Post by red on Mar 25, 2006 7:39:45 GMT -8
Utilities accuse Pasadena plant of overcharging for electricity
www.sgvtribune.com/search/ci_3625944
The other municipal power companies targeted in the suit include Azusa Light and Water, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, the Modesto and Turlock irrigation districts, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, and the cities of Anaheim, Banning, Burbank, Glendale, Riverside, Santa Clara and Seattle.
As in Pasadena, Azusa officials argue the lawsuit is misguided.
Banning, Burbank, Glendale, Riverside, Santa Clara and Seattle.
"It seems to us they are just trying to corner us into a settlement," said Bob Tang, assistant director of Azusa Light and Water. "We do not believe we have any liability as far as the California Parties are concerned."
On the contrary, Tang argues Azusa is due $350,000 in refunds from energy sold into the market for which the city was never paid.
In response to a complaint from August 2000, FERC opened an investigation into whether Pasadena or Azusa used illegal trading tactics to manipulate energy prices. The commission ultimately dropped the cases for lack of evidence.
As in Pasadena, Azusa officials argue the lawsuit is misguided.
Banning, Burbank, Glendale, Riverside, Santa Clara and Seattle.
"It seems to us they are just trying to corner us into a settlement," said Bob Tang, assistant director of Azusa Light and Water. "We do not believe we have any liability as far as the California Parties are concerned."
On the contrary, Tang argues Azusa is due $350,000 in refunds from energy sold into the market for which the city was never paid.
In response to a complaint from August 2000, FERC opened an investigation into whether Pasadena or Azusa used illegal trading tactics to manipulate energy prices. The commission ultimately dropped the cases for lack of evidence.