No. 15-0005

______________________________

In the Supreme Court of Texas

______________________________

ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY LLC, ET AL.,

Petitioners

v.

PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF TEXAS, ET AL.,

Respondents

______________________________

ONCOR’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXCEED WORD LIMITATION

______________________________

From the Third Court of Appeals at Austin, Texas

No. 03-11-00072-CV

______________________________

TO THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS:

Petitioner Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC (“Oncor”) respectfully

requests permission to exceed the 2,400 word limit for a reply to a response for a

petition for review. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i)(2)(E) & 9.4(i)(4).

1. This case is an appeal from a 2008 administrative ratemaking

proceeding involving Oncor before the Public Utility Commission of Texas

(“PUC”). The PUC issued a final Order on Rehearing on November 30, 2009,

from which several interested parties appealed to Travis County District Court.

FILED

15-0005

7/29/2015 11:25:10 AM

tex-6270462

SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, CLERK
2

The District Court signed its final judgment in January 2011. On further appeal,

the Third Court of Appeals, after considering motions for rehearing and en banc

reconsideration, issued a modified opinion on December 4, 2014, of its August 6,

2014 opinion. Oncor filed a petition for review in the Supreme Court of Texas on

February 19, 2015, raising six points of error. Two other parties to the case

below—Steering Committee of Cities Served by Oncor (“Cities”), and State of

Texas’ Agencies and Institutions of Higher Learning (“State Agencies”)—also

filed petitions for review. On June 25, 2015, six different parties, including Oncor,

filed responses to the three petitions. The three petitioners then filed a joint,

unopposed motion for extension of time to file replies, which this Court granted on

July 6, 2015. Replies are now due on July 30, 2015.

2. Oncor requests permission to exceed the 2,400 word limit for a reply

brief by no more than 600 words. Good cause supports this request.

3. Oncor requires a longer reply to address the multiple responses to its

petition for review. The Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that “[a] reply to a

response to a petition for review” may not exceed 2,400 words. Tex. R. App. P.

9.4(i)(2)(E) (emphasis added). However, the rules do not specifically address the

case of a single, combined reply to multiple responses. Here, Oncor must reply to

four responses totaling more than 16,000 words. PUC filed a 4,369-word response
3

addressing all six of Oncor’s issues,1and the remaining three respondents filed

responses concerning Oncor’s issues 1-3: Cities filed a 3,197-word response;

Texas Industrial Energy Consumers filed a 4,343-word response; and the Office of

Public Utility Counsel filed a 4,477-word response. In this case, Oncor requests to

exceed the prescribed word limit by only the amount necessary to fairly reply to

the points raised in each response.

4. The nature and complexity of the case also supports Oncor’s request

to exceed the word limitation. The issues in Oncor’s petition concern the

interpretation of multiple statutory provisions that are part of a complex regulatory

framework. The administrative record contains thousands of pages, and three

different adjudicative bodies have issued opinions on the issues. In view of the

complexity of the case, the number of issues presented, and the number of

respondents to Oncor’s petition, Oncor’s request for up to an additional 600 words

to reply is warranted.

5. Counsel for all parties have conferred by email and/or telephone about

this matter, and no party opposes the relief sought in this motion.

1 A portion of PUC’s response addressed issues raised in Cities’ petition for

review.
4

PRAYER

6. For the reasons above Oncor respectfully requests that the Court grant

leave to file a combined reply brief totaling no more than 3,000 words in length,

600 words in excess of the limit prescribed by Rule 9.4(i)(2)(E), and for such other

and further relief to which they may be entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

Howard Fisher

State Bar No. 07051500

Senior Counsel

Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC

1601 Bryan Street, Suite 23-035C

Dallas, Texas 75201-3411

214.486.3026 (phone)

214.486.3221 (fax)

howard.fisher@oncor.com

/s/ Thomas S. Leatherbury

Thomas S. Leatherbury

State Bar No. 12095275

Matthew C. Henry

State Bar No. 00790870

VINSON & ELKINS LLP

Trammell Crow Center

2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 3700

Dallas, Texas 75201

214.220.7700 (phone)

214.999.7792 (fax)

tleatherbury@velaw.com

mhenry@velaw.com

Jonah D. Jackson

State Bar No. 24071450

VINSON & ELKINS LLP

2801 Via Fortuna, Suite 100

Austin, Texas 78746-7568

(512) 542-8536 (phone)

(512) 236-3208 (fax)

jjackson@velaw.com

Counsel for Oncor Electric Delivery Company, LLC
5

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I hereby certify that on July 28 & 29, 2015, I conferred with counsel for all

parties by email and/or telephone regarding the relief requested in this motion. All

counsel indicated that they do not oppose the relief requested.

/s/ Thomas S. Leatherbury

Thomas S. Leatherbury

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that the foregoing document was electronically filed and served on

July 29, 2015, on the following counsel of record:

PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION

Elizabeth R. B. Sterling

Office of the Attorney General

Environmental Protection Division

300 W. 15th Street

Austin, TX 78701

Elizabeth.sterling@texasattorneygeneral.gov

ALLIANCE OF TXU/ONCOR

CUSTOMERS

Alfred R. Herrera

Jason Wakefield

Herrera & Boyle PPLC

816 Congress Ave., Suite 1250

Austin, TX 78701

(512) 474-1492

aherrera@herreraboylelaw.com

jwakefield@herreraboylelaw.com

OFFICE OF PUBLIC UTILITY

COUNSEL

Christiaan Siano

Office of Public Utility Counsel

1701 N. Congress Ave

Suite 9-180

Austin, TX 78701

Christiaan.siano@opuc.texas.gov

STEERING COMMITTEE OF

CITIES SERVED BY ONCOR

Thomas L. Brocato

Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle &

Townsend PC

816 Congress Ave., Suite 1900

Austin, TX 78701

tbrocato@lglawfirm.com
6

STATE AGENCIES & INSTITUTIONS OF

HIGHER LEARNING

Katherine H. Farrell

Office of the Attorney General

Administrative Law Division

Energy Rates Section

300 W. 15th Street

Austin, TX 78701

(512) 475-4237

katherine.farrell@texasattorneygeneral.gov

TEX-LA ELECTRIC

COOPERATIVE OF TEXAS INC

Mark C. Davis

John T. Wright

Holland & Knight

1005 Congress Ave., Suite 950

Austin, TX 78701

mark.davis@hklaw.com

john.t.wright@hklaw.com

RAYBURN COUNTRY ELECTRIC

COOPERATIVE, INC.

Campbell McGinnis

Shawn P. St. Clair

McGinnis Lochridge & Kilgore

600 Congress Ave., Suite 2100

Austin, TX 78701

cmcginnis@mcginnislaw.com

sstclair@mcginnislaw.com

CENTERPOINT ENERGY

HOUSTON ELECTRIC, LLC

Macey Reasoner Stokes

Baker Botts L.L.P.

One Shell Plaza, 910 Louisiana

Houston, TX 77002

macey.stokes@bakerbotts.com

TEXAS INDUSTRIAL ENERGY

CONSUMERS

Debora Alsup

Phillip Oldham

Benjamin Hallmark

Thompson & Knight LLP

98 San Jacinto Blvd., Suite 1900

Austin, TX 78701

debora.alsup@tklaw.com

phillip.oldham@tklaw.com

benjamin.hallmark@tklaw.com

/s/ Jonah Jackson

Jonah Jackson