[Federal Register: October 11, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 195)]
[Notices]
[Page 59064-59065]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11oc05-49]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. EL00-95-000 and EL00-98-000]
San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Complainant, v. Sellers of
Energy and Ancillary Services Into Markets Operated by the California
Independent System Operator and the California Power Exchange,
Respondents. Investigation of Practices of the California Independent
System Operator and the California Power Exchange; Notice Granting
Motion to Defer Filing of Comments
October 3, 2005.
1. On August 25, 2005, pursuant to the Order on Cost Recovery,
Revising Procedural Schedule for Refunds, and Establishing Technical
Conference,\1\ Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) staff
convened a technical conference to finalize the format of the uniform
template for cost filings. Filing dates for responsive pleadings were
established at the technical conference, with initial comments on cost
filings being due on October 11, 2005, and reply comments being due
October 17, 2005.\2\ On September 22, 2005, California Parties \3\
filed a motion asking the Commission to allow them to defer filing
their comments on the cost filing submitted by Enron Power Marketing,
Inc., Enron Energy Services, Inc., and Enron North America Corp.
(collectively, Enron). California Parties state that on August 24,
2005, they, along with Enron and other parties, filed a Joint Offer of
Settlement with the Commission (Enron Settlement). California Parties
state that approval of the Enron Settlement would obviate California
Parties' need to address Enron's cost filing. California Parties note,
however, that the Commission has not acted on the Enron Settlement, and
may not rule on it prior to October 11, 2005, the date on which
comments on cost filings are due. California Parties request permission
to defer their filing of comments on Enron's cost filing until 21 days
after any unfavorable ruling on the Enron Settlement, so as to conserve
their time and financial resources.\4\ California Parties further
assert that, if the Commission were to grant the motion, it would also
be appropriate to grant Enron a delayed six day reply comment period,
consistent with the six day reply period in the current comment
schedule.\5\ In addition, given the impending October 11, 2005 deadline
for filing comments on cost filings, California Parties request
expedited treatment of their motion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. Sellers of Energy and
Ancillary Services, 112 FERC ] 61,176 at Ordering Paragraph (E)
(2005) (August 8 Order).
\2\ See Cost Recovery Template, Docket Nos. EL00-95-000 and
EL00-98-000 (August 26, 2005).
\3\ The California Parties are the People of the State of
California, ex rel. Bill Lockyer, Attorney General; the California
Electricity Oversight Board; the California Public Utilities
Commission; Pacific Gas & Electric Company; and Southern California
Edison Company.
\4\ California Parties' Motion at 4-5.
\5\ Id. at 5 n.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. On September 28, 2005, Enron filed an answer supporting
California Parties' motion. In addition, Enron requested an extension
of time to file reply comments until nine days after the expiration of
California Parties' proposed revised comment period, if the Enron
Settlement were rejected and California Parties were to file comments
on Enron's cost filing.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Enron's Answer at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. We grant California Parties' motion, and we extend to all
signatories to the Enron Settlement permission to defer filing comments
and reply comments on Enron's cost filing until specified dates after
the Commission rules on the Enron Settlement. California Parties and
Enron aim to avoid devoting resources to a task that may prove
unnecessary for them, and for all settling parties, if the Commission
approves the Enron Settlement. Accordingly, we will allow California
Parties and other Enron Settlement signatories to defer filing comments
on Enron's cost filing until 21 days after the issuance of any
determination on the Enron Settlement. Similarly, we will allow Enron
to defer filing a reply to any deferred comments until six days after
the expiration date of the revised comment period. While Enron
requested nine days to reply to California Parties' comments because
``[t]he cost recovery filing is complex, and, if history is any guide,
the California Parties' comments will be detailed and voluminous,'' it
would be inequitable to grant the additional three days.\7\ Under the
current schedule, all other parties who made cost filings have six days
to reply to California Parties' comments on their cost filings, and
Enron offers no justification why California Parties' comments would be
more extensive on Enron's cost filing than any other cost filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Finally, we clarify that this deferral extends only to
California Parties, Enron and all other signatories to the Enron
Settlement. All remaining parties who intend to file comments on
Enron's cost filing must do so according to the
[[Page 59065]]
October 11, 2005 deadline, or forgo their opportunity to do so.
Similarly, Enron must file any response to those comments by October
17, 2005. The Commission is committed to completing the refund
proceeding as expeditiously as possible, which includes completing its
review of all cost filings, including Enron's, according to the
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
timetable set forth in the August 8 Order.
By direction of the Commission.
Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-5549 Filed 10-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P