy electricity in a single day last week. ??And the Wall Street rating firm Standard & Poor's, unsure that the state will be reimbursed for the power purchases, lowered California's credit rating two notches for the first time since the recession of the 1990s. ??Brightening an otherwise cloudy situation, income tax payments are meeting or exceeding predictions. More than $ 8 billion in checks from April income tax returns have flooded into the Franchise Tax Board, said Department of Finance economist Ted Gibson. On one day last week, the state's haul was $ 3.6 billion, a record. ??"Receipts are very much on track, I'm relieved to tell you," Gibson said. ??But even as budget writers were exhaling, the payments merely offered proof that the economy was strong last year, back when then-President Bill Clinton was heralding the longest period of economic growth in U.S. history, and Californians' lexicon did not include the term "rolling blackout." ??State income and sales tax receipts softened in the first few months of 2001, an indication that people will be earning less this year--and paying less in taxes next year. ??Seeing trouble ahead, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Steve Peace (D-El Cajon) wants to boost the state's emergency reserve, which was $ 1.9 billion in January. To do that, Peace last week called on budget committee members to come up with a list of cuts totaling $ 2 billion to $ 4 billion. ??Without a larger reserve heading into 2002, Peace said, the slowing economy could force the state to make deep cuts or raise taxes next year, at a time when most legislators and Davis will be running for reelection. ??"The thing to be worried about is not the current year, but the trend line," Peace said. ??He adds a caveat for the spending plan that by law must be in place by July 1: There will be cuts if legislators fail to approve legislation that state Treasurer Phil Angelides says he needs to obtain short-term loans and market long-term bonds to finance electricity purchases. ??Davis and Angelides are preparing the largest bond sale--a way that government borrows money--in U.S. history, as much as $ 12.4 billion. The state would use the proceeds to ease the shock to utility customers of record high electricity prices this year. The bond debt would be paid off over a period of perhaps 15 years. ??Given the size and complexity of the bond issue, many legislators say Angelides may not be able to sell it for months. ??Davis, however, has an immediate need for money. The governor must release a revised state budget within weeks. So, he is pushing for legislators to approve legislation that would allow Angelides to obtain a short-term loan of as much as $ 6 billion. ??At least some of the proceeds of the long-term bonds would be used to pay off the short-term loan--sort of like using one credit card to pay the balance on a second piece of plastic. ??Republican legislators are balking at the idea. ??Back in December, before the state entered the power buying business, GOP legislators had called for $ 3.2 billion in tax cuts. With the energy crisis complicating the financial situation, some Republicans are contending that Davis should use as much as $ 5 billion from the budget surplus to soften the impact of electricity rate hikes. ??"That will be a de facto tax cut," said Senate Republican leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga. "Our Democratic friends want to do the bridge financing so they can increase the size of government." ??Republicans are in the minority. But they have a significant voice, because state law requires that both houses of the Legislature approve spending decisions by a two-thirds vote. ??The state Constitution says the budget must be in place by the July 1 start of the new fiscal year. Davis signed his first two budgets on time. Given this year's uncertainties, however, some legislators are thinking twice about making July vacation plans. ??The sudden turnaround may come as a shock to many legislators and lobbyists who seek slices of the state budget pie. ??In recent years, legislators have grown used to the multibillion-dollar windfalls of tax payments, which allowed them to deliver new swimming pools, school programs, museums, parks, social and health care spending, and tax cuts to their constituents. Indeed, the budget in Davis' first two years grew 37%, even as the Democratic governor and legislators cut taxes by $ 3.9 billion. ??In a Legislature populated by term-limited newcomers, only a handful of current legislators were in the Capitol in the early 1990s, when the worst recession to hit California since the Great Depression caused the state budget to actually shrink. Then-Gov. Pete Wilson and the Legislature reacted to a $ 14-billion budget gap by raising taxes by more than $ 5 billion and slashing spending. ??"It is not going to be the pie-in-the-sky budget some of us thought it would be last year and even as late as January," said Sen. Jack O'Connell (D-San Luis Obispo). ??Veterans of the annual summer rite say there is no template for the coming budget fights. Jean Ross of the California Budget Project, a private budget watchdog and advocacy group, said Davis and legislators not only must pay attention to the economy. ??They also must take into account many unknowns: Will the judge overseeing PG&E's bankruptcy proceeding seek to raise rates further? Will federal energy regulators be able to effectively limit wholesale electricity costs? What will the economic impact be of summer blackouts? ??"It's a lot more complex and unpredictable than other years," Ross said. ??Legislators say they are lowering their sights. But letters from state senators requesting money for their favored projects fill five large red binders. "You wouldn't know there is a money shortage based on requests in appropriations," said Assembly Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Carole Migden (D-San Francisco), preparing for what she calls her "hatchet role" of blocking bills that require spending. ??For his part, Davis has not decided to significantly cut back on his proposals, ranging from a sales tax "holiday" timed for back-to-school shopping to plans to clean sewage from beaches. He won't reveal those decisions until he releases his revised spending plan. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 ?????????????????????????????15 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????????Copyright 2001 / Los Angeles Times ??????????????????????????????Los Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Home Edition SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 7; Op Ed Desk LENGTH: 839 words HEADLINE: COMMENTARY; WILL THE FERC SEE THE LIGHT ON THE LAW? BYLINE: FRANK A. WOLAK, Frank A. Wolak, an economics professor at Stanford University, is, chairman of the Market Surveillance Committee of the California, Independent System Operator BODY: ??Out-of-state firms selling into the California wholesale electricity market at exorbitant prices have been blamed for the current electricity crisis. They are, claim many observers, exercising their market power to raise wholesale electricity prices. ??Although it is not illegal under California or U.S. antitrust law for a firm to exercise its market power, it is illegal to do so under the Federal Power Act. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, which regulates the California wholesale electricity market, is the entity charged with enforcing this law. Its refusal to take sufficient actions that would result in "just and reasonable" wholesale electricity rates is the fundamental cause of California's current energy crisis. It is highly unlikely that anything it has done in the last week has changed things at all. ??In 1935, Congress passed the Federal Power Act and required the Federal Power Commission (the predecessor to FERC) to set "just and reasonable" wholesale electricity prices. Just and reasonable prices are those that recover production costs, including a "fair" rate of return on the capital invested by the firm. Moreover, if the FERC finds that wholesale electricity prices are unjust and unreasonable, the Federal Power Act gives it wide-ranging discretion to take actions that result in just and reasonable prices. The FERC can also order refunds for any payments by consumers in excess of just and reasonable prices. ??Almost 10 years ago, the FERC began to allow generators to receive market prices instead of prices set through a cost-of-service regulatory process. However, there is no guarantee that market prices meet the just and reasonable standard required by the Federal Power Act. Markets often set prices substantially in excess of the production costs for significant periods of time. This occurs because one or more firms operating in the market have what economists call market power--the ability of a firm to raise market prices and profit from it. ??However, if no firm possesses market power, the market price should be very close to a price that only recovers production costs. In such a circumstance, the price set by the market satisfies the just and reasonable standard of the Federal Power Act. ??Before it allows any market participant to receive a market price rather than a cost-based price set through a regulatory process, the FERC requires each participant to demonstrate that it does not have market power. In other words, each market participant must submit sworn testimony to the FERC demonstrating it does not have the ability to raise market prices and profit from this behavior. ??Each of the out-of-state generators made these filings before they began selling into the California market, which started in April 1998. Each firm had its authority to receive market prices approved by the FERC for a three-year period that ends before this summer for several of the firms. It is virtually impossible to determine on a prospective basis whether a firm possesses market power. Moreover, the methodology used by the FERC to make this determination uses analytical techniques that have long been acknowledged by the economics profession as grossly inadequate. The events of the past 10 months have demonstrated that contrary to their filings stating otherwise, all of the out-of-state generators possess significant market power. ??A number of independent studies have shown that the market power exercised by these firms has resulted in unjust and unreasonable rates from May 2000, until now. Moreover, in its Dec. 15, 2000 report on the California electricity market, the FERC concluded that wholesale electricity prices during the summer and autumn of 2000 were unjust and unreasonable and reflected the exercise of significant market power. ??Despite its own conclusion, the FERC thus far has refused to set just and reasonable prices for wholesale electricity in California. Instead, the FERC implemented market rule changes that have enhanced the ability of these firms to set excessive wholesale electricity prices. In addition, it has refused to order refunds for any overpayment during the summer and autumn of 2000 for the prices that it deemed unjust and unreasonable. ??Fortunately for California consumers, the California Public Utilities Commission and Gov. Gray Davis refused to be accomplices in the FERC's decision not to enforce the Federal Power Act. They refused to pass on to California consumers prices that the FERC itself had determined were unjust and unreasonable. ??Because these out-of-state firms must apply for renewal of their market-based pricing authority before this summer, the FERC has one more opportunity to set just and reasonable prices for wholesale electricity in California. It has before it several proposals that would enforce all provisions of the Federal Power Act. The health of the California and national economies would be severely undermined if the FERC continues to ignore its legal obligations. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 ?????????????????????????????16 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company ??????????????????????????????The New York Times ?????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section A; Page 1; Column 5; Business/Financial Desk LENGTH: 1444 words HEADLINE: While a Utility May Be Failing, Its Owner Is Not BYLINE: ?By By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and LAURA M. HOLSON BODY: ??Pacific Gas and Electric, the giant California utility, may have just made one of the largest bankruptcy filings in history, but it has been a banner year for the rest of its parent company, the PG& E Corporation. ??In Bethesda, Md., far from the energy crisis in California, another PG& E subsidiary, National Energy Group, earned $162 million last year and ranked as the nation's third-largest power trader. Compensation for the unit's executives soared. Many investors now believe that the subsidiary, just a decade in the making, is by itself worth more than its 96-year-old utility sibling. ???How did National Energy get so big so fast? By using cash, partly generated by its sister utility, to buy unregulated power plants in the Northeast, expand trading-floor operations and sell power across the country. The exact numbers are in dispute, but much of Nationals Energy's profits last year came from California. ??Most other large utilities have done the same thing over the past decade, building national or even global power companies from roots in local monopolies. But nowhere is the success of these unregulated businesses more of an issue than in California, where PG& E's investments may be challenged in bankruptcy court. ??Still, such transfers of assets were fundamental to deregulation plans in two dozen states, and they were encouraged by federal rules designed to build a new wholesale marketplace in electricity. ??And today, the offspring of the nation's utilities dominate that market, after industry leader Enron. ?Eight of the nation's 10 largest power marketers are affiliates or spinoffs of regulated utilities, controlling about 42 percent of power trading. ??It is largely these unregulated power producers and traders whose sales of power in California have prompted accusations by state leaders of price gouging, and demands for the price caps that federal regulators took their first, halting steps toward embracing last week. ??The profitability of the utilities' unregulated operations is becoming clear as companies report earnings for the first three months of the year. ??For example, Reliant Energy reported that operating income at its unregulated wholesale energy business soared to $216 million in the first quarter, or 16 percent more than at its regulated utility, which serves Houston. This week, Reliant expects to spin off its unregulated businesses through an initial public stock offering that would put a market value on the new company of as much as $8.8 billion -- more than the rest of Reliant. ??A number of other major utility companies have spinoffs or trading and generation units that now earn nearly as much as, or more than, their core utility operations. These include Duke Energy in Charlotte, N.C.; Sempra Energy of San Diego; the Southern Company in Atlanta; the Constellation Energy Group in Baltimore; and Utilicorp United in Kansas City, Mo. ??In some places, the growth of the unregulated businesses continues to raise questions of fairness -- particularly where utilities have been permitted to transfer plants to the new units at deep discounts to their market value. Critics say that ratepayers, whose bills paid for the plants' construction, should benefit more when the plants are sold. ??In Florida, a commission on energy deregulation formed by Gov. Jeb Bush has proposed permitting such transfers on the grounds that they are needed to create a new wholesale marketplace. Opponents, including the Florida Municipal Electric Association, which represents utilities owned by local governments, say the plan would produce a $9 billion windfall that should go to ratepayers. ??In California, some creditors of Pacific Gas and Electric have signaled that they will want the bankruptcy court in San Francisco to review parent PG& E's efforts to keep its unregulated businesses out of creditors' reach. ??And the California Public Utilities Commission is investigating whether PG& E and Edison International, whose Southern California Edison utility unit is also near insolvency, have improperly transferred cash to their parents and to unregulated sister companies. ??A recent audit ordered by the commission showed that Pacific Gas and Electric transferred $4.1 billion to PG& E from 1997 to 1999. Most of that went to dividends and stock repurchases, but $838 million was invested in other subsidiaries, primarily its National Energy Group unit. Southern California Edison transferred $4.8 billion to its parent company between 1996 and November 2000, a separate audit showed; Edison International invested $2.5 billion in its unregulated Mission Group subsidiaries during the same period. ??Executives of the companies say the transfers were proper. Audits have shown that "we followed the rules and didn't do anything wrong," said PG& E's chief executive, Robert Glynn. "We did not ask consumers in California to support any of the losses that occurred in those businesses when we started them up," he said. Now, forcing the unregulated units to support their ailing sister utility, he said, "would be no different than calling up shareholders and saying, 'The California electric bills are pretty high; send some money in so we can give it back to them.' " ??Loretta Lynch, the president of the utilities commission, took a different view. "Should we look backward," she asked, "and say, 'Hey, wait a minute -- that corporate structure profited by all of our power payments to them in the past, and they should participate in helping us through to get to a solution in the future?' " ??The cornerstone deal of PG& E's unregulated energy business was struck four years ago, when it acquired the hydroelectric and fossil-fueled generation plants of New England Electric System for $1.6 billion. PG& E is now one of the largest generators in the Northeast, operating plants that can light up to five million average-sized homes. ??While California officials say Pacific Gas and Electric's woes have been caused, at least in part, by market manipulation by out-of-state generators, the Justice Department has been investigating possible market abuses involving PG& E and two other companies in New England. Mr. Glynn said that PG& E had done nothing wrong and that the company has responded to Justice Department requests for information. ??Overall, PG& E's National Energy Group has 30 power plants in 10 states, and others under development or construction that include one in Athens, N.Y., that is expected to begin supplying electricity to New York City in 2003. It also operates an energy trading operation in Bethesda and controls a natural gas pipeline into Northern California. ??To Wall Street, the utility companies' investments in unregulated businesses were a necessary survival tactic, as investors demanded faster-growing profits. ??"The stock market was going like gangbusters, and the utilities' returns of 11 percent weren't cutting it," said Richard Cortright, a utility analyst at Standard and Poor's, the bond rating agency. ??Moreover, as deregulation loomed, industry executives saw no choice but to make new investments. "It looked like the utility opportunity was going to start shrinking," Mr. Glynn said. ??Consumer groups question whether utilities would have invested more in improving basic service if they had not had the option of putting money elsewhere. ??Mike Florio, a lawyer with The Utility Reform Network, a consumer group in San Francisco, cited findings last year by state regulators that from 1987 to 1995, Pacific Gas & Electric spent nearly $550 million less on maintaining electric and gas facilities than had been factored into its rates. Separately, in 1999, the utility agreed to pay about $29 million to settle charges that consumers were endangered because it failed to trim trees near high-voltage power lines. ??"Several hundred million dollars didn't get spent for maintenance, and that ultimately falls to the bottom line as profit," Mr. Florio said. ??Mr. Glynn said the utility had always spent appropriate sums on maintenance, coming within one-half of one percent of the amount built into rates over a 20-year period. ??In the big picture, he said, it was hard to see how PG& E had been a winner in deregulation, even before its utility's humiliating bankruptcy. "If you look at what happened, the net of it was a loss," Mr. Glynn said, "because the value leaked out on the regulated utility side faster than we were able to build it on the nonregulated side." About This Report ??This article is part of a joint reporting effort with the PBS series "Frontline," which will broadcast a documentary about California's energy crisis on June 5. ??http://www.nytimes.com GRAPHIC: Charts: "The Biggest Power Marketers" Most of the biggest unregulated power marketers and traders are owned by the the country's biggest electric utilities or have been spun off by them. Here are the top 10, based on 2000 sales. Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Enron Power and affliliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 590.2 MARKET SHARE: 13.03% CHANGE FROM 1999: + 97% Companies owned or spun off from utilities: American Electric Power Service MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 401.3 MARKET SHARE: 8.86 CHANGE FROM 1999: +84 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: PG&E Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 282.6 MARKET SHARE: 6.24 CHANGE FROM 1999: +62 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Duke Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 276.2 MARKET SHARE: 6.10 CHANGE FROM 1999: +226 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Reliant Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 204.3 MARKET SHARE: 4.51 CHANGE FROM 1999: +166 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Mirant Americas Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 202.6 MARKET SHARE: 4.47 CHANGE FROM 1999: +23 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Aquila Energy Marketing MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 186.7 MARKET SHARE: 4.12 CHANGE FROM 1999: +4 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Cinergy operating companies MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 166.4 MARKET SHARE: 3.67 CHANGE FROM 1999: +246 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Constellation Power Source MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 162.3 MARKET SHARE: 3.58 CHANGE FROM 1999: +222 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Williams Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 138.4 MARKET SHARE: 3.05 CHANGE FROM 1999: +127 (Source: Platt Power Markets Week)(pg. A17) "Outdoing Their Parents" Taking advantage of deregulation, many of the country's biggest power utilities have set up unregulated subsidiaries to trade and produce power. These subsidiaries have become extremely profitable, often outperforming their regulated corporate siblings. UTILITY: Duke Energy OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +$465 1Q '01: +460 UNREGULATED BUSINESS: North American Wholesale Energy OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +82 1Q '01: +348 RELATIONSHIP OF UNREGULATED BUSINESS TO UTILITY North American Wholesale Energy is a subsidiary of Duke Energy. UTILITY: Reliant Energy OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +$202 1Q '01: +186 UNREGULATED BUSINESS: Wholesale Energy OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: -22 1Q '01: +216 RELATIONSHIP OF UNREGULATED BUSINESS TO UTILITY Reliant Energy plans to sell 18 percent of Reliant Resources -- mostly Wholesale Energy -- this week. UTILITY: Southern OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +$439 1Q '01: +483 UNREGULATED BUSINESS: Mirant OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +169 1Q '01: +279 RELATIONSHIP OF UNREGULATED BUSINESS TO UTILITY Southern completed the spinoff of Mirant on April 2. (Source: S.E.C. filings)(pg. A17) LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 ?????????????????????????????17 of 103 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ????????????????????APRIL 30, 2001, MONDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A3 LENGTH: 1108 words HEADLINE: NEWSMAKER PROFILE; Nettie Hoge; Taking on power; Consumer advocate revels in uphill battle SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: Chuck Squatriglia BODY: Given a choice, Nettie Hoge would rather be out in her garden right about now, digging in the dirt. ???Instead, the head of The Utility Reform Network is digging into California's energy mess, making sure the average Joe doesn't take it in the kisser as lawmakers, regulators and utility brass hats try to keep the lights on and utilities afloat. ???It's grueling work, full of long hours that leave precious little time for the gardening Hoge so adores. Not that she's complaining. Hoge, 50, honestly loves her job and insists she wouldn't do anything else. ???"I've got a mutant gene," she said with a laugh as she relaxed, for just a moment, in a spartan office littered with messy piles of paperwork. "I've always wanted to do this." ???TURN has been keeping tabs on companies like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Pacific Bell for more than 25 years. Hoge and her crew lobby the Public Utilities Commission, counsel lawmakers, analyze reports and file the occasional lawsuit. They are, in short, professional gadflies who represent the public in a system that some say favors big business. ???"The biggest protector of the consumer, by far, has been TURN," said Bob Gnaizda, public policy director for the Greenlining Institute in San Francisco. "(Hoge) has made TURN into the leading consumer utility advocate in the nation." ???It's not glamorous work, nor is it particularly lucrative. Hoge, a lawyer by training, took a pay cut when she accepted the $75,000-a-year job in 1995. And, truth be told, most folks have no idea Hoge is in their corner. ???"There are other rewards," she said. "You don't get the adoration of Joe Citizen standing up and yelling, 'Yay TURN!' But there's an excitement about being involved in the discussions where the big decisions are made." ???The youngest of four children, Hoge bounced around the middle of the country as she grew up, following her career Army officer father from Kansas to Oklahoma to Texas. ???"All the places where you can shoot big guns," she joked. ???Hoge graduated from high school in Pullman, Wash. After a stint at the University of Southern California, she graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Washington State University and earned a law degree from the University of San Francisco. ???Hoge's entire career has been spent protecting the underdog. During a two-year stint as a law school graduate at Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison in San Francisco, "I got into trouble for doing too much pro bono work," Hoge recalled. "The partners would come around each month to check our billable hours. Mine were always zero." ???Since taking the helm almost six years ago, Hoge has led TURN to some impressive consumer victories. They include persuading the Public Utilities Commission to create a $352 million fund to underwrite rural telephone service and bringing an end to ratepayer subsidies of PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in 2002. ???Hoge, a stickler for detail, has a reputation for giving exhaustive answers to even mundane questions. ???"Everybody agrees she knows what she's talking about," said Harvey Rosenfield, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. "In many respects, TURN is the intellectual force in this debate. Those of us who are deeply involved in this issue rely upon Nettie to lay out the facts for us." ???Hoge is surprised people think her wonkish, but admits she is circumspect. ???"My big fear is being marginalized and having people think we (at TURN) don't know what we're talking about," she said. "Maybe I overcompensate." ???Few doubt Hoge's smarts, but she has plenty of critics among the utilities, lawmakers and lobbyists she has crossed swords with over the years. However, none of them will say anything publicly. ???"We have no comment on her," said Shawn Cooper, a spokesman for Pacific Gas and Electric Corp., the parent company of the foundering utility. ???It was the same story with Southern California Edison and many of the legislators who have criticized Hoge and TURN in recent years. ???Hoge isn't surprised her adversaries are keeping mum. ???"There's nothing for them to gain by saying anything negative about us because the public is on our side," she said. ???Still, TURN has drawn criticism from Carl Wood, generally considered the most ardent consumer advocate on the PUC. ???"Frankly, I would have expected myself to be on the same page with (TURN) more than I actually am," Wood said. "I'm not sure they wholeheartedly believe in regulation, and I think it comes from a distrust of regulators. But maybe I'm taking it personally." ???Wood chastised TURN for supporting utility divestiture of generating plants as California's deregulation effort got under way. And he said Hoge places too much emphasis on the utilities' role in the energy mess instead of focusing on the profiteering of power generators. ???"The utilities have some culpability, but they are not the main driver behind the crisis," Wood said. "TURN's interventions do not reflect that reality." ???Still, he gave TURN high marks and credited Hoge with making it a far more effective advocate. ???Hoge admits she has had her hands full with the energy crisis, saying she and her staff "are trying to keep our health and sanity." ???Asked if she would have joined T
|