Nevada electric controversies heat up

Friday, June 29, 2001 | 11:04 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- The state's consumer advocate said Thursday he declined to join big casinos and mines in their quest for alternative power.

Tim Hay said he turned down a request from the gaming and mining industries to join in their lawsuit. They are seeking a Nevada Supreme Court ruling that would allow them to pull out of the current power system to seek cheaper rates.

The ruling sought by the industries is that Assembly Bill 661 is valid as passed by the Legislature.

Oral arguments before the Supreme Court on the energy bill are set for July 6. The Nevada Constitution limits the Legislature to 120 days and says it is to end at 12 a.m. Pacific Standard Time.

AB661 was passed during the regular session after midnight Pacific Daylight Time.

Attorneys for the Legislature initially said the lawmakers had an extra hour to approve the legislation. The lawyers then reversed their opinion.

Hay said he supports the position of Legislative Counsel Brenda Erdoes, that the bill passed during the regular session is invalid because it didn't make it through by the deadline.

He also opposes the bill on fairness grounds.

"It's inherently inequitable," Hay said.

The advocate, who was in the middle of the fight over the energy package during the session, said small customers should have been permitted also to seek alternate sources outside of Nevada Power Co. and Sierra Pacific Power Co.

AB661 was submitted to the special session of the Legislature to clear up the legal status of the power suppliers and their customers. But it got entangled in a dispute over reapportionment and the bill never gained passage.

Now, the casino and mining industries are seeking affirmation from the Supreme Court that the bill was valid as passed during the disputed hour of the regular legislative session.

AB661 also included a section establishing a surcharge on each customer for the amount of energy used. An estimated $10 million would have been raised to help low-income families meet their higher electric bills.

Even if the Supreme Court rules AB661 is not legal, there are other ways to build an energy assistance fund, Hay said.