ML20005A280

Order Shortening Comment Period on Second Supplemental Offer of Settlement.Offer Is Identical to First Supplemental Offer Filed 801008,except for Agreement Between Central & Southwest Co & DOJ

ML20005A280
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas, Comanche Peak
Issue date:	06/24/1981
From:	Head D FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
To:
Shared Package
ML20005A270	List: ML20005A280
References
EL79-8, NUDOCS 8106300153
Download: ML20005A280 (2)

Text

_ _. ___ _

1s . .

, P UNITED STATES OF AMERICA f

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Central Power & Light Company, et' al. ) Docket No. EL79-8 i

ORDER SHORTENING COMMENT PERIOD q

,p (June 24, 1981) , ,

On June 22, 1981, the Central and Southwest Companies (CSW) filed a second supplemental offer of settlement, together with -

a motion seeking to abbreviate the comment period on this .

second supplemental offer. The grounds for the motion to abbreviate .

are that the second supplemental offer is identical to the first supplemental offer filed October 8,1980, except insofar as the second offar contains an agreement between CSW and the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), to only party which had raised a contested issue within the meaning of Section 1.18(e) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules),

18 CFR Part 1. CSW alleges that this agreement does not prejudice the rights of the other parties but contains voluntary l commitments intended to increase the power supply options and planning abilities of other systems. Moreover, the motion

. points out that numerous comments were filed on the first supplemental offer, which also was discussed extensively at a two-day prehearing conference in' January 1981. Accordingly, because of the thorough scrutiny that the first supplemental offer has already received and because of the limited nature of the second supplemental offer, CSW urges that abbreviated comment periods are appropriate. Therefore, CSW asks that the -

parties be given 10 days from the date of the second supplemental offer for comments thereon, with S days further allowed for reply Comments.

The Presiding Judge has the authority under Section 1.12(c) of the Rules to adjust the time to respond to motions. Since the motion to shorten the comment period is procedural in nature cnd since good cause has been shown, the Presiding Judge will cct on the motion without awaiting responsive pleadings.

More ove r, this action is appropriate since the Presiding Judge has discretion, under Section 1.18(c)(2) of the Rules, to alcer the comment periods on offers of settlement. Should any party object to the granting of the CSW motion to abbiaviate and to the change in the comment period, they may request an extension Cr seek reconsideration of this order.

t , l l

DC-A-26

[**.- ,

"" "S P00R ORIGINAL

-- ~

f.- 2 -

Since, as noted above, there is good cause for the Csw action to abbreviate, it is hereby granted. Accordingly, che parties are given ten days, until July 2, 1981, to file comments on the second supplemental offer of settlement and are given five further days, until July 7, 1981, to submit reply comments thereon. -

~

. ~s SO 'JRDERED. ~~ *

l. l~ , -

1

. /c*.: l- ,; -

lDanielM. Head Administrative Law Judge

~ - - - - - -

1 i

a -

4

--. . ~ . . . - . . .

, g n

0 l# P00R ORIGINAL

.