ket have dealt with something they're used to by now -- some of the highest electric prices in the nation.
Of course, deregulation takes what was once a government controlled monopoly and breaks into separate businesses for electric generation, transmission and distribution.
From state to state, the impetus has been to increase consumer choices and reduce prices.
In New York, the process created "free" markets for electric generation and retail services, while transmission and distribution are still regulated.
Instead of passing detailed legislation, New York administered deregulation through the New York Public Service Commission (PSC).
An administrative law judge made recommendations to the commission which outlined how the transition to a competitive market should take place.
The PSC orchestrated deregulation through a collaborative process that involved more than 90 interested parties such as utilities, industrial customers, environmental and consumer groups, according to PSC director of public information David C. Flanagan.
The PSC issued a series of decisions beginning in September 1997 which approved settlement agreements with six of New York's seven major electric utilities.
According to Flanagan, the PSC approved separate agreements because it felt it couldn't take a "one-size-fits-all approach" to utilities which operate in different areas of the large state.
The settlements established rates to be effective over the next four to five years; permitted the utilities to change their corporate structure; provided for either the separation or sale of non-nuclear generating plants from the regulated utility; and set a schedule for the implementation of consumer choice for electric suppliers and retail services.
Flanagan said he doesn't think New York needs to take another look at its deregulation set up in light of the events in California.
"Looking at California, we've taken some lessons from what ...