ORDER NO. 99-199

ENTERED MAR 12 1999

This is an electronic copy.

OF OREGON

DR 21

DISPOSITION: MOTION DENIED

On November 5, 1998, Columbia River People’s Utility District (CRPUD) filed a petition for a declaratory ruling pursuant to ORS 756.450. CRPUD asks the Commission to declare that CRPUD has an exclusive territorial allocation because of previous Commission orders. However, if the Commission determines that CRPUD does not have a currently valid territorial allocation, CRPUD asks the Commission to allocate a territory to CRPUD in this proceeding.

On January 4, 1999, CRPUD requested that this proceeding be held in abeyance with no further processing until CRPUD requests the proceeding commence again. CRPUD cited missing files and a pending judicial decision as reasons for the request for abeyance. CRPUD explained that this proceeding was filed as a result of what CRPUD considered to be an adverse judicial decision. That adverse decision has been appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals. CRPUD states that it probably will withdraw its declaratory petition in this proceeding if the appellate court decision is favorable. Rather than spend a lot of time and energy processing this case now, CRPUD requests that we wait until the issue needs to be decided.

No response to the request for abeyance was filed, and on January 20, 1999, administrative Law Judge Lowell Bergen issuing a Ruling granting the request to hold this proceeding in abeyance.

On January 28, 1999, Portland General Electric Company (PGE) filed a motion for clarification of the Administrative Law Judge’s Ruling. PGE contends that CRPUD's filing is in two parts, a request for a Declaratory Ruling in one part, and in the second part a request for a current territorial allocation contingent on a particular finding by the Commission. The request for a current allocation designation would only be activated if the Commission decided that it had not previously allocated an exclusive territorial allocation to CRPUD. PGE asks the Commission to issue an order now stating that CRPUD is not entitled to retain its original filing date if the alternative pleading becomes active.

We see no need to resolve the filing date issue at this time. This issue is not ripe for determination now; future events may or may not require resolution of this issue. It will be sufficient to fully explore the issue if CRPUD reactivates this proceeding and requests that the Commission issue a new territorial allocation. We also note that the record before us at this stage in the proceeding is meager. Significant issues should be resolved after developing a full record on which to base the order. There will be sufficient time to develop a full record on the issues if this proceeding becomes active again.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Clarification filed by PGE on January 28, 1999, is denied.

Made, entered, and effective ____________________________.

A party may request rehearing or reconsideration of this order pursuant to ORS 756.561. A request for rehearing or reconsideration must be filed with the Commission within 60 days of the date of service of this order. The request must comply with the requirements of OAR 860-014-0095. A copy of any such request must also be served on each party to the proceeding as provided by OAR 860-013-0070. A party may appeal this order to a court pursuant to ORS 756.580.