Fyi.  Does this impact on us?   Mark
---------------------- Forwarded by Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT on 10/20/99 02:01 
PM ---------------------------


"JOHN G KLAUBERG" <JKLAUBER@LLGM.COM> on 10/19/99 10:51:33 AM
To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Blurb from EEI Report



Mark:

I thought you would find the attached blurb describing an effort in the UK to 
attempt to indirectly curb prices for generation of some interest in light of 
ENA's enhanced interest in building and owning peaker plants and the desire 
to capture profits particularly during times of electric market volatility 
(even though ENA's plants, unlike those of PowerGen and National Power, will 
constitute only a very small percentage of the generation market).  While I 
do not see this type of policy occurring in the U.S. I always think it is 
useful to keep an eye on developments like this, even if they exist outside 
the U.S., since many U.S regulators often look to the UK for "ideas" since it 
is further ahead in some respects on the deregulation curve.

John



*    U.K.:  REGULATOR'S PROPOSAL WOULD ALLOW CUSTOMERS TO SUE
      An offshoot of Dallas-based TXU, Edison Mission Energy and
 AES Corp. are three energy companies likely to be most affected
 by U.K. industry regulator Callum McCarthy's announcement
 yesterday that customers could be able to sue their suppliers
 for abusively raising prices.
      The measure is designed to safeguard potential price
 manipulation by generators until new electricity wholesale
 trading rules are introduced next year. McCarthy plans to add
 "good behavior" clauses to legislation proposed by the
 government last week and scheduled for discussion in parliament
 next month. And an independent advisory body would settle
 disputes between McCarthy and electric companies.
      Allegations from big industry customers that National Power
 and PowerGen abused their market power by raising prices in July
 spurred McCarthy's action. The company's combined profits were
 $21.7 million higher than profits during the same two weeks in
 1998.  The companies "strenuously deny" the charges of price
 manipulation (Andrew Taylor, Financial Times, Oct. 19).