Deep Cuts in Alternate-Fuels Funding Urged : Energy: PUC judge wants to pare utility requests for ratepayer money that would help prepare for new vehicles.

In a pivotal ruling in a stormy debate, a state Public Utilities Commission judge called Wednesday for deep cuts in the almost $400 million in ratepayer funds that California’s regulated utilities have requested in order to prepare the way for alternative-fuel vehicles.

The utilities submitted plans last year to the commission to fund projects over the next six years, including construction of public and private refueling stations, rebates for buyers of cleaner-burning cars, and preparation of the electric and natural gas systems to accommodate changes in the energy load delivered to customers.

The utilities’ original requests totaled more than $600 million; under the new proposal, that would be reduced to less than $160 million.

Hardest hit was Southern California Gas Co., which would get only $33 million of the $70 million it had asked for--and that after a drastic cut last month in its original request. Electric utilities, including Southern California Edison Co., generally fared better.

“This really is insufficient to jump-start the natural gas vehicle market,” said John Weber, general manager of natural gas vehicles at Southern California Gas. “We are going to be digesting the details and very definitely going back to the commission with more explanatory remarks, item by item and program by program.”

After public comment, the commission will take a final vote on the proposed ruling by Commission Administrative Law Judge Steven A. Weissman by Aug. 11 or Sept. 6 at the latest, according to Commission President Daniel W. Fessler.

The utilities have argued that the programs are needed to allow introduction of the new vehicles, as mandated by the state Air Resources Board’s low-emission vehicle rule and the federal Clean Air Act.

“Edison remains fully committed to all programs necessary,” Vikram S. Budhraja, Edison senior vice president for planning and technology, said in a statement. The proposal would cut Edison’s already-lowered funding request from $103 million to less than $72 million. The California Energy Commission expects Edison to have more than 50,000 electric vehicles driving around its service territory by 2000.

Consumer groups have agreed with some parts of the plans but argued that others actually promote--not just make possible--introduction of the cars. This, they say, is beyond a utility’s rightful use of ratepayer money and would bring unjustified rate hikes.

The proposal disallows use of ratepayer funds for rebates to car buyers and for much of the capital needed to build public refueling facilities. Weissman was also guided by a law passed by the previous Legislature that prohibited use of ratepayer funds in these programs that primarily promoted clean air, not efficient fuel use.

“Generally, this looks good,” said Audrie Krause, executive director of Toward Utility Rate Normalization, a residential consumer advocacy group based in San Francisco. “But we aren’t optimistic that this is finally what the commission will adopt. They will probably end up giving the utilities more what they want, because that has certainly been their pattern.”