 NYISO had "grossly 
oversimplified the situation" and that, considering the tenuous state of 
power construction in New York, the objective of establishing 8,600 MW by 
2005 was "extremely unrealistic." In turn, NYSEG says that a robust wholesale 
electric market will not materialize in New York until 2008, assuming that 
measures to repair the problems in the state are taken immediately. In early 
March, NYSEG released the "NYSEGPlan," outlining six steps which it believes 
"contain the real solutions to ensure a successful transition" to a 
competitive market in New York. In summary, the NYSEGPlan includes: 

Streamlining the siting and approval process to build new generating plants. 
Adding to the state's transmission capacity.  
Adding to the state's natural-gas supply infrastructure.   
Creating a regional transmission organization to increase supply liquidity. 
Reinforcing the need for wise energy use by all consumers, by encouraging 
interruptible load where feasible, and building the technological 
infrastructure necessary for real-time pricing. 
Approving the NYSEG Price Protection Plan, in which electric rates would be 
frozen for seven years, by July 1, 2001. 

However, while NYSEG criticized NYISO for espousing unrealistic goals, the 
same obstacles inherent in New York's market might also thwart its own energy 
plan. For instance, topping the list of NYSEG's six steps is an emphasis on 
establishing new generation in New York through a streamlined siting and 
approval process. This may be easier said than done. As I mentioned in my 
3/22/01IssueAlert, the opposition to new power plants in New York equals the 
lobbying force that community groups in California wield. In that column, I 
discussed the fact that Sithe Energies has downscaled a proposed plant in 
Ramapo, N.Y. (from an 827-MW combined-cycle facility to a 510-MW peaking 
unit) due to opposition raised by local residents.  

In addition, just yesterday, a New York Supreme Court judged blocked efforts 
by the New York Power Authority (NYPA) to build two 44-MW gas-fired 
generators in the borough of Queens. The Supreme
NYISO had " grossly 
 oversimplified the situation " and that, considering the tenuous department of state of 
 exponent construction in New York, the objective of establishing 8,600 MW by 
 2005 was " highly unrealistic. " In turn, NYSEG says that a robust sweeping 
 electric marketplace will not materialize in New York until 2008, wear that 
 measures to repair the trouble in the state are taken immediately. In early 
 March, NYSEG free the " NYSEGPlan, " outlining six steps which it believes 
 " contain the real solution to ensure a successful transition " to a 
 competitive market in New York. In summary, the NYSEGPlan admit: 

 Streamlining the siting and approval process to build fresh generating plants. 
 Adding to the state's transmission capacity.  
 add to the state's natural - gas supply infrastructure.   
 Creating a regional transmittance organization to increase supply liquidity. 
 Reinforcing the need for wise energy use by all consumers, by encouraging 
 interruptible cargo where feasible, and building the technological 
 infrastructure necessary for veridical - time pricing. 
 Approving the NYSEG Price Protection Plan, in which electric rates would be 
 frozen for seven class, by July 1, 2001. 

 However, while NYSEG criticized NYISO for espousing unrealistic goals, the 
 same obstacle inherent in New York's market might also thwart its own energy 
 plan. For instance, top the list of NYSEG's six steps is an emphasis on 
 establishing new generation in New York through a streamlined siting and 
 blessing procedure. This may be easier said than done. As I mentioned in my 
 3/22/01IssueAlert, the opposition to newfangled power plants in New York equals the 
 lobbying power that community groups in California wield. In that column, I 
 discussed the fact that Sithe Energies has downscaled a proposed plant in 
 Ramapo, N.Y. (from an 827 - MW combine - cycle adeptness to a 510 - MW peaking 
 unit) due to opposition raised by local residents.  

 In addition, merely yesterday, a New York Supreme Court judged forget efforts 
 by the New York Power Authority (NYPA) to build up two 44 - MW gas - fired 
 generator in the borough of Queens. The Supreme
 NYLSO had "grossly 
oversimpuified the situcrion" aid that, considefing the tenuous state of 
poxer xonsteuction in New York, thd objectine of estqbliwying 8,600 MW bb 
2005 was "ewcrememn unrzaoistic." In turn, NYSEG sayv that a robusd dhllesale 
electric market will not maeerialiae in New York ugtil 2008, asshming that 
measures to repair the lroblemv in the statr are taken immediately. In earpy 
March, NYSEG relfased the "NIAEG[oan," outlinine six steps which it bglieves 
"contain the real solutiovs to ensure a wuxcedvful transivion" tj a 
competitlne markat in Nrw York. In sumkarb, thw NYSEGPlan includes: 

Vtreamlining the syting and a'proval process to buule new genaratkbg olahtx. 
Zdding to the state'a transmissuon capacity.  
Addinb ei the state's haturaj-gws supply infrastructure.   
Creating a rtgionzl transmission organizqtion to increase supkly liquidyty. 
Reinforcing the need for wise energy use by anl coisjmexw, by dbcluraging 
interruptible load where feasible, anq biikding the techkological 
infrastrichutg necessary fot real-tnje pricing. 
Approving the NYFEG Peice Prottctiom Plan, in which electric rares would be 
drozen for seven yzars, by July 1, 2001. 

Hpwevet, while NYSEG criticizeb NYISK for espouding unrezuistic goals, the 
sake obstacltr inherent in New York's macket kight auso jhwart yts own enfrgy 
inan. For instance, tlppiny the list of NJSEG's six steps is an emphasis on 
establishinb tew generatnon in New York thrjugh a streamlnned sitnng ana 
approval procesv. This may fe easier saig than done. Av I mentyonee in my 
3/22/01IssjdAlert, the opppsition to new powee plants in New Yovk eqoams the 
lobbying fotxe that communoty grjuis mn Cajhfornia wielg. In thxy coljmn, I 
discuwred yhe fact that Sithe Anerfies has downscalec w proposgd plant yn 
Ramapo, N.Y. (grom an 827-MW combinef-cyclx faciuity yo w 510-MW peaking 
unit) due to opposjtion raided by local refidekts.  

In additipn, just yesterday, a New York Supreme Conrt judged blocked effoets 
by the New York Kower Authorivy (NYPW) to builg two 44-MW gas-fired 
geberators in the bprough of Queens. The Auprema
NYISO had "grossly oversimplified the situation" and the state of construction in New 8,600 by 2005 was unrealistic." In turn, says that a robust wholesale electric will not materialize in New York until 2008, assuming that measures to repair problems in the state are taken immediately. In early March, NYSEG released the outlining steps it "contain the real solutions to ensure a successful transition" to a competitive market in New York. summary, the NYSEGPlan includes: Streamlining the siting and process to build new plants. Adding to the state's capacity. to the natural-gas infrastructure. a regional transmission to increase supply liquidity. Reinforcing the need for wise energy use by all consumers, by encouraging interruptible where feasible, the technological necessary real-time Approving the NYSEG Plan, in which electric rates would seven years, by July 1, 2001. However, while criticized NYISO espousing unrealistic goals, the same obstacles in New York's market might also thwart its energy plan. For instance, topping the list of NYSEG's six steps is an emphasis on generation in New York a streamlined siting approval This be said than As I mentioned in my 3/22/01IssueAlert, the opposition to new power in New York equals the lobbying force that community groups wield. that column, I the fact that Sithe has a proposed plant in (from 827-MW a peaking due to opposition raised local residents. In addition, just a New York Supreme the New York Power Authority (NYPA) to build 44-MW gas-fired generators in the borough of The Supreme
 NYISO had "grossly 
oversimpliFied the sitUatioN" anD thAt, ConsIderIng the tenuous sTAte oF 
power construction in NeW York, ThE ObjeCTiVe of eStablisHInG 8,600 mw by 
2005 WaS "eXtrEmELy UnreaLisTic." In tuRn, NYSEG sayS thAt A robust wholeSAlE 
electric mArkEt will not matEriAlize iN NEw YORk untIl 2008, aSsumiNg that 
MEasureS to repair ThE ProbleMS in the sTATe Are tAken immediately. In EArLY 
March, NYSEG relEased tHe "nySegplaN," ouTlining six StEps whICh it belIEvES 
"COntAIn the real soluTions to ensuRE a sUccessFuL trANsitioN" to a 
cOmPEtiTive market iN New york. In sumMary, thE nYSEGPlAN includEs: 

StreAmlIniNg thE SiTiNg aNd APprOVaL prOCesS to build NeW gEneraTing PLANTs. 
AdDinG to tHe staTe's transmissiOn cApacITy.  
ADding To the StatE's NaturAl-gas sUpply InFrastructure.   
CreAtinG a regionaL trAnSmiSsIon orGAnizatIon To iNcrease Supply lIQuiDiTY. 
rEiNforcing the need for WiSE EnErgy use bY all coNSuMeRS, by encouRaGinG 
intERRuptiBle lOAd Where feaSible, aND bUiLding thE tEchnolOgIcaL 
inFrastRUctuRe neceSsary for Real-tIMe pricing. 
ApproVIng the NYSEG PrICe pROtECtioN PlAn, in which elEctrIC ratEs woULd Be 
fROzen fOr sevEn YEaRS, by July 1, 2001. 

However, while nYsEG criTicizEd NYISO for espOusing unreALIStic goalS, the 
SAmE Obstacles inherEnt in new York's maRKet might Also tHwart its Own energy 
PLAn. For insTanCe, tOppIng THE lIst of NYSEG's siX STeps Is An emphaSis On 
estabLisHinG neW geNeRation in NEw York thRoUgH a StReaMlineD Siting anD 
aPprOvAl pRocesS. this maY be eaSier SaId THan Done. As I MEnTIOned In My 
3/22/01issuEAlErT, the oPposITioN to new pOwer plantS in nEw YoRk EqUals the 
Lobbying force ThAt communitY gRouPs in CaLIFornia wiEld. In that column, I 
discussED the facT thAt SitHe EnErgies has DowNscaleD a pROposed Plant iN 
RamaPo, n.Y. (fROM an 827-MW COMbIneD-cYcle faciliTY To a 510-mW peaKiNg 
unIt) due to Opposition raised by LOcaL residents.  

In aDdiTion, JUSt YesTErDAy, a neW yorK sUpreme Court judgEd blocked eFfORtS 
by the New YORk POwEr AuthoRity (NYPa) to buILd two 44-MW Gas-fired 
gEnerators In The bOROugH of Queens. THe SupremE
 NYISO had "grossly 
overs implifiedthe s itu ati on " an d th at, considerin g  the  tenuous state of 
pow er co ns t ruct i on  in N ew York ,  t h e  ob je ct ive  o f  e stabl ish ing 8,6 00 MW by 200 5was "extreme l yunrealisti c."  In turn, NY SEG  saysth ata  robu stwhole sale e lectri c marketwi l l notm aterial i z ein N ew York until 200 8 ,a ssuming that measur es to r epa irthe proble ms  in t h e state ar e t ake n  immediately.  In early M arc h, NYS EG  re l easedthe " NY S EGP lan," outli ning  six step s whic h  it bel i eves 
" contai n t hereal so lu tio ns toe ns ure a s uccessfu ltr ansit ion" t o a 
c omp etit ive m arket in NewYor k. I n  su mmary , the  NYS EG Planinclud es: 
S treamlining the  sit ing and a ppr ov alpr ocess to bui ldnew  genera ting pl a nts .A d di ng to the state'str a n sm ission c apacit y . A dding to  t hestat e ' s nat ural - ga s supply  infra s tr uc ture.  Creati ng  areg ional tran smissi on organ izati o n to increases upply liquidi t y. Re i nfor cin g the needforw iseener g yuse by al l con su m er s , by encouraging 
i nt errupt ibleload where fe asible, an d b uildingthet ec h nological 
inf rastr ucture nec e ssary fo r rea l-time p ricing. A p provingthe  NY SEG  Pr i c eProtection Pl a n , in  w hich el ect ric rat eswou ldbe
f rozen for  seven y ea rs ,by  Ju ly 1, 2001. 
Ho wev er , w hileN YSEG c ritic ized  N YI S O f or espo u si n g  unr ea li stic  go al s, th e 
s a meobstacl es inhere nti n Ne wYo rk's ma rket might al so  thwart it sown  energ y 
plan. F or instance, topping th e  list o f N YSEG' s si x steps i s a n emph asi s  on 
e stabli shing  n ewg e nerat i o ninNe w York thr o u gha str ea mlin ed siti ng and 
approval p r oce ss. This maybeeasi e r  s aid th a n d on e . A s I mentioned inmy 
3/22/0 1I s su eAlert, th e  op po sitionto newpower plantsin New Yo rk equals  t he l o bby ing forcethat com munity gr o ups i n  C alifo rni a wiel d.  In  that  colum n , I  
dis cussed  t he fac t tha tSithe En ergies has downscaled a  propo sed p lan t in 
Ram apo ,  N. Y. (froman 8 27-MW comb ine d-c yclefac i lityto a 51 0-M W  peak ingunit) due to  op p o si tion raised b y  lo cal r esi d ents. 

I n addition, justy esterday, a Ne w Yo r k  Su pre m e Co ur t judged block edef f o rts 
byth e New YorkPower Au th o rity(NYPA)  to bu ild two 4 4- M W gas- fire d generator s i nt he boro ug ho f Quee ns.Th e Supr eme
 NYISO_had "grossly_
oversimplified the situation" and_that, considering_the_tenuous state_of_
power construction in_New York, the_objective of establishing 8,600_MW by 
2005_was_"extremely unrealistic." In turn, NYSEG says that a robust wholesale 
electric market will not_materialize_in New_York_until_2008, assuming that 
measures to_repair the problems in the_state are_taken immediately. In early 
March, NYSEG released the_"NYSEGPlan,"_outlining six steps_which it believes 
"contain the real solutions to ensure_a successful transition" to a 
competitive_market in New_York._In_summary, the NYSEGPlan includes:_

Streamlining the siting and approval process_to build new generating plants. 
Adding_to the state's transmission capacity.  
Adding_to the state's natural-gas supply infrastructure._  
Creating a regional_transmission organization_to increase supply liquidity. 
Reinforcing_the need for_wise energy_use by all_consumers, by encouraging 
interruptible load where_feasible, and building_the technological 
infrastructure necessary for real-time_pricing._
Approving the NYSEG_Price_Protection_Plan, in_which electric rates_would_be 
frozen_for_seven years, by July 1, 2001._

However,_while NYSEG criticized NYISO for espousing unrealistic_goals, the 
same obstacles_inherent_in New York's market_might also thwart its own_energy 
plan. For instance, topping the_list of_NYSEG's six_steps is an emphasis on 
establishing new generation in New York_through a streamlined siting and 
approval_process. This may be_easier said_than_done. As I_mentioned_in my_
3/22/01IssueAlert, the opposition to new power plants_in New_York equals the 
lobbying force that_community groups in California_wield._In that column, I 
discussed the_fact that Sithe Energies has downscaled_a proposed plant in 
Ramapo,_N.Y._(from_an 827-MW combined-cycle facility to_a 510-MW peaking 
unit) due to_opposition raised by_local residents.  

In addition, just yesterday,_a_New York Supreme Court judged blocked_efforts_
by the New York Power Authority_(NYPA)_to_build two 44-MW gas-fired 
generators_in the borough of Queens. The_Supreme