Texas Register, Volume 28, Number 14, Pages 2821-2988, April 4, 2003 Page: 2,848
2821-2988 p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
PART 2. PUBLIC UTILITY
COMMISSION OF TEXAS
CHAPTER 25. SUBSTANTIVE RULES
APPLICABLE TO ELECTRIC SERVICEPROVIDERS
SUBCHAPTER J.
TARIFFSCOSTS, RATES AND
DIVISION 2. RECOVERY OF STRANDED
COSTS
16 TAC 25.263
The Public Utility Commission of Texas (commission) proposes
an amendment to 25.263, relating to True-Up Proceeding. The
proposed amendment will implement the provisions of Public
Utility Regulatory Act (PURA) 39.262, which sets forth the re-
quirements for the final true-up of stranded costs.
The commission proposes to amend 25.263 by modifying sub-
section (d)(1) to establish the true-up filing schedule required
by PURA 39.262(c). As more fully discussed below, the pro-
posed schedule is based upon staff's assessment of available
resources, the complexity of the true-up filings, and factors re-
lated to each filing company's specific circumstances.
The proposed true-up filing date for Centerpoint Energy Hous-
ton, LLC (Centerpoint), Reliant Energy Retail Service, LLC, and
Texas Genco, LP is January 12, 2004. This date is effectively
consistent with the date specified in PURA 39.262(c) as the
date after which true-up filings may begin and it is also consis-
tent with Reliant Resources, Inc.'s option, exercisable in January
2004, to purchase the shares of Texas Genco common stock
owned by Centerpoint. If the timing of Centerpoint's true-up filing
is different from the date used to establish the option purchase
price, Centerpoint will be exposed to uncertainty regarding full
recovery of its stranded costs. Additionally, given the potential
magnitude of its stranded costs, a filing date of January 12, 2004
is proposed for Centerpoint because its stranded-cost proceed-
ing will likely be the most thoroughly litigated of all the true-up
filings and, consequently, will likely require the greatest amount
of resources.
For Texas-New Mexico Power Company (TNMP) and First
Choice Power, Inc., the proposed true-up filing date is March
31, 2004. This date is approximately two and one- half months
after Centerpoint's proposed filing date and thus allows much of
the processing in that case to have been completed. TNMP has
already sold its generation assets, and the apparent amount of
TNMP's stranded costs is considerably smaller than that of the
other companies filing for stranded-cost recovery. Additionally,
some elements of the true-up proceeding will not be at issue
in TNMP's filing (e.g., the capacity auction true-up adjustment,
potential inclusion of control premium, etc.). For these reasons,
the amount of resources required for TNMP's true-up filing is
not expected to be as great as that of the other stranded-cost
companies.
For AEP Texas North Company and Mutual Energy WTU, LP, the
proposed true-up filing date is May 28, 2004. This date is pro-
posed because it allows a number of months to pass after thefiling of the previous cases and thus allows much of the process-
ing of those cases to have been completed. Additionally, AEP
Texas North Company will not be filing for stranded-cost recov-
ery; the only two true-up items for AEP Texas North Company
and Mutual Energy WTU, LP are the "retail clawback" calculation
required by PURA 39.262(e) and the final fuel reconciliation.
The expected amounts at stake for these two items, in compari-
son to the amounts for all true-up elements in the other compa-
nies' true-up filings, are not expected to be significant. Accord-
ingly, the resources required for this true-up filing are not likely
to be substantial.
For AEP Texas Central Company (AEP Central) and Mutual En-
ergy CPL, LP, the proposed filing date is September 3, 2004.
This relatively late filing date is essentially based upon AEP Cen-
tral's specific circumstances -- that is, this date reflects the fact
that AEP Central has not yet definitively determined whether the
market valuation of its generation assets will occur by the sale of
the assets or by the issuance of stock pursuant to a stock valu-
ation or partial stock valuation methodology. In Docket Number
27120, Petition of Central Power and Light Company for Declara-
tory Order and Approval of Plan of Divestiture, in which AEP
Central (formerly Central Power and Light Company) sought a
declaratory order approving its right to sell nuclear assets for pur-
poses of stranded-cost determination, AEP Central estimated
that if it uses the sale methodology, the time required for sale
of all its generation assets will be approximately 18 months. Al-
ternatively, if AEP Central ultimately uses one of the stock valua-
tion methodologies allowed by PURA 39.262(h)(2) or (h)(3), the
time required for the issuance of any stock coupled with the sub-
sequent one-year minimum trading period will be approximately
the same 18-month period required by the sale process. Sim-
ply as a practical matter, therefore, the proposed true-up filing
date for AEP Central must reflect an approximate 18-month time
period because the company will not have a market valuation
of its generation assets before that time. Accordingly, the pro-
posed filing date for AEP Central and Mutual Energy CPL, LP is
September 3, 2004.
Darryl Tietjen, Director of Financial Analysis, Financial Review
Division, has determined that for each year of the first five-year
period the proposed section is in effect there will be no fiscal
implications for state or local government as a result of enforcing
or administering the section.
Mr. Tietjen has also determined that for each year of the first five
years the proposed section is in effect the public benefit antici-
pated as a result of enforcing the section will be an orderly de-
termination of the final reconciliation of certain amounts due to
the unbundled successors-in-interest of deregulated electric util-
ities. There will be no effects on small businesses or micro-busi-
nesses as a result of enforcing this section. There will be no
economic costs to persons who are required to comply with the
proposed amendment. The proposed amendment merely sets
up a schedule upon which the persons required to comply will
discharge existing duties under PURA 39.262.
Mr. Tietjen has also determined that for each year of the first
five years the proposed section is in effect there should be no
effect on a local economy, and therefore no local employment
impact statement is required under Administrative Procedure Act
2001.022.
Comments on the proposed amendment (16 copies) may be
submitted to the Filing Clerk, Public Utility Commission of Texas,
1701 North Congress Avenue, P.O. Box 13326, Austin, Texas
78711-3326, within 30 days after publication. Reply comments28 TexReg 2848 April 4, 2003 Texas Register
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas. Secretary of State. Texas Register, Volume 28, Number 14, Pages 2821-2988, April 4, 2003, periodical, April 4, 2003; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101027/m1/27/: accessed June 6, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.