[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 67 (Friday, April 6, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18237-18238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-8488]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IN01-5-000]


Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. El Paso 
Natural Gas Company, El Paso Merchant Energy-Gas, L.P., and El Paso 
Merchant Energy Company; Order of Investigation

Issued April 2, 2001.
    Before Commissioners: Curt Hebert, Jr., Chairman; William L. 
Massey, and Linda Breathitt.

    Pursuant to the authority of 18 CFR 1.b (2000) and at the 
recommendation of FERC's General Counsel, the Commission is instituting 
a formal, non-public investigation into the apparent disclosure of non-
public information and/or documents filed in Docket No. RP00-241-000. 
As discussed below, the Chief Administrative Law Judge (Chief ALJ) is 
designated to conduct the investigation and to report the results of 
the investigation to the Commission, along with any recommended 
remedies, within 30 days of the date of issuance of this order.
    On April 4, 2000, the Public Utilities Commission of the State of 
California (CPUC) filed a complaint under section 5 of the Natural Gas 
Act (NGA) \1\ against El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso Pipeline), 
El Paso Merchant Energy-Gas, L.P., and El Paso Merchant Energy Company 
\2\ (jointly, El Paso Merchant). The complaint asserts, inter alia, 
that three transportation contracts between El Paso Pipeline and El 
Paso Merchant for approximately 1,220 MMcf/day of firm capacity to 
California (El Paso Contracts) raise issues of possible affiliate 
abuse, of anti-competitive impact on the delivered price of gas and the 
wholesale electric market in California.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. Sec. 717d (1994).
    \2\ Effective January 1, 2001, El Paso Merchant Energy Company 
changed its name to El Paso Merchant Energy, L.P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The procedural background of this proceeding is fully described in 
the Commission's Order Denying Rehearing and Affirming Protective Order 
that was issued January 10, 2001 (January 10, 2001 order) \3\ and will 
be addressed in this order only briefly. On June 28, 2000, the 
Commission issued an Order on Complaint Requiring Responses to Data 
Requests (June 28, 2000 order).\4\ Pursuant to that order and the terms 
of a confidentiality agreement, El Paso Pipeline and El Paso Merchant 
provided to CPUC and filed with this Commission under seal certain 
information in response to the data requests approved by the 
Commission. El Paso Pipeline and El Paso Merchant sought privileged 
treatment of the information pursuant to section 388.112 of the 
Commission's regulations (18 CFR 388.112 (2000)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. El 
Paso Natural Gas Co., 94 FERC para. 61,021 (2001).
    \4\ Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. El 
Paso Natural Gas Co., 91 FERC para. 61,312 (2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 31, 2000, CPUC filed a motion for a protective order, 
asserting that other parties to this proceeding should be given access 
to the information provided to CPUC and this Commission in compliance 
with the June 28, 2000 order. On September 15, 2000, the Commission 
issued the requested protective order (September 15, 2000 Protective 
Order).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. El 
Paso Natural Gas Co., 92 FERC para. 61,225 (2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the January 10, 2001 order, the Commission, inter alia, required 
El Paso Merchant to provide Protected

[[Page 18238]]

Materials \6\ to parties that executed the Protective Order and 
appropriate Non-Disclosure Certificates (January 10, 2001 order).\7\ 
After reviewing the Protected Materials, Southern California Edison 
Company, Pacific Gas & Electric Company, and Southern California Gas 
Company filed comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Under paragraph 2 of the September 15, 2000 Protective 
Order, ``[a] Participant may designate as protected those materials 
which customarily are treated by that Participant as sensitive or 
proprietary, which are not available to the public, and which, if 
disclosed freely, would subject that Participant or its customers to 
risk of competitive disadvantage or other business injury.''
    \7\ Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. El 
Paso Natural Gas Co., 94 FERC para. 61,021 (2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 26, 2001, an article entitled ``Deal for Use of Gas 
Pipeline Stirs Dispute on Competition'' was featured in The New York 
Times. The article makes detailed references to ``sealed documents'' 
filed in Docket No. RP00-241-000 and obtained by The New York Times. 
Such references have raised issues of whether improper disclosure of 
Protected Materials or otherwise non-public materials has occurred.
    The Commission is instituting an investigation to determine whether 
improper disclosure of Protected Materials or otherwise non-public 
materials has occurred and whether the September 15, 2000 Protective 
Order, any Non-Disclosure Certificates executed pursuant to the 
September 15, 2000 Protective Order or the Commission's regulations at 
sections 388.112 and 3c.2 have been violated (18 CFR 388.112 and 3c.2 
(2000)). In conducting the investigation, the Chief ALJ has all powers 
conferred under section 1.b of the Commission's regulations, including 
the authority conferred under sections 1b.13 and 1b.14 (18 CFR 1b.13 
and 1b.14 (2000)).
    The Commission orders: The Chief ALJ shall conduct a formal, non-
public investigation pursuant to 18 CFR 1b.5 (2000), with all the 
authority conferred under 18 CFR 1.b (2000), including the authority to 
subpoena witnesses conferred in 18 CFR 1b.13 and 1b.14 (2000), as 
discussed in the body of this order. The Chief ALJ shall report non-
publicly the results of the investigation to the Commission, along with 
any recommended remedies, within 30 days of the date of issuance of 
this order.

    By the Commission.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-8488 Filed 4-5-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M