ML19338E947

Petition for Leave to Intervene

ML19338E947
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas, Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/17/1980
From:	Fabrikant R, Favretto R, Kaplan D JUSTICE, DEPT. OF
To:	FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Shared Package
ML19338E942	List: ML19338E941 ML19338E947 ML19338E951
References
ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8010060349
Download: ML19338E947 (3)

Text

.

~K .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

)

Central Power and Light Company )

Public Service Company of Oklahoma )

Southwestern Electric Power Company ) Docket No. EL 79-8 West Texas Utilities Company )

)

i-f PETITION OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT l OF JUSTICE FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE I The United States Department of Justice (" Department")

herein represents that it has an interest in the above entitled

! proceeding and can mhow good cause to support its petition to intervene and, pursuant to Section 1.8 and of the Rules of Practic'e of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("Commis-I sion"), respectfully requests leave to intervene in and become i a party to this proceeding. In support of this petition, the

- Departmeic states

a

1. The Department, as the agency in the Executive Branch

of the United States Government charged by Congress with the

enforcement of the antitrust laws, has regularly appeared be-i fore this Commission to advocate policies which would preserve

! and promote competition and economic efficiency of regulated industries.

2. On February 9, 1979, Central Power and Light Company

("CPGL"), Public Service Company of Oklahoma ("PS0"), South-western Electric: Power Company ("SWEPCO"), and West Texas Util-ity Company ("WTU") filed with the Commission in the above captioned proceeding the " Application of Central Power and Light Company and Others for Exemption from State Commission

Orders Preventing Voluntary Coordination Pursuant to Section i 205 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, and 1 Interconnection of Facilities, Provision of Transmission Ser-vices and Related Relief Pursuant to Sections 202 210, 211 and 212 of the Federal. Power Act" ("CPGL Application"), requesting that the Commission issue an order requiring Texas Electric I

Service Company ("TESC0"), Texas Power and Light Company

("TPGL"), Dallas Power 4 Light Company ("DPGL"), all sub-

, sidiaries of Texas Utilities Company ("TU") and such other members of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas ("ERCOT")

as the public interest may require, to make physical connection of their transmission facilities with PSO and SWEPCO through

" Mode 4" alternating current synchronous interconnections.

8 010060Kd

3. On June 27, 1980, CPGL, PSO, SWEPCO, and WTU filed an

" Amendment to Application of Central Power and Light Company and Others for Interconnection of Facilities, Provision of Transmission Services and Related Relief Pursuant to Section 210, 211 and 212 of the Federal Power Act" (" Amended Applica-tion") with the Commission in the instant proceeding amending the proposal contained in the CPGL Application to request that the Commission order the construction of two direct current asynchronous electrical interconnections between the ERCOT and the Southwest Power Poul ("SWPP"), instead of the previously proposed alternating current synchronous interconnection, as

well as wheeling and other relief.

4. The construction of the two direct current asynchronous electrical interconnections between ERCOT and SWPP, as advo-cated by CPGL, PSO, SWEPCO, and WTU in their Amended Applica-tion of June 27, 1980, instead of the construction of alternating current synchronous interconnections between ERCOT utilities and SWPP utilities, as advocated in the CPGL Applica-tion of February 9, 1979, could have effects on utilities both in ERCOT and SWPP and throughout the southwestern United States that would be anticompetitive, inconsistent with the public in-terest and contrary to the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 ("PURPA").

5. Under the Federal Power Act, as amended by PURPA, the Commission must consider the pote.,tial effects on competition in ruling upon the Amended Application.

6. The Department's participation in this proceeding will facilitate the consideration of, and the development of a record on, the relevant antitrust law and policy issues which the Commission must address in making its findings on the Amended Application.

i 7. The position and interest of the Department will not be i adequately represented by any other person likely to be a party to this proceeding.

8. The Department accepts the record as it stands and re-quests only prospective participation in the proceeding.

9. Intervention in this proceeding by the Department will not unduly expand the scope of the proceeding or cause unrea-sonable delay.

4 4

WHEREFORE, the United States Department of Justice requests that it be granted leave to intervene herein and be treated as a party hereto for all purposes.

J Res ectfully submitted, Richard J. FafrM to Deputy Assi Want Attorney General An rust Division V /z ~

96nald A. Kaplan /'

Chief Energy Section aul-MMD Robert Fabrikant Assistant Chief Energy Section W

Nancy ~H. MpMillen s

d M 'NO A /fAM Frederick H. Parmenter David A. Dopifovid Y k. O&

Mildred L. Calhoun Attorneys, Energy Section Antitrust Division U.S. Department of Justice (Telephone Number: 202/724-6624 September 17, 1980 Washington, D.C.

l