UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Transcription

1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, and Riverside, California No Petitioners, v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Respondent. MOTION TO INTERVENE Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15(d), Southern California Edison Company (SCE) respectfully moves to intervene in the above-captioned docket in support of Respondent. This motion is made on the grounds that: 1. SCE is a transmission-owning public utility that serves more than 13 million people in a 50,000 square mile area of central, coastal, and Southern California. SCE s service territory includes more than 180 cities. As a investorowned utility, SCE has a public service obligation conferred by state laws to deliver electricity to its customers. Furthermore, SCE is a Participating Transmission Owner and market participant in the California Independent System Operator (CAISO).

2 2. SCE desires to intervene in this appeal to protect its interest and those of its customers. In the appeal, the petitioners challenge two orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that dealt with the Must-Offer Obligation and the categorization of the South of Lugo Transmission Path as a zonal rather than local constraint under the rules of the CAISO market. Under the FERC Order categorizing the South of Lugo Transmission Path as a zonal constraint, the cost responsibility of the Must-Offer Obligation will now be allocated to a number of load-serving entities, including Petitioners, rather than just to the load that SCE serves. Any modification of the categorization of the South of Lugo Transmission Path will impact SCE ratepayers. Further, because SCE is a Participating Transmission Owner and market participant in the CAISO, any further modification of how the Must-Offer Obligation is calculated will necessarily have an impact on SCE and its ratepayers. Thus, SCE s interests in these proceedings meet the standard for intervention under Fed. R. App. P. 15(d). 1 1 See Yakima Valley Cablevision, Inc. v. FCC, 794 F.2d 737, (D.C. Cir. 1986) (Rule 15(d) intervention granted to one directly affected by agency policy); New Mexico Dep't of Human Servs. v. Department of Health & Human Servs. Health Care Fin. Admin., 4 F.3d 882, 884 n.2 (10th Cir. 1993) (Rule 15(d) motion granted to intervenors with a substantial and unique interest in the outcome ); Bales v. NLRB, 914 F.2d 92, 94 (6th Cir. 1990) (Rule 15(d) motion granted to one with substantial interest in the outcome ); In re Grand Jury Investigation of Cuisinarts, Inc., 665 F.2d 24, 28 n.2 (2d Cir. 1981) (Rule 15(d) motion granted to one with significant interests in proceedings). 2

3 CONCLUSION SCE is entitled to intervene in these proceedings and respectfully requests that it be afforded all rights as a respondent. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Rebecca Austin Furman Jennifer R. Hasbrouck Southern California Edison 2244 Walnut Grove Ave. P.O. Box 800 Rosemead, CA (626) Attorneys for Southern California Edison Company Dated: December 13,

4 RULE 26.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Rule 26.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Circuit Rule 26.1 of this Court, Southern California Company (SCE) hereby discloses the following: SCE is an investor-owned public utility primarily engaged in the business of purchasing, generating, transmitting, distributing, and selling electric energy at wholesale and retail in the State of California. SCE is a subsidiary of its parent, Edison International, both of which have issued equity and debt securities to the public. SCE has common and preferred stocks outstanding. The common stock is held 100% by Edison International; the preferred stocks are publicly-held. There is no publicly-held company that has a 10% or greater equity interest in SCE, other than Edison International. Respectfully submitted, Dated: December 13, 2011 /s/ Rebecca Austin Furman Jennifer R. Hasbrouck Southern California Edison 2244 Walnut Grove Ave. P.O. Box 800 Rosemead, CA (626) Counsel for Southern California Edison Company

5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Michal Odorczuk, hereby certify that on December 13, 2011, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing motion to be served, by delivery in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, on counsel for petitioners and respondent: SERVICE LISTS FOR ER AND ER Office of the Solicitor Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Avenue NE Washington, D.C /s/ Michal Odorczuk Case Analyst Southern California Edison 2244 Walnut Grove Ave. P.O. Box 800 Rosemead, CA (626)

6 FERC Service List EL Non- Chrystina L Steffy FERC 888 1st St NE Washington, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA District of Columbia Roger Van Hoy Modesto Irrigation District PO Box 4060 Modesto,CALIFORNIA Stanislaus James C Feider Northern California Power Agency 180 Cirby Way Roseville, CALIFORNIA Placer MAURY A KRUTH Transmission Agency of Northern California PO Box Sacramento,DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Sacramento

7 FERC Sevice List ER Non- Kerry Hattevik CPUC 505 Van Ness Ave San Francisco, CALIFORNIA Chrystina L Steffy FERC 888 1st St NE Washington, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA District of Columbia Roger Van Hoy Modesto Irrigation District PO Box 4060 Modesto,CALIFORNIA Stanislaus James C Feider Northern California Power Agency 180 Cirby Way Roseville, CALIFORNIA Placer

8 FERC Combined Service List for EL and ER04-835