|
|
Enron Mail |
On November 2, 2000, the California PUC issued an Order Instituting
Investigation into the adequacy of Sempra's, SoCal's and SDG&E's planning of SoCal's and SDG&E's gas transmission system and what measures should be taken to correct any deficiencies. The parties have been ordered to appear and show cause at a hearing (to be scheduled by the assigned ALJ) demonstrating that: - SDG&E has adequate gas and transmission supply for the 2000/2001 winter heating season, as well as the longer term throughout the year. If such supply is not adequate, SDG&E shall submit plans for obtaining an adequate supply. - SDG&E's gas and transmission supply is adequate to meet anticipated need for gas-fired electric generation. If not, SDG&E shall submit plans for obtaining adequate supply. - SDG&E's gas transmission service is not being adversely affected by interests of its corporate affiliates. - Recently added demands on SDG&E's capacity are not negatively impacting supply for SDG&E's customers, and are otherwise consistent with representations to the Commission. - SDG&E's current gas curtailment rules are just and reasonable; if not, SDG&E shall propose changes. A written response from the three parties on these issues is due on November 22. Other parties may file comments on the response within 10 days after the response is filed. The Commission also ordered SDG&E to evaluate whether an interim, interruptible program, which will provide cost incentives to those customers voluntarily electing interruptible service, is needed this winter. If so, SDG&E must submit a proposal for expedited Commission consideration. The OII represents the Commission's response to an Advice Letter filed by SDG&E requesting emergency review and approval of its proposal to temporarily revise the gas transportation service level elections of its large electric generation customers. The Advice Letter was heavily protested and was withdrawn by SDG&E. In my conversation with Mark Baldwin regarding our pending consulting agreement for monitoring California regulatory matters for Transwestern, I asked him to watch for Sempra's Nov. 22 filing and to advise whether he believes Transwestern should file comments or appear at the hearing that is to be scheduled. I will follow up with Mark, and provide you with a copy of the filing.
|