Cost

By reversing a ruling by a federal district court judge, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has effectively reinstated an antitrust suit by a natural gas marketer against Washington Natural Gas Co., a natural gas local distribution company (LDC), charging the LDC with "off-tariff" pricing and other practices designed to favor commodity sales over transport-only customers who buy their own gas directly, such as from marketers.

In reinstating the complaint, the appeals court denied any "state action immunity" against antitrust claims.

Sound bites from state and federal regulators.

Natural Gas Briefs

Gas Rate Indexing. Alabama continues its a rate stabilization and equalization (RSE) procedure for Alabama Gas Corp. (rates adjusted quarterly to conform return on equity to a preset range). Commission says RSE plan has helped company address recent gas market changes such as supply diversification, system bypass, and competition. Docket No. 25600, Oct. 7, 1996 (Ala.P.S.C.).

Gas Motor Vehicles. Peoples Natural Gas Co.

Which matters most: Cost? Price? Sales? Regulation?

Many investors no longer think of electric utility stocks primarily as dividend-rich, income-oriented investments. Instead, they have begun to consider new criteria in evaluating utility stocks (em criteria that might help explain some of the variations in equity price performance now seen among various utility companies.

An oft-heard argument these days says that states with low-cost power should refrain from restructuring their electric utilities. This argument has gained credence in some states, where protectionists have used it to slow down the liberalization of electricity markets. The rationale is simple: Because the state would export its low-cost power, local consumers would lose. They would face higher electric prices than if their state had somehow confined its low-cost resources within its boundaries.

Utilities that participate in a merger are just a likely to find revenues shrinking as growing, according to a recent study of completed and pending M&A activity among U.S. utility and energy companies.

The study, "Energy Utility Perspectives (em Creating Value Through Mergers and Acquisitions," conducted by Mercer Management Consulting, examines 43 completed and 53 pending U.S. utility deals conducted between 1985 and 1995.

How a sample electric company could reduce risk of loss by upgrading performance to industry benchmarks. Competition in electric generation will expose utility costs that exceed those of alternative suppliers. Roughly speaking, these above-market ("transition") costs should track the difference between the new market price and the embedded cost set by traditional cost-of-service regulation.

The problem has attracted no shortage of proposals.

What do the first months of trading say about the spread between spot markets and futures prices?

ust over nine months ago the New York Mercantile

Exchange opened trading in the first-ever electricity futures contracts. As occurred

previously in oil and gas, futures trading in electricity

promises to play a central role in

commodity markets (em markets that are gradually evolving as competitive.

Electricity futures also provide a valuable tool for managers at utilities or other power producers.

Incumbent monopolists won't command high premiums

if newcomers can rebuild capacity from scratch at a cheaper price.

At first glance, many of the nation's regional markets for wholesale electric generation appear monopolistic. In some of the 18 regional power markets we have identified, the leading companies account for 75 to 90 percent of the area's generating assets. In other markets, where the concentration problem does not yet seem as pressing, mergers and acquisitions threaten to raise levels of concentration of ownership in generation.

Stranded Costs Projected at -$2.9B to $22B

The Texas Public Utility Commission (PUC) was scheduled this month to consider estimates of retail competition's impact on electric utilities.

A draft staff report, yet to be reviewed by the PUC, estimates stranded costs that span a high of $22 billion to a low of negative $2.9 billion.

The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) has decided to use separate cost methods 1) to determine whether a local telephone service is subsidized, and to set price floors for essential monopoly services provided by NYNEX, a local exchange carrier (LEC); and 2) to set rates and price floors for competitive services.

According to the DPU, Total Service Long Run Incremental Cost (TSLRIC) was undisputed as the proper method of testing for subsidies between services.