The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20050118_1064.pdfDECISION MEMORANDUM TO:COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER COMMISSIONER SMITH COMMISSIONER HANSEN COMMISSION SECRETARY COMMISSION STAFF LEGAL FROM:WELDON STUTZMAN DATE:JANUARY 12, 2005 RE:CASE NO. PAC-01- DISMISSAL OF CASE INITIATED BY P ACIFICORP TO DETERMINE ITS WHEELING OBLIGATIONS TO SNAKE RIVER VALLEY ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION This case was initiated by PacifiCorp in 2001 when it filed a petition pursuant to Idaho Code ~ 61-332D. Section 61-332D was enacted in 2001 in response to litigation between PacifiCorp and Snake River Valley Electric Association (Snake River) regarding PacifiCorp obligation to wheel electric service to Snake River. Section 61-332D provides that electric suppliers are not required to provide wheeling service "if such service results in retail wheeling and/ or a sham wholesale transaction." An electric supplier that declines to furnish wheeling service may petition the Commission "for review of the electric supplier s action in respect to a request for such service. After PacifiCorp filed its Petition with the Commission, the court litigation between the parties continued. Accordingly, at the parties' request , this action before the Commission was put on hold. Late last year the federal case finally concluded when the United States Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by Snake River of a Ninth Circuit of Appeals decision. Staff contacted the attorney for PacifiCorp regarding its interest in pursuing its Petition filed in this case. PacifiCorp s attorney stated the finality of the federal court litigation, and the fact that the period identified by Snake River for its wheeling request terminated in April 2001 , rendered the case moot and PacifiCorp therefore does not intend to pursue its Petition. PacifiCorp attorney provided a letter to that effect, a copy of which is attached. DECISION MEMORANDUM Staff recommends, in light of the lack of interest in the case by the Petitioner, that the Commission dismiss this case and close the file. COMMISSION DECISION Should the Petition filed by PacifiCorp for an order determining its wheeling obligation to Snake River be dismissed? Weldon Stutzman Vld/M:PACEOIO6 ws2 DECISION MEMORANDUM 01-11-05 10:26 From-STOEL RIVES LLP +BO157B6999 T-4BB 02/03 F-266 STOEL ATfOltJlifTS ,,1 ~,,-. 201 S M::I.n S(r~ 5""11: 1100 SalE C.I) Utill'l 1..111 ma,n 8013.2531.$1 f;. lal.S7um :.loI:1 cam J anuazy 10, 2005 JOHN M. E~SON Dirt:ct (80J) $78.6937 jmenkssonce1~oc1.com Weldon Stutzman Deputy Attorney General Idaho Public Utilities Conunission 472 West Washington St. Boise, Idaho 83702-5983 Re:Case No. PAC-E-Ol-6; Petition of PacifiCorp re Snake River Valley Electric Association Dear Mr. StUtzman: As you know, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last year affimled the District Court decisions in the Snake River Valley Elecnic Association v. PacifiCorp anuuust case, and the U.S. Supreme Coun recently denied Snake River s petition for cenioran. The letter from Snake River which was the subject of that case, and the basis for PacifiCorp s Petition in the above-referenced matter, states that Snake River was requesting transmission service through April, 200l. (Exhibit B to PacifiCorp s Petition, anached hereto.) It is also our understanding that Snake River never sought Commission approval to provide electric service to customers served by PacifiCoIp. Idaho Code ~ 61-334B. In light of the finality of the antitrUst case, and inasmuch as the period identified by Snake River for its "request" for transmission service has long since passed, we believe the above-referenced matter is now moot. Very trUly yours, John M. Eriksson --- cc: Charles F. Wheatley OreSQn w.,"l'Iln~l",n C:..I.r~rn,.. U t. 1'\ I Q.1I