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, 59064-59065 [E5-5549]

Download as PDF 59064 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 11, 2005 / Notices (Milford) filed an amended complaint requesting a Commission Order directing ISO New England to grant Milford’s Requested Billing Adjustments. Milford states this amended complaint amends the Complaint filed on August 31, 2005. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all parties to this proceeding. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for review in the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on December 19, 2005. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5–5553 Filed 10–7–05; 8:45 am] 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 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:40 Oct 07, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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. 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 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. 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 4 California Parties’ Motion at 4–5. at 5 n.8. 6 Enron’s Answer at 2. 7 Id. at 2. 5 Id. E:\FR\FM\11OCN1.SGM 11OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 11, 2005 / Notices 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 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 October 3, 2005. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings. Docket Numbers: ER01–931–005; ER05–1178–002; ER01–930–005; ER05– 1191–002. Applicants: Entegra Power Group LLC. Description: Entegra Power Group LLCfiled a response to FERC’s 8/30/05 deficiency letter. Filed Date: 09/28/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0001. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–1225–003. Applicants: New York Industrial Energy Buyers, LLC. Description: New York Industrial Energy Buyers, LLC submits an amendment to its 8/3/05 application for market-based rates. Filed Date: 09/28/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0008. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–1226–002. Applicants: New York Commercial Energy Buyers, LLC. Description: New York Industrial Energy Buyers, LLC submits an amendment change to its 8/3/05 application for market-based rates. Filed Date: 09/28/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0009. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–1328–001. Applicants: Central Maine Power Company. Description: Central Maine Power Co submits a revision to an unexecuted Local Network Agreements with Newark Group Gardiner Paperboard. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:40 Oct 07, 2005 Jkt 208001 Filed Date: 09/28/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0010. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–1510–000. Applicants: Northeast Utilities Service Company. Description: Northeast Utilities Service Co on behalf of Connecticut Light and Power Co et al submits a notice of termination to the Power Supply Agreement with Princeton Municipal Electric Department. Filed Date: 09/27/2005. Accession Number: 20050928–0216. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Tuesday, October 18, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–1511–000. Applicants: Noble Thumb Windpark I, LLC. Description: Noble Thumb Windpark I LLC submits its application for Order Accepting Initial Rate Schedule, Waiving Regulations, and Granting Blanket Approvals and Request for Expedited Considerations. Filed Date: 09/28/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0005. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–1512–000. Applicants: PJM Interconnection L.L.C. Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits an executed interconnection service agreement with Wellington Development-WDVT, LLC and West Penn Power Co. dba Allegheny Power. Filed Date: 09/28/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0014. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–1514–000. Applicants: Southern Company Services, Inc. Description: Southern Company Services, Inc on behalf of Southern Companies submits an informational filing to update FERC Annual Charge component. Filed Date: 09/28/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0012. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–1515–000. Applicants: Texas Retail Energy, LLC. Description: Application of Texas Retail Energy LLC for order accepting market-based rate tariff for filing granting waivers and blanket approvals. Filed Date: 09/28/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0003. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, October 19, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER05–651–003. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 59065 Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc submits a revised version of the Large Generator Interconnection Agreement with FPL Energy Cowboy Wind, LLC et al pursuant to Commission Order issued 8/25/05. Filed Date: 09/27/2005. Accession Number: 20050929–0088. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Tuesday, October 18, 2005. Docket Numbers: ER95–1441–022. Applicants: ConocoPhillips Company. Description: ConocoPhillips Co submits amended triennial market power analysis and revision to FERC Electric Tariff No. 1. Filed Date: 09/22/2005. Accession Number: 20050930–0208. Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on Thursday, October 13, 2005. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other and the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http:// www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission’s eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission’s Public Reference Room in E:\FR\FM\11OCN1.SGM 11OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 11, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59064-59065]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-5549]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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