The Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) has initiated an investigation of electric industry restructuring and emerging competition. The SCC stressed that Virginia is not saddled with high-cost power, and that larger electric utilities in the state currently provide service at rates "significantly below" the national average. Nevertheless, the SCC concluded that a formal investigation was necessary to determine whether regulatory improvements might result in reliable service at lower costs for state consumers.

The New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has issued preliminary guidelines for a pilot program to examine the implications of retail competition in the electric industry. The guidelines, which respond to a state law mandating creation of a retail competition pilot, propose opening 3 percent of each electric utility's peak load to competitive suppliers of electric power.

The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) has ruled that Cambridge Electric Co. may recover stranded costs from customers that switch to self-generation. The DPU made the ruling while reviewing a "Customer Transition Charge" (CTC) filed as part of the utility's tariff for services in connection with the operation of a cogeneration qualifying facility (QF) by one of its large customers, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

At Addison Mizner's pink fantasy on a Spanish theme, the Boca Raton Resort, the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) waited for Godot. Yes, that was the theme of EEI's 30th financial conference, and its first plunge into literature. You may remember the play, in which two hobos talk endlessly while waiting for the mysterious Godot, who has not yet arrived by the final curtain. In the same way, electric utilities and those who invest in them have been awaiting the advent of restructuring, the California remake of the industry, retail wheeling somewhere, and the wipeout of stranded assets.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has denied a Jersey Central Power & Light Co. (JCPL) request that it invalidate the procedures used by the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) to implement the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) (Docket No. EL95-36-000).

JCPL claimed that state procedures required it to enter into a purchase agreement with a qualifying facility, Freehold Cogeneration Associates, L.P., for 100 megawatts of power at rates that exceeded JCPL's avoided cost at the time of contract execution and approval.

A new Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) order in the restructuring proceeding for Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America (NGP) suggests how the Commission will handle evolving issues in natural gas decontracting (Docket Nos. RP95-326-000).

NGP had asked to implement its compliance rates for new services in conjunction with a deferred-cost mechanism, allowing it to defer collection of revenue shortfall it allegedly would experience under those rates.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has imposed a $600,000 civil penalty on Public Service Electric and Gas Co. (PSE&G) for six violations at the Salem Nuclear Generating Station. PSE&G, which owns and operates 42.59 percent of the plant, responded by shutting Salem down temporarily.

"We take no issue with the concerns raised by the NRC," says Leon R. Eliason, PSE&G chief nuclear officer and president of its nuclear business.

Sen. Alfonse D'Amato (R-NY) has introduced a bill to replace the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 (PUHCA) with a new holding company act that would give the utility industry greater flexibility. Endorsed by a bipartisan group of senators, the bill is co-sponsored by Frank Murkowski (R-AK), chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and J.

At its first-ever annual meeting, held in Baltimore, MD, GISB also was gently chided and commended by James J. Hoecker of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC): "I submit to you that GISB must not, in an attempt to please everyone, set standards at the lowest common denominator.

When the Salt River Project (SRP) held a series of focus groups in 1994, one participant said he related to our products and services, and felt he received good value for his monthly payments. Unfortunately, a few questions later, we discovered that he did not live in our service area, his bill was higher than he thought, and he wasn't particularly pleased after all.

We were more than a little taken aback.