Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 25 - TXU ElectricMEMO TO: FROM: MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION: 11TM 1P c� HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ROGER NELSON, CITY MANAGER ,� MAY 16, 2000 TXU ELECTRIC — DENY REQUEST TO CLOSE, MODIFY OR DELETE TARIFFS The City Council consider approval of a resolution to deny the application to close, modify or delete certain tariffs. of TXU electric FUNDING SOURCE: The denial of the tariff revisions will not impose a financial impact. BACKGROUND: On February 15th, the City Council passed a resolution suspending the effective date of the implementation of TXU Electric's request to close, modify or delete c and authorized intervention before the Public Utility Commission (PUC) in recognized as PUC Docket No. 22051. The effective datf their cewhat was rtain tariffs, Is' to May 30`h, 2000. TXU Electric provided a sum e was suspended from March Proposed changes to specific classes of service. (See At achment)filing that outlines the Geoffrey Gay, of the firm Lloyd, Gosselink, Blevins, Rochelle, Baldwin, & Townsend, been working on behalf of the Steering Committee of Cities Served b TXU has has advised the Cities, which suspended rates in February, to deny the Electric. He request. (See Attached Memorandum.) According to Mr. Gay, the Administrative Law Judge in charge of Docket No. 22051 released aProposaly TXU Electric that the docket be dismissed. That decision was baed on the oP C' decision recommending Previous docket, that it did not have the authority to modify or delete d tariffs determination, in a the Legislature's imposition (relative to SB 7) of a rate freeze. The PUC cause of Proposal for decision from the Administrative Law Judge on May g approved the of Grapevine, which has exclusive original jurisdiction, has been tadvised ver, the City request before May 30`h to avoid the implementation of the proposed tariffs. to deny the The Staff and the City Attorney recommend approval of the resolution t o deny TXU Electric's request. MYL May 10, 2000 (11:27AM) LLOYD, GOSSELINK, BLEVIN5, ROCHELLE, BALDWIN & TOWNSEND, P. C. W ATTORNEYS AT LAW II( CONGRESS AVENUC, 9UITI< 1800 807 SOUTH AUSTIN AVENUE* AUSTIN. TEXAS 78701 `•ir. Guy'c Dircct l•im: (51Z)3.2c53?5 GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 18926 TELEPHONC (S12) 322.5800 L^.11171) Sb'Ry�I61IIWTUMCOM TELEPMONE (SIS) 930-1317 TELECOPIER (512) ♦72-0532 *5Y A7oOINTM04T ONLY TNIEh10PLANDUM TO: TXU Cities That Took Action To Suspend TXU Electric's Application Revise Retail Rates/Riders FROM: Geoffrey NL Gay DAVE: April 17, 2000 RE: Recommended Action It is my recommendation that Cities' deny in all respects the relief requested by TXU Electric. Your city passed a resolution suspending the effective date of the implementation of T' -,U Electric's request to close or delete certain tariffs and authoring intervention before the PUC in what was designated as PUC Docket No. 22051. The 90 -day suspension period ends May 30; 2000 and Cities must take action before that date or the Company's proposed changes will become effective. On April 10, 2,100 the A . i msrrative Law Judge in charge of Docket No. 22051 released a proposal for decision recommending that the docket be dismissed. This recommendation was based upon the Commission's decision on March 24, 2000 to severe competitive energy services tariffs into PUC Docket No. 21987 which is the Competitive Energy Services Issues Docket severed from Tx -U's Business Separations Plan. The recommendation is also based upon the Commission's determination in Docket No. 21987 on March 24, 2000 that it did not have the authority to close or delete tariffs even if such tariffs were not being used, because of the Legislature's imposition of a rate freeze. While the Proposal for Decision must be approved by the Commissioners, I see no point in the Cities waiting any longer to take action. I believe the matter should be rejected at your earliest convenient time. The tariff matters raised by TXU Electric in this filing will be addressed in Docket.Ni o. 21987 or the transmission and distribution rate case (Docket No. 22350) the Company filed on hlarcb 31, 2000. Th"U Electric's request to modify or delete tariffs should be regarded as premature. 1659,.00`.2 0541,mmcQ0C41 %o* g TXU Electric Tariff Filing January 25, 2000 In anticipation of retail competition in the electric market in Texas as a result of the passage of the 1999 electric industry restructuring law, TXU has filed a change in tarif`s with the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) and each original -jurisdiction municipality we serve. This filing is being made to facilitate the move to retail competition in Texas. TXU is attempting to be proactive in our efforts to prepare for the start of competition. There are four types of changes proposed 1) Close certain retail tariffs to new customers for services deemed competitive energy services which we cannot provide after September 1, 2000 2) Close and/or modify optional retail tariffs with contract provisions that extend beyond the January 1, 2002 date of full competition or that are no longer necessary 3) Modify retail tariffs to limit contract term for basic rates to December 31, t 2001, and 4) Delete retail tariffs that are no longer being utilized Competitive energy services are customer energy service business activities which are capable of being provided on a competitive basis in the retail market. Examples include, energy efficiency services, energy audits, and guard lights. The electric industry restructuring passed by the Texas Legislature in 1999 requires that on or before September 1, 2000, an electric utility shall separate its regulated utility activities from its customer energy services The PUC initiated an industry rulemaking to identify those competitive energy services. As a result, TXU Electric has identified its competitive energy services and filed a plan with the PUG on January 10, 2000 to describe hove we will accomplish this separation. These changes will not impact anyone's rates. Rates were frozen effective September 1, 1999 in accordance with the electric industry restructuring law Additionally, the changes proposed in this tariff filing are designed to address new customers on these rates and do not directly impact current customers receiving service under these rates. However, the issue of how to handle existing retail contracts that extend beyond January 1, 2002 is currently being discussed by the PUC. TXU Electric plans to take proactive measures to handle these contracts through negotiations. Our plan is to review each existing retail contract and renegotiate the terms with each customer to either: 1) limit the contract term to December 31, 2001, 2) allow for contract termination by mutual agreement: or 3) allow both the customer and TXU Electric to terminate the contract with 30 days written notice, effective any time after December 31, 2001. ZOc—a ZO d 62q-1 + —w01d we6l:01 00—ZO—caa TXLT Electric Summary of Tariff Revisions Close Rate/Rider to new customers March 1, 2000 ED - Economic Development Service ET - Environmental Technology Service • GC - General Service Com GC1 - General Service Competitive Pricing • I - Interruptible Service • OL - Outdoor Lighting Close Rate to new customers January 1, 2001 • RLU - Residential Low Use Service • RTU - Residential Time -of -Use Service • RTU1 - Residential Time -of -Use Service ' RTU 1-M - Residential Time -of -Use Service Municipality Close Rate to new customers January 1, 2001 & Limit to December 31, 2001 t contract term GTUC - General Service Time -of -Use Voluntary GTUC-M - ry Curtailment General Service Time -of -Use Municipality Voluntary Curtailment Delete Tariff RTP - Real Time Pricing RTP -I - Real Time Pricing -Interruptible RTP -I-1 - Real Time Pricing - Instantaneous Interruptible Limit contract term to December 31, 2001 • ES - Enterprise Zone • GP - General Service Primary • GS - General Service Secondary • GTU - General Service Time -of -Use • GTU-M - General Service Time -of -Use Municipality HV - High Voltage Service • LPP -Non-Firm Energy Purchases from Qualifying Facilities R - Residential Service S - Standby Service SL - Street Lighting Service SPP - Small Power Production T - Temporary Service 51 01/25/00 RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS DENYING THE APPLICATION OF TXU ELECTRIC TO CLOSE, MODIFY OR DELETE CERTAIN TARIFFS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, on or about January 25, 2000 TXU Electric filed an application with the City of Grapevine to close, modify or delete certain retail tariffs effective March 1, 2000; and WHEREAS, the City of Grapevine adopted Resolution No. 2000-16 suspending the effective date of TXU Electric's application until May 30, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) has determined that it lacks authority to close or delete tariffs during a statutorily imposed rate freeze; and WHEREAS. the PUC's Administrative Law Judge in charge of the Docket No. 22051, TXU Electric's application to implement its proposed tariff changes in unincorporated areas, has proposed that the PUC dismiss the Company's application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAPEVINE, TEXAS: Section 1. That the relief requested by TXU Electric be denied. Section 2. That a copy of this resolution be sent to the local representative of TXU Electric. Section 3. That this resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage. APPROVED: ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: RES. NO.