EEI's Kuhn Meets With Key Senators to Sort Through Allocation Issue

Some of the Senate powerhouse leaders are squaring off in the climate debate, partly in response to EEI's initiatives to strike a balance that favors a resolution to the allowances issue, ClimateWire reported today on the New York Times Web site.

EEI's position, as noted by EEI President Tom Kuhn, has been to create an allowance split of 50-50 between companies based on their historic emission levels and retail sales. The issue has become divisive because at least 14 Democratic senators in the Midwest and Great Plains have raised concerns about the approach in Senate debate, insisting that the "formula should be changed to reflect allocations based solely on emissions."

Leaving a meeting with key senators involved in the issue--Sens. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., Joseph I. Lieberman, ID-Conn., and John F. Kerry, D-Mass.--Kuhn was quoted as saying: "Everything is under discussion." Wrote ClimateWire: "Kuhn said yesterday that he thinks final decisions on allocations won't be made until several other critical parts of the proposal are decided, including emission limits and cost containment. 'We've said it's right at the very end because it's a question of how the other pieces play out,' Kuhn said."

A leading critic, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, was quoted as saying: "There will be a battle on it. We're going to fight hard. I think equity will be on our side. After all, if you're trying to get at emissions, it'd seem to me the allocations would be based on emissions, not on how much you sell." While Harkin claimed that he had logic and the votes to prevail, EEI's position is supported by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Tom Carper, D-Del., who want the Senate version to match the House version to smooth passage.

Wrote ClimateWire: "In a letter sent last week to Kerry, Feinstein said a change from the EEI-approved allocation system could force electric companies to drop their support for the legislation. It also would leave energy consumers in California to pay higher costs for electricity even though their utilities already made significant low-carbon investments."