Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices 63853

1 16 U.S.C. 824e (1994).

2San Diego Gas & Electric Company, et al., 92

FERC ¶ 61,172 (2000), reh’g pending (August 23

Order).

3Order Directing Staff Investigation, 92 FERC

¶ 61,160 (2000). The order directed staff to complete

the investigation and report the findings to the

Commission by November 1, 2000.

4Parties that intervened in the SDG&E complaint,

Docket No. EL00–95–000, are considered to be

parties in the consolidated hearing proceeding. See

August 23 Order at 61,608.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket Nos. EL00–95–000 and EL00–98–

000]

Order Announcing Expedited

Procedures for Addressing California

Market Issues

October 19, 2000.

Before Commissioners: James J. Hoecker,

Chairman; William L. Massey, Linda

Breathitt, and Curt He ́bert, Jr.

San Diego Gas & Electric Company,

Complainant, v. Sellers of Energy and

Ancillary Services Into Markets Operated by

the California Independent System Operator

and the California Power Exchange,

Respondents; Investigation of Practices of the

California Independent System Operator and

the California Power Exchange.

On August 23, 2000, in the

consolidated dockets listed above, the

Commission issued an order initiating

hearing proceedings under section 206

of the Federal Power Act 1 to address

matters affecting bulk power markets

and wholesale energy prices in

California.2 The Commission held the

hearing in abeyance, however, pending

the results of a separate staff fact-finding

investigation, ordered by the

Commission on July 26, 2000, of the

conditions in electric bulk power

markets (including volatile price

fluctuations) in various regions of the

country.3 In the August 23 Order, the

Commission directed staff to focus its

fact-finding investigation on California

and the Western region as soon as

possible; the Commission stated that it

intended to issue a further order in the

captioned dockets after it reviews the

outcome of the staff investigation

related to California markets to take into

account the staff investigation findings,

as appropriate, and to address or further

refine the issues it was setting for

hearing, as appropriate.

Because of the need for expeditious

action to address the serious issues

affecting California electric power

markets and California consumers, and

to provide guidance to persons whose

interests may be affected by decisions in

these dockets, the Commission is taking

the unusual step of announcing in

advance the procedures it expects to

follow over the coming weeks to move

forward in these proceedings:

• On November 1, 2000, the

Commission plans to hold a special

meeting for purposes of considering the

issuance of a proposed order in the

captioned dockets that proposes specific

remedies to address the issues set for

hearing in the August 23 Order and that

directs any further procedural steps

deemed necessary or appropriate. The

Commission also will place in the

public record of these dockets the staff

investigation report on California and

the Western region.

• The Commission will give all

interested persons approximately three

weeks to intervene 4 and to comment on

the Commission’s proposed remedies or

on other remedies that they believe

should be adopted, and to provide any

additional factual information or

arguments to supplement the record.

Comments filed may also address any

facts or issues discussed in the staff

investigation report that is placed in the

public record of the captioned dockets.

• On November 9, 2000 (during the

comment period on the proposed

remedies), the Commission expects to

hold a public conference to discuss

proposed remedies. A transcript of the

conference will be placed in the public

record of the captioned dockets. A

separate order will be issued to specify

time of the conference and the manner

for seeking participation in the

conference.

• The transcript of the Commission’s

September 12, 2000 public conference

conducted in San Diego, California, in

Docket No. EL00–107–000, and any

written comments filed in that docket,

will be placed in the public record of

the captioned proceedings.

• Based on the record developed in

the captioned dockets, including the

staff investigation report and all

comments and additional facts and

information placed in the record, the

Commission anticipates issuing, by the

end of this calendar year, an order

adopting and directing remedies (to the

extent those remedies are within our

jurisdiction) to promptly address to the

extent possible the identified problems

adversely affecting competitive power

markets in California and, if necessary,

ordering any further proceedings to

develop remedies to other identified

problems.

The Commission reminds all

interested persons that this is a

contested, on-the-record proceeding,

and that the Commission’s regulations

concerning ex parte communications

apply. Generally, this means that no

person may make any off-the-record

communication to a Commissioner or to

any other Commission decisional

employee in this proceeding. An off-therecord communication means any

communication relevant to the merits of

the proceeding that, if written, is not

filed with the Secretary and served on

the parties or, if oral, is made without

reasonable prior notice to the parties in

the proceeding and without the

opportunity for such parties to be

present when the communication is

made. See 18 CFR 385.2201 (2000).

By the Commission. Commissioner He ́bert

concurs with a statement attached.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

He ́bert, Commissioner concurring:

I support this order because it gives the

people of California an indication of the

timetable for FERC action following our

staff’s investigation of this past summer’s

prices. In a democratic society, government

owes citizens the duty to account for its

actions and the means for them to affect

policy. I would go a step further, however.

Rather than wait for November 1 to release

the findings of our staff’s investigation, I urge

the Chairman to release the completed report

now. Open government requires it; fairness

does as well. The people of California should

have as much time as possible to digest our

staff’s findings and consider the options

presented.

Justice Brandeis often remarked ‘‘Sunshine

is the best disinfectant.’’ Let the sun shine on

our staff’s report. It can only help heal the

raw emotions rampant in the State of

California. I hope that the Commission will

proceed in the right path from now on. I,

therefore, concur.

Curt L. He ́bert, Jr.,

Commissioner.

[FR Doc. 00–27386 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. GP01–1–000]

Shell Deepwater Development Inc., et

al.; Notice of Petition for Declaratory

Order

October 19, 2000.

Take notice that on October 16, 2000,

in Docket No. GP01–1–000, Shell

Deepwater Development Inc., Shell

Deepwater Production Inc., and Shell

Offshore Inc. (collectively: Shell

Producers) filed a petition for a

Declaratory Order from the Commission

finding that the services rendered

through 15 offshore production

complexes (see list below) are exempt

63854 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 25, 2000 / Notices

1Regulations under the Outer Continental Shelf

Lands Act Governing the Movement of Natural Gas

on Facilities on the Outer Continental Shelf, Order

No. 639, 65 FR 20354 (Apr. 17, 2000), FERC Stats.

& Regs. 31,514 (2000), 91 FERC 61,019 (2000), order

on reh’g, Order No. 639–A, 92 FERC 61,077 (2000).

from the reporting requirements of

Order Nos. 639 and 639–A,1 for the

reasons set forth in the petition. The

subject petition is on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

1. The West Delta 143 Production

Complex

2. The Bullwinkle Production Complex

3. The Boxer Production Complex

4. The Enchilada (Garden Banks 128)

Production Complex

5. The South Timbalier 300 Production

Complex

6. The Bud Production Complex

7. The Ram-Powell Production Complex

8. The Spirit Production Complex

9. The Eugene Island 331 Production

Complex

10. The Mississippi Canyon 311

Production Complex

11. The Eugene Island 158 Production

Complex

12. The High Island 154 Production

Complex

13. The High Island 179 Production

Complex

14. The Brazos A–19 Production

Complex

15. The Main Pass 290 Production

Complex

The Shell Producers contend that

each of the above-referenced production

complexes should qualify under Order

No. 639’s feeder-line exemption, and

that certain of these facilities should

qualify under either the single-shipper

or shipper-owner exemption in Order

No. 639. The Shell Producers also

contend that Order No. 639’s singleshipper and shipper-owner exemptions

require clarification, and request that

the Commission find that producer

participation in the Minerals

Management Service’s royalty-in-kind

(RIK) program will not cause otherwise

applicable Order No. 639 exemptions to

terminate.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

protest said filing should file a motion

to intervene or a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC

20426, in accordance with sections

385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s

Rules and Regulations. All such motions

or protests must be filed on or before

November 15, 2000. Protests will be

considered by the Commission in

determining the appropriate action to be

taken, but will not serve to make

protestants parties to the proceedings.

Any person wishing to become a party

must file a motion to intervene. Copies

of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection in the Public Reference

Room. This filing may be viewed on the

web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/

rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for

assistance). Beginning November 1,

2000, comments and protests may be

filed electronically via the internet in

lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR

385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions

on the Commission’s web site at http:/

/www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–27338 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RP01–45–000]

Total Peaking Services, L.L.C.; Notice

of Request for Exemption

October 19, 2000.

Take notice that on October 13, 2000,

Total Peaking Services, L.L.C. (Total

Peaking) in compliance with the

Commission’s September 28, 2000 order

in Docket No. RM96–1–016, and

pursuant to Rule 212 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure, 18 CFR 385.212, tendered for

filing a requests for waiver of section

284.12(c)(2)(ii) of the Commission’s

regulations, which requires pipelines to

implement imbalance netting and

trading on their systems.

Total Peaking states that its shippers

do not incur imbalances netting trading

to avoid cash-out charges because Total

Peaking does not have a cash-out

mechanism.

Total Peaking states that copies of the

filing have been served upon each

person designated on the official service

list compiled by the Secretary in Docket

No. RP00–460–000, as well as any

affected state commissions.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

protest said filing should file a motion

to intervene or a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, NE., Washingotn, DC

20426, in accordance with Sections

385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s

Rules and Regulations. All such motions

or protests must be filed on or before

October 26, 2000. Protests will be

considered by the Commission in

determining the appropriate action to be

taken, but will not serve to make

protestants parties to the proceedings.

Any person wishing to become a party

must file a motion to intervene. Copies

of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection in the Public Reference

Room. This filing may be viewed on the

web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/

rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for

assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–27341 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket Nos. RP01–55–000 and RP01–37–

000 (Not Consolidated)]

WestGas InterState, Inc., Equitrans,

L.P.; Notice of Request for Exemption

October 19, 2000.

Take notice that on October 10, 2000,

WestGas InterState, Inc. (WGI), and

Equitrans, L.P. (Equitrans) tendered for

filing separately their petition for

exemption from the imbalance trading

requirements of 18 CFR 284.12(c)(2)(ii),

of the Commission regulations, which

requires pipelines to implement

imbalance netting and trading on their

systems.

WGI and Equitrans states that copies

of this filing have been served on their

jurisdictional customers and public

bodies.

Any person desiring to be heard or to

protest said filings should file a motion

to intervene or a protest with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC

20426, in accordance with Sections

385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s

Rules and Regulations. All such motions

or protests must be filed on or before

October 26, 2000. Protests will be

considered by the Commission in

determining the appropriate action to be

taken, but will not serve to make

protestants parties to the proceedings.

Any person wishing to become a party

must file a motion to intervene. Copies

of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection in the Public Reference

Room. This filing may be viewed on the

web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/

rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for

assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–27345 Filed 10–24–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M