BEECHER - NAWC

Water ComparedStructural Changercash-rich energy firms as these firms position themselves for competition. Water companies,with their long standing in some communities, can provide out-of-town companies with anentree into valued local distribution markets.In the context of restructuring, a fundamental issue is how to regulate utilities in a marmer thatfacilitates and encourages the development of beneficial competition while providingadequate controls or incentives for the elements of service that remain monopolistic.Regulatory alternatives are considered in the next section.IIIII.Table 3-3Restructuring TirnelineTelecommunicationsFCC grants MCI petitionFCC's Computer I decisionFree entry decisionJustice files AT&T antitrust suitFCC's Computer II decision (unbundling)Modified Final Judgment approvedFCC's Computer /II decision (open network)1969197019711972197319741975197619771978197919801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996EnergyPublic Utility Regulatory Policies Act (QFs)Natural Gas Policy ActFERC Order 380 (gas take or pay)FERC Order 436 (gas open access)FERC Order 451 (gas market pricing)Natural Gas Wellhead Decontrol Act.FERC Order 500 (amends Order 436)Clean Air ActFERC Order 537 (gas transmission)Energy Policy Act modifies PUHCA andauthorizes FERC to order wheelingFERC Order 636 (gas unbundling)FERC Orders (gas gathering policy)Local competition begins to emergeTelecommunications Act (competition)First residential gas choice pilotsFERC Orders 888 & 889 (electricity access)FERC allows recovery of wholesale stranded costStates begin electricity restructuringNARUC files suit against FCC 1997Many states continue to move toward local 1998 Electric restructuring implemented or undercompetition and performance-based regulationreview in almost all statesSource: Author's construct based on summaries provided in Appendix B.NAWC 70 September 1998