PSC Rebukes Retail Supplier's Petition Filed Entirely Under Seal

The Secretary of District of Columbia PSC rejected the submission of a "request for expedited opinion" filed by Constellation NewEnergy for which Constellation had sought confidential treatment for the entire filing.

On November 26, Constellation, "filed this pleading as confidential in its entirety, pursuant to Commission Rule 150, 'Confidential and Proprietary Information,' asserting that [its] relationship with [its] customer is confidential and that Constellation's competitive position might bi harmed if [its] Request for Expedited opinion was publicly filed," the Secretary said.

"While Rule 150 allows for the filing of some 'material' or 'materials' as confidential, this rule does not expressly allow for the filing of pleadings as confidential nor does it allow for the name of the pleader to be redacted or otherwise withheld as confidential. Your request is tantamount to filing a pleading under seal and, even in a court, such a request would only be granted upon a showing of an extraordinary circumstance or compelling need. The Commission, as a public agency, operates under the presumption that its records are open to public inspection. Even if the Commission agreed that filing under seal is appropriate in some circumstances, the justification you proffered is too generalized to warrant granting the request. I am, therefore, rejecting your pleading, and returning it to you," the Secretary said.

Constellation told Matters that the request was regarding an existing customer contract to verify its status under the revised RPS regulation. The PSC has since provided clarification on the issue.

"The initial request was rejected because the PSC concluded that it wasn't able to make a formal determination as a confidential pleading. The PSC instead provided informal guidance with respect to the question," Constellation said.