ESCO "Confused" By "Frivolous" PULP Motion Seeking Sanctions, Says It Is In Full Compliance With PSC Order
August 29, 2017 Email This Story Copyright 2010-17 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • email@example.com
In a filing with the New York PSC responding to a motion for sanctions filed by the Public Utility Law Project due to an alleged failure to abide by a discovery order, Agway Energy Services said that it was "confused" by PULP's request and said that it is in full compliance with the relevant PSC order
"Upon receipt of the initial motion by the counsel for the Public Utility Law Project of New York, Inc. (PULP), Agway Energy Services (Agway) was confused," Agway Energy Services said
Agway Energy Services cited an August 3 order from the PSC addressing PULP's discovery requests which lays out a long history of a PULP motion to compel and the underlying practice.
Agway Energy Services said, "Of significant note is the background on page 3, which discussed the nature of the underling [sic] request for relief: 'On March 23, 2017, PULP filed a Motion to Strike General Objections and to Compel Discovery Responses (Motion to Compel) from ESCO parties. The Motion to Compel sought a ruling directing those ESCO parties servicing residential gas and/or electric markets to answer PULP's first and second sets of discovery requests served on the ESCOS [sic] on February 16, 2017 and February 22, 2017, respectively. The Motion to Compel also asked the presiding administrative law judges to strike the general objections of Constellation and Constellation New Energy, Inc.; Infinite Energy, Inc. d/b/a Intelligent Energy (Infinite Energy); Accent Energy Midwest Gas, LLC, Accent Energy Gas Supply, Inc. (collectively, Interstate Gas); and National Fuel Resources (NFR).'"
"Agway's confusion stems from two related issues: 1. Agway answered PULP's First and Second Discovery request on May 24, 2017; and 2. Agway is not listed in the companies against whom specific relief is sought," Agway Energy Services said
"To date, with the exception of the current Motion for Sanctions, PULP has never expressed any concern with the substance of the responses provided by Agway. In fact, the motion seeking the sanctions is the first time PULP has discussed the substances of its alleged concerns," Agway Energy Services said
"PULP has filed no motion to compel as to Agway. PULP has engaged in no discussion with Agway as to its concerns with Agway's discovery response. Instead, PULP jumps immediately to a motion for sanctions on an order that directs nothing from Agway by the very description of the Order," Agway Energy Services said
"This motion for sanctions is beyond frivolous -- it appears to be a deliberate misuse of the judicial process. PULP did NOT seek to have general objections struck as to Agway; PULP did NOT name Agway in the motion to compel that formed the basis of the Order; and PULP has NOT followed the rules and process for seeking a motion to compel as to Agway," Agway Energy Services alleged
"Accordingly, Agway is in full compliance with the Order, and respectfully requests that this motion be denied in full," Agway Energy Services said
"Additionally, and in the interest of restoring professionalism to this process, Agway will be willing to forego its own request for sanctions, fees and costs against PULP for this frivolous motion so long as the motion for sanctions is withdrawn today before 5 p.m. Otherwise, Agway reserves the right to seek sanctions for this abuse of the judicial process," Agway Energy Services said