Mid-Atlantic Power Supply Association
Download 24.75 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- BEFORE THE MARYLAND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
- INTRODUCTION
- REQUESTED ACTION
- the grounds for the Commission’s conclusions.
| Mid-Atlantic Power Supply Association
Office of the Executive Director Phone: (201) 818-0936 6 East Main Street, Suite 6E, Ramsey, NJ 07446 Fax: (201) 818-4347 January 30, 1998 The Maryland Public Service Commission Daniel P. Gahagan The Executive Secretaries Office 6 St. Paul Street, 16th Floor Baltimore, MD 21202-6806
INQUIRY INTO THE PROVISION AND ) REGULATION OF ELECTRIC SERVICE )
Steven M. Kirk, Esq. Mid-Atlantic Power Supply Association 6 East Main Street, Suite 6E Ramsey, NJ 07446
COMMISSION’S INQUIRY INTO THE ) Case No. 8736 PROVISION AND REGULATION OF ) ELECTRIC SERVICE ) MOTION TO STRIKE OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND TO VACATE ORDER 73901 BY THE MID-ATLANTIC POWER SUPPLIERS ASSOCIATION OF COMMISSION INTRODUCTION The Mid-Atlantic Power Association (“MAPSA”) being a party to the above captioned matter, files this motion for rehearing of the Public Service Commission (“the Commission”) Order No. 73901, which was issued December 31, 1997, pursuant to the Annotated Code of Maryland 78 § 86(a); MD Regs. Code Title 20.07.02.08. The Commission commenced their restructuring proceedings more than three years ago with their September 19, 1994 Order No. 71459 which directed Staff to prepare a commentary and discussion paper on relevant regulatory and competitive issues. This discussion paper was released on November 1, 1994. From that point on the Commission issued a Staff report, solicited and received comments and conducted a series of hearings. Following a week of evidentiary hearings, the three year investigation culminated with the Commission’s December 3, 1997 issuance of Order No. 73834. Based on the informational Page 1
record, Order 73834 set out a time schedule for the implementation of retail customer choice for Maryland electric users. The schedule set forth in Order No. 73834 for the employment of load phase-in percentages subject to retail competition is as follows: Beginning April 1, 1999 33 1/3% Beginning April 1, 2000 66 2/3% Beginning April 1, 2001 100%
Page 2
ARGUMENT THE COMMISSION IMPROPERLY ISSUED ORDER NO. 73901 ISSUED WITHOUT EVIDENTIARY SUPPORT IN THE RECORD OR LEGAL REASONING, IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PARTIES’ RIGHTS OF DUE PROCESS AND FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE ANNOTATED CODE OF MARYLAND, ART. 78 § 20, AND 86 AND MUST BE VACATED BY THE COMMISSION. Md. Code Ann. art. 78 § 20© states in pertinent part: § 20. Proceedings en banc or in panels; delegated proceedings. © Finality of orders; appeal from proposed order. -- Orders of a panel constituted under subsection (a) shall be final. The legislative evidentiary hearings in this matter were conducted en bano by the Commission pursuant to subsection (a) of Art. 78 § 20. Section 85(a) of article 78 of the Maryland Code Annotated provides: (a) To be based on record, in writing and state grounds.-- Every decision and order of the commission in any contested proceeding shall be based upon a consideration of the record, shall be in writing and shall state the grounds for the Commission’s conclusions. Page 3 The December 31, 1997 order does not satisfy the requirements of sections 20 and 85(a) of article 78 of the Maryland Code Annotated. Specifically , the Commission contradicted its own order in contravention of the evidentiary record without affording any party the right to present additional or rebuttal evidence in support of the December 3, 1997 Order, thus violating MAPSA’s and the other parties due process. Additionally, the Commission acted without legal authority by not citing in its December 31, 1997 Order any new evidentiary ground or fact which supports its conclusions. Therefore the December 31, 1997 was in directed contradiction of Md. Code Ann. art 78 section 85(a) which states: “Every decision and order of the Commission in any contested proceeding shall be based upon a consideration of the record, shall be in writing and shall state the grounds for the Commission’s conclusions.” Essentially, the December 31, 1997 Order was a premature response to the Application for Reconsideration of the Maryland People’s Counsel and therefore deprives MAPSA’s due process. In addition to being premature and legally inappropriate MAPSA believes that the December 31, 1997 Order was an ill advised attempt to respond to concerns raised by only a small minority of parties without affording all other parties an opportunity to respond. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above the December 31, 1997 Order is arbitrary and capricious, without legal authority and violative of MAPSA’s and other parties due process. Page 4 However, the commission must view their decision in another light. Competition in the PJM is fast approaching. New Jersey and Pennsylvania have already set their phase-in schedules for retail competition. The Pennsylvania pilots have already begun, while New Jersey’s phase-in is scheduled to begin on October 1, 1998. The Commission’s delaying of retail competition has a far reaching impact on Maryland’s consumers and economy as a whole. The delay of competition will put Maryland’s industries at a competitive disadvantage as compared to other states in the region who have instituted retail electric competition. Therefore, the Commission needs to re-examine its goals and bring retail competition to Maryland as expeditiously as technically possible.
Page 5
Respectfully submitted, MID-ATLANTIC POWER SUPPLY ASSOCIATION By: ___________________________________ Steven M. Kirk, Esq. Mid-Atlantic Power Supply Association 6 East Main Street, Suite 6E Ramsey, NJ 07446 201-818-6782 Date: January 30, 1998 Directory: newIntranet -> Casenum Casenum -> In a memorandum dated July 16, 2001, the Technical Staff of the Commission filed its comments regarding this matter. Staff noted that the loan would consist of two amounts: $10,233,000 to be obtained from rus Casenum -> Mid-atlantic petroleum distributors association Casenum -> Case No. 8509(z) Casenum -> Reply brief of the staff of the maryland public service commission Casenum -> Hearing examiner's notice of extension of filing date Casenum -> Notice of revised procedural schedule Casenum -> 630 Martin Luther King Boulevard po box 231 Wilmington de 19899-0231 Casenum -> Registration Form Please forward this completed and signed application, and accompanying information to the following address Casenum -> Baltimore Gas And Electric Company By Casenum -> Request for investigation and petition for declaratory order against southern maryland electric cooperative, inc., Choptank electric cooperative and choptank home and business services, inc Download 24.75 Kb. Share with your friends:
|