The Clinton Administration’s electric restructuring proposalreleased this week faced immediate praise and vilification bylobbyists and legislators. “I appreciate the apparent progress onthe Administration taking a position,” said Sen. Frank H. Murkowski(R-Alaska), chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and NaturalResources. “But the devil’s in the details-and we don’t yet havethe details since DOE has yet to provide Congress with its specificlegislative proposal.” When that is provided “we can begin holdinghearings on their measure and the other bills before the EnergyCommittee,” he added

While pleased that the plan did not include federal mandates forstates, Murkowski was disappointed that the renewable package didnot include hydroelectricity and the emissions-free benefits ofnuclear power. “The Administration complains about carbonemissions, yet their restructuring plan fails to promote America’slargest sources of carbon-free power,” he said

Sen. Dale Bumpers (D-Ark), author of his own proposal (S. 1401)praised the administration’s proposal and said he would call onMurkowski to move forward on the issue. Rep. Dan Schaefer (R-CO),chairman of the House Commerce Energy and Power Subcommittee,called it a “meaningful step in our push to pass legislation thisyear.” Sen. Larry E. Craig of the Energy and Natural ResourcesCommittee told an Edison Electric Institute group yesterday thatwhile it might be possible to get a bill passed in the House thisyear, it would be impossible in the Senate. That might suit EEI,which is primarily concerned with talk about expanding the abilityof the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission over utility mergers,possibly mandating divestiture of investor-owned utilities. EEIPresident Thomas R. Kuhn called it a “drastic, unnecessaryexpansion of government authority over newly emerging restructuredelectric markets.” Nevertheless, EEI was pleased that theAdministration was willing to repeal “outmoded federal laws” likePUHCA and PURPA

Natural gas producers thought the plan went too far in promotingrenewables. “We oppose efforts to mandate a market share forrenewable fuels,” said George Yates, Chairman of the IndependentPetroleum Association of America. “This mandate undermines theconcept of competition, and gives economically inefficient energysources of electricity generation a free ride on the back of theconsumer. This guaranteed market share would come at the expense ofother fuels, such as abundant, clean-burning natural gas.

©Copyright 1998 Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. Thepreceding news report may not be republished or redistributed, inwhole or in part, in any form, without prior written consent ofIntelligence Press,Inc.