Don Allen Resnikoff Law LLC 5335 Wisconsin Ave. NW Suite 440 Washington, D.C

Transcription

1 Don Allen Resnikoff Law LLC 5335 Wisconsin Ave. NW Suite 440 Washington, D.C October 1, 2015 Ms. Brinda Westbrook- Sedgwick Public Service Commission of the District of Columbia Secretary 1333 H Street, NW 2 nd Floor, West Tower Washington, D.C PSC-CommissionSecretary@dc.gov Re: FC OPPOSITION OF D.C. PUBLIC POWER TO THE APPLICATION OF D. C. GOVERNMENT FOR A STAY OF THE PENDING RECONSIDERATION PROCEEDING AND TOLLING OF THE TIME PERIODS CONCERNING RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER NO Dear Ms. Westbrook-Sedgwick: With regard to the application of D.C. Government for a stay of the pending reconsideration proceeding initiated by Exelon Corporation and PHI and other Applicants with regard to the D.C. Public Service Commission s August 25 decision in the captioned case denying Exelon s application to merge with/acquire Pepco Holdings, I submit the attached statement in opposition of D.C. Public Power to a stay and the other relief requested by D.C. Government. 1

2 I am providing notice by to all parties noticed by D.C. Government concerning the Government motion. 15 copies will be delivered by hand to the Commission. Sincerely, Don Allen Resnikoff 2

3 BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN THE MATTER OF THE MERGER ) OF EXELON CORPORATION, PEPCO ) HOLDINGS, INC., POTOMAC ELECTRIC ) Formal Case No POWER COMPANY, EXELON ENERGY ) DELIVERY COMPANY, LLC AND ) NEW SPECIAL PURPOSE ENTITY, LLC ) OPPOSITION OF D.C. PUBLIC POWER TO THE APPLICATION OF D. C. GOVERNMENT FOR A STAY OF THE PENDING RECONSIDERATION PROCEEDING AND TOLLING OF THE TIME PERIODS CONCERNING RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER NO DC Government has filed a motion with the Commission seeking a stay of proceedings in response to the Reconsideration Application, including tolling the time period for reconsideration, for 30 days until November 4, 2015, from which date the parties shall have five business days to file their responses to the Reconsideration Application, if necessary, and other alternative related relief. All of this is to facilitate pending settlement discussions which are currently being conducted behind closed doors, without transparency, between the D.C. Mayor s Office and the proposed merger parties.

4 D.C. Public Power opposes the Government motion because it squelches the open debate on merger alternatives that the current Application for Reconsideration invites, and substitutes delay leading to a settlement proposal that is more likely to serve narrow interests of Exelon/PHI rather than the broad public interest. DCPP further opposes any extension of time or tolling as being unnecessary, burdensome, costly, and redundant to all parties. Any prospective settlement has been acknowledged by the Mayor's Office to require a new filing by the parties necessitating additional public review and new proceedings - a view with which we concur. Ironically, the Joint Applicants have argued that the Commission is obligated under applicable law to lay out an acceptable roadmap for the parties that would lead to Commission approval for the Exelon/PHI merger. The Joint Applicants legal argument builds on Commissioner Phillips comments in his separate opinion denying the current merger proposal, in which he suggested guidance to the parties from the Commission. The Joint Applicants argument invites open discussion in the context of the Reconsideration hearing of the array of merger options that are available. There are, in fact, merger arrangements that can be practically implemented that fully satisfy public interest concerns, in particular, DCPP s proposal to buy Pepco s DC-assets assets in a divestiture from Exelon/PHI. The result would be an independent D.C. based not-for-profit electric power utility serving the interests of the citizens of the District of Columbia. In this context, Joint Applicants argument concerning a road map is disingenuous. If such a road map were to arise from the Commission in response to a Reconsideration hearing, Applicants might expect the Commission to propose conditions that are more strongly in the public interest, consistent with its earlier Decision - or with DCPP s proposal - over conditions

5 that would favor Joint Applicant s narrow financial interests. But Joint Applicants also appear to be pursuing yet another track that could lead to a new Application less favorable to the public interest. In summary, DCPP urges the Commission to go forward with the hearing on the Reconsideration Application without delay, which will provide DCPP and others the opportunity to comment promptly and in a manner that will expeditiously lead to a D.C. electric power utility that best serves the citizens of the District of Columbia. Date: October 1, 2015 Respectfully submitted, Don Allen Resnikoff, LLC 5335 Wisconsin Avenue, NW Suite 440 Washington, D.C Donresnikoff@donresnikofflaw.com Phone

6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 1 st day of October, 2015, I caused true and correct copies of the foregoing Opposition of D.C. Public Power to the Joint Motion of the District of Columbia Government and Joint Applicants for a Stay or, in the Alternative, for an Extension of Time to Respond to the Application for Reconsideration of Order No to be electronically delivered to the following parties: Sandra Mattavous-Frye, Esq. Office of the People's Counsel th Street, NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC smftye@opc-dc.gov Frann G. Francis, Esq. Apartment and Office Building Assoc. of Metropolitan Washington th Street, NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC ffrancis@aoba-metro.org Peter E. Meier, Esq. Potomac Electric Power Company 701 Ninth Street, NW Suite 1100, 10th Floor Washington, D.C Peter.meier@pepcohold ings.com Olivia Wein, Esq. National Consumer Law Center 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 510 Washington, D.C owein@nclc.org Abraham Silvernan, Esq. NRG Energy Inc. 211 Carnegie Center Princeton, NJ Abraham.Silverman@mgenergy.com Anya Schoolman D.C. Solar United Neighborhoods 1826 Lamont Street, NW Washington, D.C Anya.schoolman@gmail.com

7 Richard Herskovitz, Esq. Associate General Counsel Public Service Commission of the District of Columbia 1333 H Street, N.W., 7th Floor East Washington, D.C rherskovitz@psc.de.gov Leonard E. Lucas, III, Esq. Office of General Counsel General Services Administration 1275 First Street, N.E., 5th Floor Washington, D.C leonard.lucas@gsa.gov Richard M. Lorenzo, Esq. Loeb & Loeb 345 Park Avenue New York, NY rlorenzo@loeb.com Brian R. Greene, Esq. GreeneHurlocker, PLC 707 East Main Street, Suite 1025 Richmond, VA BGreene@GreeneHurlocker.com Jeffrey W. Mayes, Esq. Monitoring Analytics, LLC 2621 Van Buren Avenue, Suite 160 Eaglesville, PA Jeffrey.mayes@monitor inganalytics.com Robert I. White, Esq. Nancy A. White, Esq. Squire Sanders Patton Boggs, LLP th Street, NW, Suite 300 Washington, D.C Nancy.white@squirepb.com Randy E. Hayman, Esq. D.C. Water & Sewer Authority 5000 Overlook Avenue, SW Washington, D.C Bruce R. Oliver Revilo Hill Associates, Inc Laketree Drive Fairfax Station, VA revilohill@verizon.net

8 Larry Martin Grid 2.0 Kimberly B. Frank, Esq. Kaye Scholer LLP 901 Fifteenth St. NW Washington, D.C Carolyn Elefant, Esq. Law Offices of Carolyn Elefant 2200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, 4th FL East Washington, D.C s/ Don Allen Resnikoff

9 4