DOCKET NO. UE-960299 PAGE 1
BEFORE THE WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND   )
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION,  ) DOCKET NO. UE-960299
        )
    Complainant,  ) SEVENTH SUPPLEMENTAL         ) ORDER GRANTING 
        ) PERMISSION TO          ) WITHDRAW
 v.       ) SPECIAL CONTRACT and
        ) DISMISSING PROCEEDING
PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT   )
COMPANY,      )
        )
    Respondent.   )
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   )

  On March 15, 1996, Puget Sound Power & Light Company (Puget or Company) 
submitted a special contract to the Commission for approval which would allow 
Puget to provide electric service to Intel Corporation (Intel), a new customer. 
The filing was made pursuant to WAC 480-80-335, the Commission’s special 
contract rule.  The request for a special contract claimed: (1) without the 
special rate Intel would not locate its manufacturing plant in Washington; (2) 
Intel considered Puget’s rates under tariff excessive; (3) the rate under the 
special contract provides for the recovery of all costs directly associated 
with the provision of electric service; and (4) the agreement does not result 
in undue discrimination between customers receiving like and contemporaneous 
service.
  
  Puget was represented by James M. Van Nostrand, attorney, Seattle.  The 
Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (Commission Staff) was 
represented by Sally G. Johnston, Assistant Attorney General, Olympia.  Robert 
F. Manifold, Assistant Attorney General, Seattle, appeared as Public Counsel.  
Clyde H. MacIver, attorney, Seattle, represented Industrial Customers of 
Northwest Utilities (ICNU).  Matsushita Semiconductor Corporation of America 
(Matsushita) was represented by Richard A. Finnigan, attorney, Olympia. 

  Prehearing conferences were held April 24, April 30, and June 17, 1996 before 
administrative law judges Marjorie R. Schaer and John Prusia.

  The parties filed an agreed issues list with the Commission on July 5, 1996. 
Testimony and exhibits of Commission Staff, Public Counsel, and Intervenors 
were due to be filed on August 22, 1996.  On August 21, 1996, the Commission 
received a letter from Puget asking the Commission to postpone action on this 
matter.  Puget was, at the time, seeking approval of a new Schedule 48 in 
Docket No. 960696.  Puget stated that if their proposed Schedule 48 was 
approved, Intel would consider taking service under that schedule rather than 
the proposed contract.  Parties in this docket agreed to Puget’s request; the 
Commission suspended the schedule.  The Commission approved Schedule 48 at its 
October 9, 1996 open meeting.

  On November 14, 1996, the Commission received a letter from Puget requesting 
permission to withdraw this filing. According to the letter, Intel has advised 
Puget that it intends to execute a service agreement to take service under 
Schedule 48, and has authorized Puget to withdraw the special contract filing.  
Puget asks for permission to withdraw the special contract in this proceeding, 
and for a Commission order terminating the proceeding. The Commission notified 
parties wishing to comment on the letter to respond by November 21, 1996.  No 
responses were received.

  The Commission will allow Puget to withdraw the special contract and will, by 
this order, terminate the proceeding.

ORDER

  THE COMMISSION ORDERS That the request by Puget Sound Power & Light Company 
to withdraw the special contract filing in Docket No. UE-960299 is granted. 
Docket No. UE-960299 is dismissed.

  Dated at Olympia, Washington, and effective this       day of November, 1996.

  WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION



        SHARON L. NELSON, Chairman
 


        RICHARD HEMSTAD, Commissioner



        WILLIAM R. GILLIS, Commissioner

NOTICE TO PARTIES:

This is a final order of the Commission.  In addition to judicial review, 
administrative relief may be available through a petition for reconsideration, 
filed within 10 days of the service of this order pursuant to RCW 34.05.470 and 
WAC 480-09-810, or a petition for rehearing pursuant to RCW 80.04.200 or RCW 
81.04.200 and WAC 480-09-820(1).