California marketers complain bill would end choice until 2003

By the OGJ Online Staff

HOUSTON, July 16 � California energy marketers Monday criticized the state Assembly's Democrat-sponsored bill to rescue Southern California Edison Co. as a back door effort to close the door on all retail electricity choice until 2003.

Earlier, Democrats released an analysis that said the bill preserved choice for large customers. Introduced Friday, the bill appeared to be on the fast track with debate scheduled in committee Monday afternoon.

Energy marketers prefer a bill sponsored by Assemblyman Dave Kelley (R-Palm Dessert) which would allow Californians to continue choosing a supplier other than a local utility, but Democrats hold a majority in both the Assembly and the Senate.

The Alliance for Retail Energy Markets (AReM) said it strongly opposed ABX2 82 sponsored by Speaker Robert Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys) and others because the legislation would halt the ability of Californians to select an electricity supplier other than a utility until 2003.

According to the bill summary, the California Public Utilities Commission "may not authorize any new or replacement direct transactions for retail customers until Jan. 1, 2003."

In the meantime, it orders the commission to study "the most expeditious means" of implementing a direct transaction program that will provide customers with peak loads equal to or greater than 20 kw with the choice of electric suppliers.

It also would provide all customers with the choice of a green supplier as certified by the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission after 2003. The commission has until Mar. 31, 2002, to deliver its report to the legislature.

"This bill is about putting Edison back on its feet and putting Edison's competitors out of business," said Rick Counihan of Green Mountain Energy Co., Austin. "Customers' right to choose the best energy option to meet their needs, and the needs of the environment, is being trampled in the name of restoring a monopoly."

The organization said ABX2 82 raises questions about the status of existing contracts and current customers who may be forced to return to "extremely high-priced" power under the utilities.

"In many ways this bill is worse than AB X1, because it threatens to nullify extension contracts for current direct access customers," said Aaron Thomas with AES NewEnergy, a unit of AES Corp., Arlington, Va. "This would force customers to return to utility service which would require the state to buy even more power than it has already."