Alright. I think we have everyone or close to everyone. And at this point, it's time to start regardless. So, Jennifer, if you're all set, let's go on the record. Good afternoon, everyone. This is Julia Mater. I'm the administrative law judge assigned to preside over this matter. And this is the time set for the telephonic prehearing conference in docket number E01933ADash25Dash0103
involving the application of Tucson Electric Power Company for the establishment of just in reasonable rates and charges designed to realize a reasonable rate of return on the fair value of the properties of Tucson Electric Power Company. We'll take appearances for the record, officially this time. So everyone can go ahead and unmute yourself so you're ready and just try to keep the background noise down. And we'll start with TEP. Good afternoon, your honor. Michael Patton, the law firm of Osborne Maladon, on behalf of Tucson Electric Power.
And with me on the phone are Brad Carroll and Megan Hill. Alright. And, Ruko? Thank you, your honor. Sarah Barrios Kuhl on behalf of Ruko, and with me in the room is Dan Szesky, our chief counsel. Okay. And for the Department of Defense and Federal Executive Agencies? Yes. Good afternoon. Kyle Smith on behalf of the United States Department of Defense and all other Federal Executive Agencies. K. And for Underground Arizona? Good afternoon. This is Daniel Dempsey with Underground Arizona. And the Arizona Large Customer Group?
Good afternoon. Thor Nelson and Seamus Crowley of the law firm of Holland and Hart on behalf of the AZLCG. K. And for, mister Corbin, are you with us? K. It does not appear that mister Corbin has joined today. And for Kroger? Good afternoon. Kurt Boehm appearing on behalf of the Kroger company. Right. And or Pima County? Alright. I don't believe we have anyone from Pima County for APS. No one from APS. Miss Reyes, I'll just let you list all the entities in your appearance. Good afternoon, your honor. Chanel Reyes from the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest.
Also with me is, my call counsel, Antonio Langowski. In this matter, we represent the citizen groups, which are Tonnojoni Ani and San Juan Citizen Alliance, the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, the Arizona PERG Education Fund, and Wildfire. Thank you. And for Arisaya. Good afternoon, your, your honor. Autumn Johnson on behalf of the Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association or ARASEA. Thanks. And for the state? Good afternoon, your honor. This is Andy McCoy on behalf of the state of Arizona. I'm here with Anthony Proano and Karen Potter.
And for Calpine Energy? Good afternoon, your honor. This is Greg Adams appearing on behalf of Calpine Energy Solutions. And for Walmart? Good afternoon, your honor. Justina Cavelio on behalf of Walmart. And for IBEW local eleven sixteen. Good afternoon, your honor. This is Clara Bustamante, and on the line is also my colleague, Margo Veranes, for the union. Thank you. And Hudbay Minerals? Good afternoon, your honor. Patrick Black on behalf of Hudbay Minerals. As I mentioned in our previous filing, Hudbay will not be actively participating in this,
hearing at this time. Okay. And Freeport Minerals as well? You're on top of Yes, your honor. Patrick Black and Caitlin Smith with the law firm Fenmore on behalf of Freeport Minerals Inc. K. Thank you. And for the city of Tucson? Good afternoon, your honor. This is Brad Forman appearing on behalf of the city of Tucson. K. And Tesla? Good afternoon, your honor. Court Rich from the Rose Law Group on behalf of Tesla. And for staff? Good afternoon, your honor. Bridget Humph excuse me.
Bridget Humphrey, Eli Gola, but Sean Bodkin on behalf of staff. Okay. Thank you everyone for that. I think we'll only ever do that one more time, so I appreciate it. So I want to go over just a few reminders and some logistical things, and then I have some questions. And we'll go around the room and get get everyone a chance to answer questions and share anything that they wanna share and raise any issues that they have. If you are planning to participate in a hearing via Webex for all or part of the time,
make sure that your email address is provided to our broadcast division specifically sent to them, and not just assume we have it from your notices. And make sure that Webex works for you either because you've done it many times or because you've conducted a test with our broadcast team. And make sure you talk to your witnesses in advance about the importance of speaking clearly and slowly, making sure they're muted when they're supposed to be, unmuted when they're supposed to be, and that they have a camera set up as close to their face as possible.
This is very important for our court reporter. The camera should be there very close or zoomed in as much as possible, so that our court reporters can read lips. That helps them a lot. If you plan on putting on any confidential testimony at the hearing, please let me know that today if possible so that we can start planning accordingly. And I I do discourage you from doing so unless it's it's really necessary just because of the logistical challenges and additional time involved in in doing that. A reminder that witness summaries should be filed five days before the witness is expected
to testify with the copies distributed, as directed in the procedural order that set the hearing. I started to see a few of those trickle in, make sure those do do get filed on time and distributed. Exhibit list should be filed today, and I've seen a lot of them come in. Maybe all of them at this point. I'm not sure. If you haven't filed yours yet, please put the table on one page if possible. That helps me a lot. And marked copies of all of the exhibits and the list needs to be provided
to the hearing division in Phoenix. Just one copy. If there are new exhibits at the hearing, please bring a copy for me if you are going to be in Tucson in addition to the marked copy that you've provided in Phoenix, just for anything that's new during the hearing. If you're not in Tucson or you're not coming to Tucson and you file a new exhibit, you don't need to provide an extra copy for me because I'm not gonna get it anyways. Just the single marked copy for the record delivered to Phoenix.
So just to clarify, I am in Tucson. I'm not going to Phoenix, and no one from Phoenix is bringing me anything before the hearing. So if I need to have something, someone someone needs to bring it to Tucson. I don't need to have the exhibits. Those should go to Phoenix. They no longer go to our court reporter. They're handled by the hearing division up in Phoenix. So because of that, I also won't have any copies available for witnesses to refer to at the hearing. So the the one marked copy that you're gonna give to the hearing division in
Phoenix is not gonna make it down to Tucson for witnesses to use during the hearing. So you are responsible for having copies of anything that your witness may need, whether it's their own testimony or that of others. And the parties can certainly coordinate and and probably should in that regard, so that there aren't 20 copies of everything floating around. But just know that I am not gonna have a copy that is available. Okay. For the first day of hearing,
we're going to do public comment first, and we're gonna treat it as if it's a separate event. We use a translator, and the less we say for that part of the process, the faster things will go. So we're not gonna take appearances. We're not gonna take do anything procedural. We're not gonna talk about anything until after public comment is over. And we will take a break in between public comments and the start of the hearing. It may be a ten minute break or it may be the lunch break depending
on, how many public commenters we have. So because of this, I don't have an expectation that everyone is either in the room or on Webex right away at ten because you're not gonna be needed unless you want to listen or participate in public comment. Not participate in the sense of hearing what people have to say and and thinking about it. Obviously not giving public comment. But, there is no way to predict how long public comment is going to go. So if you're if you decide that you're not going to be there right at
ten, still have to be paying attention one way or another so that you are ready to go when we're ready to go. And after the first day of hearing, we will we plan to start at 9AM, every day unless a party tells me at some point that there's a reason we need to start later. Also, I'm not intending for us to take any longer than a one hour lunch each day. Again, unless a party tells me that there's a reason on a particular day to have a longer lunch. For those of you who are gonna come down in Tucson,
the electrical outlet situation is is not ideal for having a large number of people plugging their laptops in. The outlets are far from the tables, and they there are few of them. So if you are going to need to have a laptop plugged in, you will be responsible for bringing extension cord, surge protectors, protectors, whatever you need. I do not believe we have a supply of anything like that in Tucson. I don't want to end early on the hearing days unless it's absolutely necessary.
I would like everyone to try to have people available that are next in line whenever that's possible so that we're not ending early a lot. Based on the schedule, I don't I don't see that happening. I think if anything, we'll have carryover. But, you just never know how things are gonna go, so let's try to be prepared. Last, the Arizona large customer group, Ruko in Freeport yesterday filed a motion for me to late file corrections to their server bottle testimony for mister Bieber. If you have an objection to that,
let me know when we go around the room. Given that it's just number corrections, as far as I can tell, not changes to the substance of the analysis or the arguments, it seems reasonable to me. So I will grant that at the end of this procedural conference unless, any legitimate objections are raised. So I have a few questions I wanna go over. I'm gonna go through each party one at a time. I'll ask my questions, and then that would be the time for you, to raise any issues that you have or tell me anything that you think I need to know. So, we will start with TEP.
And, again, I did receive the proposed witness schedule and the joint issues matrix. I do appreciate everyone who took the time to collaborate on making those two things happen, as a unified proposal. I do appreciate that. So, mister Patton, any corrections that need to be made to any of the testimony or the exhibits that TEP has filed? We are not aware of any, your honor, at this point. It's always possible as the witness prepares to testify, he'll see something.
But, we did not aware of any material changes at this point. Okay. And what about any objections to testimony or exhibits that have been filed by other parties? No objection to the pre file testimony, and we haven't had a chance to look at proposed exhibits that are coming in today. So we'd reserve our right to object to non pre file testimony exhibits. I just can't tell you right now having not seen all of them. And that's fine. And that this question will be the thing for everyone. I just wanna know if there's anything that you're aware of at this point in
time. It certainly doesn't mean that issues can't be raised later. Mister Patton, any motions that you need to make now or that you intend to make at the start of the hearing? No, your honor. Okay. And in terms of the order of questioning, remind me the company prefers to go last on. Yes, your honor. For the witnesses that we're presenting and and the other witnesses, we'll put them on direct and obviously have a chance to redirect. But for noncompany witnesses, we would request to go last.
Okay. And any other issues you wanna raise or questions that you have? I I wanna thank the parties for being very cooperative in putting together the both the proposed schedule and the the matrix. I think the schedule is as good as we could figure out. There's a couple heavier days, couple lighter days, and, hopefully, that will work out okay. We do suggest, your honor, if you can if things take a little bit longer, we need an extra day or two in week four that I don't know if the hearing room is reserved,
but we might, request that you do that just in case in an abundance of caution. So you would be talking about, like, May. Yeah. I think two two days just just in case. I'd it's hard to predict how these things will go with 20 parties and that many witnesses, but you you just never know. Okay. I will make every effort to do that. Alright. Anything else you can have? In in terms of confidential testimony, we had one witness that filed confidential testimony.
We don't intend him for him to say anything publicly about it. Maybe cross examination of him, but I don't know that the numbers would perhaps be relevant to that. So which are the confidential piece, away. So we'll deal with that, when we get to it. Okay. And just make sure that he's aware that he needs to stop and and wait before answering any questions that may elicit confidential testimony. And that goes for everyone, obviously, for if you think it may happen with your witness,
warn them ahead of time not to just start talking. Okay. Anything else, mister Patton? I think that's it. Thank you. Okay. Next, we'll go to Ruko. Any corrections to be made to any of the pre filed testimony that you're aware of other than, the surrebral testimony of mister Bieber? No. Not that we're aware of at this time. It is just as you say, your honor, we're we're relating to mister Bieber's testimony. Alright. Any known objections, to any testimony or exhibits? No, your honor. Not that we know of at this time. We're still reviewing,
the exhibits and, like, the company reserve our objections, but we were not anticipating any objections to pre file testimony. Any motions you wanna make now or that you know you will be making at the start of the hearing? None that we're aware of at this time, your honor. And does Ruko have a preference in terms of the order in which they ask questions on cross? I I would say that it might be helpful, if Ruko went last among the the intervener, but I'll leave that to your honor's discretion. So we we we don't have a a strong preference,
but we recognize that others may have fewer questions than Ruko. Okay. And I think that's fairly typical, right, that Ruko goes last before staff for most of the witnesses. That's my understanding, your honor. Alright. Any issues you wanna raise or questions that you have? I do want to alert your honor that Rugo does have some confidential exhibit. To the extent that we're able to, we'll try to avoid, confidential testimony, but if it does arise, we'll, let your honor know,
that we're going to to kind of be in that territory so that your honor can take the steps necessary. With respect to, mister Patton's, request for maybe setting aside, some additional hearing rooms for the additional days, we're hopeful that won't be needed. But we do note that the APS, pre hearing conference is set for May 13, so that would cause some difficulty with us at that at that time. And I think that's every So maybe we would do the fourteenth and fifteenth,
maybe a half day on the thirteenth. Do you think a half day on the thirteenth would be problematic? I think as long as we can avoid a direct conflict with APS prehearing conference, then there there aren't other times that I'm aware of, being problematic at the present time. Okay. And anyone else, while we're going around, let me know if you know of a conflict for the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth just so we make sure we get enough hearing days reserved. Okay. Anything else from Ruko?
I sort of an odd thing I just wanna put on your honor's radar, and it it's sort of a a personal thing. On the morning of the fit, at 10AM, I'm gonna have to touch a few buttons on my phone to try and, enroll my child in a school program. It's sort of one of those limited, capacity issues, and you have to just, like, enroll at that at that right at that moment. I'm gonna try to do that as we sit in the hearing, but I do beg the court's indulgence. I wish I could get someone else to do that for me, but it's unfortunately my registration is tied to the IP on my cell phone,
and I haven't been able to resolve that. Okay. Understood. Thank you for letting me know. Okay. Next, we will turn, to you, mister Smith, on behalf DOD. You can let me know if you have any corrections to be made to any of the testimony that's been filed or any objections to other testimony that's been filed. Not at this time. Any motions that you need to make now or intend to make later? Not that I'm aware of at this time. And does the DOD have a preference in terms of the order in which
it ask questions of witnesses? Not really. I don't expect that I'm gonna have a ton of cross for witnesses at the hearing on on many issues because a lot of our issues, I well, I'll just leave it at that. So, yeah, I don't really have much of a preference. Okay. And any issues you wanna raise or questions that you have? Nope. Not at this time. Oh, actually, I'll I'll take that back. With respect to the witness testimony summaries, how many physical copies should be sent to the commission of those?
So I I am not recalling off the top of my head the number, but I'm gonna pull it up briefly because you're probably not the the only one who has that question. So they get distributed to the commissioners. I don't remember if there's a specific number. Oh, there's not a specific number, which is probably why you have that question. Okay. So five commissioners. So it says commissioners and aides. I would provide two copies to each of the commissioner's offices, one for their aids and one for the commissioner.
It says copy shall be provided to me. That's not necessary. I'm not gonna get them. I should have excluded that from the order. And then parties of record, which would just be the normal, you know, either either they've consented to email service or they haven't and you treat it accordingly like any other filing. But in terms of, like, actual physical copies that need to go to the commission, let's say ten, two for each office. Thank you, your honor. Mhmm. And I apologize for that not being a little bit clearer or a little bit
more accurate. Lessons learned. Okay. Anything else from you, mister Smith? No? Okay. No. That was it. Alright. Thank you. Okay. Next, we'll turn to mister Dempsey with Underground Arizona. Any corrections testimony? Not right now. Thank you. Okay. Motions? Not right now. No. Preference in your order of asking questions at the hearing? I think we would prefer to be towards the end. We shouldn't have a ton of questions, but we're gonna have some. Okay. And any issues you wanna raise or questions you have?
Not right now. Thank you. Alright. Thank you. Alright. For a d large customer group, any corrections to testimony or objections to testimony? So the only correction is the, one that we have with the motion that's pending, which your honor has already addressed, and I appreciate that. But other than that, no other known corrections at this time. Okay. What about motion? I would no motions. I would note that you did inquire, though, about confidential issue. And on that note, mister Bieber has two portions of his testimony,
one in his q and a and one in his exhibit that are confidential. I don't know whether parties sort of like mister Patton. I don't know whether parties will ask questions of mister Bieber regarding those areas of his testimony, but I will certainly advise him to be cautious about that. For my part, I don't while there may be cross examination on those topics, I don't know that it will raise confidential issues. But, of course, it's up to the witnesses to direct that. The one thing, if you'll permit me,
your honor, that I would ask What what what what sorry, Crowley. Nope. Can I just interrupt you for one minute? Sorry. Jennifer? Sorry. Jennifer, do you need something? Yes. I just wanted to ask who was speaking. Oh, sorry. That was Jameis Crowley. No. Actually, it wasn't. That's my fault for not introducing myself. This is mister Nelson. Oh, apologies. Okay. Mister Nelson, you said? Okay. Go ahead. Thank you. My apologies to your honor and the court reporter that was not very polite of me. Okay. The the confidential issue I wanted to raise, and this also implicates,
mister Patton. In mister Bieber's direct testimony on page 23, because we provided information that was identified by TEP as confidential. He included a sentence in his testimony that was confidential. However, we subsequently noticed that mister Rademacher's rebuttal testimony at age 18 discussed that issue and was not identified as confidential. And so if if you'll permit me, I guess, I would just ask TEP to confirm whether or not that information,
which was previously submitted as confidential, could now be treated as public, which would then allow that portion of mister Bieber's testimony to also be public. Okay. I'm I'm not gonna put mister Patton on the spot to answer that question, but I I think he heard and he could take a look at that, and the parties can confer and clarify before, the hearing starts. Yeah. Very much appreciate that, your honor. And I do do understand your preference and the commission's preference for as much of this to be public as possible.
Okay. And do you have a preference in terms of the order of asking questions of witnesses across? I'm, your honor, I'm happy to ask to ask questions in any order that you prefer. I will say, though, because many people don't like it, I'm fine going first. So, you could put me down there, but happy to go anywhere that is your pleasure. Okay. Thank you. And any other issues you'd like to raise or any questions you have? Not at this time. Thank you so much. Okay. And I don't think mister mister Corbin joined us.
But, mister Corbin, if you're on the line, it's your turn. No? Okay. Alright. Next, we'll turn to Kroger. Any objections to testimony, corrections to be made to testimony, or motions? No objections, your honor. Okay. Preference in the order of that you ask questions? I I I don't have a preference. And any issues you wanna raise or questions you have? No issues at the time. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. We did not and we did not have anyone from Pima County or APS. Okay. Miss Reyes, I'll let you go next and,
speak on behalf of all of the various entities. So any objections to testimony or corrections to be made to testimony or motions? No, your honor. We have no corrections, objections, or motions. Preference in order of asking questions. No preference. We're not anticipating a great deal of cross examination, but it would be, convenient if we could have our clients in the same like, in order together. Okay. That makes a lot of sense. Okay. Any issues you wanna raise or questions you have? Yes. As, Ruko raised earlier, we're also involved, pretty heavily in the APS case.
So we would not be available the morning of May 13. And unfortunately, we're also not available the morning of May 14. However, we're not anticipating much cross examination or if any toward the end of the case. So if, your honor would allow, we may, be be excused during the times that we are unavailable. Yeah. That's certainly fine. And in terms of these extra days we're looking at scheduling, we can figure out later if needed who's gonna be there when and which hours we'll convene. I just, at this point, wanna make sure I get sufficient hearing days reserved.
So thank you for letting me know that. Any That's that's all I have. Okay. Alright. Miss Johnson, any corrections to testimony, objections to testimony, or motions? Not that I'm aware of at this time, your honor. Preference in the order in which you ask questions. We do not have a preference, but do very much appreciate having a set order, for all the witnesses in case we're unavailable for some time period. So we we know when we're going to be anticipated to go. That would be very helpful. Okay. That we can do. Alright. Thank you. And any issues you would like to raise or questions that you have?
I would just reiterate, we also are probably, like, almost everyone on this call are also in the APS. That's 10AM on May 13. And I just this was I did not know that we were required to print witness summaries. This is the first that I've heard of that. And so I just wanted to confirm that it is a requirement to provide 10 witness summaries to the Phoenix location of the commission. Is that correct? Yeah. So the the procedural order setting the hearing has that in there about copies. I I will say I think this is something that's sort of always been done where
these witness summaries have been, provided to the commissioners and their staff. And I I can't say I know much about the behind the scenes on how that works. Maybe miss Humphrey knows more when it's, staff's turn, she can say. So it's possible that they would be fine with an email copy if you reached out to their office, and asked. Online We've always just filed them we've always just filed them electronically. I've not for to debit any prior rate case. Okay. Well, my understanding is that we've always have the requirement.
Our procedural orders are all largely the same, so I didn't make this up. It's what's in our it's in our standard hearing order that copies are provided to the to the commissioners. And that may be sort of a relic. I I honestly don't know, but there is an expectation that the witness summary copies get get to the commissioners and their staff one way or another. But And is that is that due when the exhibits are due then? It's so it's what the what the procedural order says is to provide the copies when they're filed,
which is five days before the witness is expected to testify. I already filed my witness summary, but I can just make the copies when I take the exhibits. That's okay. That that would be my recommendation. But it like I said, it's possible that each office would be perfectly fine with an emailed copy. I I just don't know about the the inner internal workings and their preferences of the commissioner's offices. Okay. I don't have any other questions. Thanks. Okay. Alright. Next, we'll turn to, the state. Mister McCoy,
any corrections to be made to testimony, objections to testimony, or motions? No corrections to testimony, no motions, and no objectives objections from the state, your honor. Okay. A preference in terms of the order in which you ask questions? If possible, it'd be great to go, I guess, right before Ruko. I think thematically, we'll get on many of the same items. Okay. Mhmm. And any, issues you wanna raise or questions no. But I would like to say thank you to mister Patton for herding all the cats on the the issue matrix and the WIDA schedule.
That was very helpful. Great. Thank you. Okay. Next, we will turn to, Calpine Energy, mister Adams, I believe, we have. Yes. Mister mister Adams, any corrections, objections, motions? No. We have no corrections that I'm aware of, judge, and and no motions we're expecting to be filed. And a preference in the order in which you ask questions? I don't have any particular preference, your honor, as long as I have some, ex I have a good expectation when where I am in the order in advance. That'll be helpful. Okay. And
any issues you'd like to raise or questions that you have? No no questions. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Miss Cavalia, any objections, corrections, motions? Walmart does not have any. Thank you. And any, preference in the order you in which you ask No preference from us. Okay. Any issues or questions? No issues or questions. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Alright. And miss Bustamante for the union. Any objections to testimony, corrections, motions? No, your honors. Preference in the order in which you ask questions? We don't have a preference.
Okay. And any issues you'd like to raise or questions that you have? No. We we don't anticipate asking questions on confidential testimony or submitting anything to that effect. And that that's really it. Okay. Alright. Mister Black or miss Smith, on behalf of Hudbay and Freeport, any, corrections, objections, motions? Thank you, your honor. Nothing more than what's already been raised about mister Bieber's testimony. Okay. And a preference for, the order in which you asked question? We would ask that we, go right after the Arizona large customer group given our,
joint sponsorship with witnesses and likely, same topics to go over with witnesses. Okay. I don't like going first, so if mister Gibson wants to go first. Okay. Any issues you have or questions you'd like to raise? Not at this time, your honor. Thank you. Alright. Mister Borman, on behalf of the city, any corrections, objections, motions? Mister Borman? Okay. I I apologize. I thought I'd unmuted, and I kept muting myself. Can you can you hear me now? Yes. I can hear you. Any objections, corrections, or motions? No no none that we have identified.
Okay. And a preference in the order of questions questioning? Nope. We have no preference. Any issues you'd like to raise or questions you have? The only issue I'd like to raise is that I have another legal matter to attend to on Monday, April 27, and I would wish to be excused from the hearing that day. Our our witness is not, expected to, testify for at least another week, and so it should not pose an issue in terms of putting our person on, mister Catanzaro. I can file a motion to to be excused if that would be your preference.
But that's the only issue I have. Okay. Just letting me know is fine. So I've made a note of that that you will not be in attendance on, Monday, April 27. Seventh. That is correct. Thank you. Okay. Alright. Anything further, mister Boorman? No. I have nothing further. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Alright. Mister Rich, for Tesla, any objections, corrections, motions? Thank you, your honor. The only thing that I would, offer to you is that at this point, Tesla has not offered any, testimony, does not anticipate cross examining any witnesses or putting on any evidence.
And so I, with your permission, like, the ability to, not participate in the hearing, but certainly reserve the right to participate or drop by if for some reason we hear something that, requires us to to get involved. And by that, do you mean at this point, you you don't intend to participate in the hearing at all or just certain days? Right now at all, your honor. Okay. I I apologize. I spoke over you. And that's that's fine. I will make a note of that so that we're not,
waiting for you, but you are certainly welcome to join when you want. Great. I appreciate it, your honor. Any other issues you'd like to raise or questions that you have? No other issues. Okay. Alright. And last, we will turn to staff. Miss Humphrey, can you tell us first if you have any, insider information about the commissioner's preferences for witness summaries? I do not. I I'm not sure if that's an issue that, I think that all came up when we went from paper to electronic,
and I I'm not sure everything got cleaned up. But but I don't have any insight into that. I I can certainly inquire, after we finish the phone call and communicate with any parties who, who need to have that question answered, they can contact me. Okay. Thank you, miss Humphrey. Does staff have any corrections that need to be made to testimony or any objections or any motions? Staff does not have any changes to make to his testimony. I do believe we're going to have one objection slash motion, which mister Botkin will address. But I'd like to go ahead and clean up some of the housekeeping,
issues before we do that. Okay. And, among those, there are a couple of, clarifications that we need to include on the, order of witness, document that was filed. Okay. That document indicates that mister Parcel will be testifying via Webex on April 30. In fact, he will be there in person. Okay. Thank you. And then with regard to mister Smith's testimony, he is scheduled for the afternoon of May 5 and May 6. He will be traveling on May 7.
But if we run out of time for him on May, he can appear via Webex on May 8 for additional questions. Okay. Alright. I don't go ahead. Sorry. No. I don't have anything. Go ahead. Okay. I do have one other there are three staff witnesses, who who, have no issues according to the issues matrix that was filed. That would be Beckerman, Absher, and Madine. And in as much as as their their pre filed testimony doesn't doesn't address any contested issues,
we would propose that their testimony be stipulated to, and we would not intend to call them as witnesses. I'm pulling up my list of questions. And your honor, this is Sarah Barriosko with Ruko. I just wanna make sure I heard miss Humphrey correctly that she identified Beckerman, Abshire, and Nadine for the party to consider? That's correct, your honor. Okay. Miss Humphrey, I I did have one question for miss Medine. Is it possible that she can be made available on Webex? Absolutely. Okay. The other two, that's fine with me.
So I don't think we necessarily need to deal with that right now because I don't really wanna go around the room and ask everyone to agree to a stipulation. That'll just be easier the day of. So perhaps you can just work with the parties, and that can be stipulated to, at the start of the hearing or at the start of staff's case, whatever makes more sense. And and it doesn't mean that I wouldn't agree to a stipulation for the testimony of miss McEwen. I just did have one quick question I wanted to ask her. Okay. And what we can do with if if it would be alright, mister Beckerman and mister Absher are listed as appearing in person.
If If we really are not gonna have any questions, but somebody does want to question either of them, I we would like to have the option to present them via Webex. That's fine. Yeah. I think everyone who for which it makes more sense to appear via Webex can do so. Okay. And and one final that's I guess, one final clarification I would ask is with regard to the the order across, are you anticipating that the end would be Ruko then Steph then TEP? Yes. Okay. Just wanted to make sure of that. And then mister Bodkin will address the the objection slash motion that we have if
you're ready for that. Alright. Yep. We'll find out. Go ahead. You, your honor. So, staff objects to, witnesses with Madison and Reynolds direct testimony. The reason we object to this testimony is it it doesn't pertain to the batter at hand. They'll address policy issues that are being addressed in other forums, either potential litigation or commission meetings, and none of them are specific to the facts and circumstances of this case. Can can you say which testimonies again? Hi. It's witness Zwick, z e w I c k, witness Madsen,
m a d s e n, and witness Reynolds, r e y n o l d s. You object to their direct testimony and its entirety? Yes. So your argument is there's none there's nothing relevant in either of those testimonies to this proceeding? Oh, nothing in all three of those testimonies that I've reviewed, pertain to this matter at hand. They all are addressing broader policy issues, like, multivariate adjusters, formula rates, other jurisdictions, what they do, which doesn't pertain to the unique facts and circumstances of this proposed adjuster.
None of them are specific to the facts and circumstances of this matter's hand. Okay. I I have a hard time understanding how the policy issues aren't relevant. There's well, okay. I'm gonna do this. Miss Barrios, cool. Would you like to respond to that first? Yes. I would, your honor. So let let me take each one of these witnesses one by one. I will say that, the combined pre filed testimonies of, directors Wick, Dustin Madsen, and Stanley Reynolds, is directly relevant to this case. Each of those testimonies directly speak to TEP's specific proposal in its application and in
its case and not only relating to the ARAM. Miss Wigt has recommendations, for instance, relating to TEP specific lifeline program. Stanley Reynolds has specific information relating to his analysis of extensive data requests, submitted by TEP that relate to, bill analysis and affordability concern. And Dustin Madsen is Rugo's, primary formula rates witness. And in that respect, mister Madsen performed an extensive analysis of the particular
ARAM proposed by this company, including all of the company's testimony on the ARAM, the template, and the interaction of this company's, various adjusters and and operating expenses and a a myriad of information. Not only is all of this testimony relevant, but it would be a, a death blow to Ruko's due process right to, keep this testimony out. The other thing is that a a relevant objection under Arizona law, you know, it's a it's a low threshold for evidence.
What your honor views in the hearing, you can give it the weight that you think is necessary, but a but a relevant subjection with respect to this testimony as not being related to TEP is misplaced and, frankly, I'm I'm shocked to hear it from staff. I think it would be a a waste of time for me to go through and count up the very many times that there are specific references to TEP and its proposal in the testimonies that that staff is objecting to. I can say more, your honor, but I'll just finish with this.
There there is, an analysis that your honor will have to conduct about whether or not there should be a formula rate implemented in this case and the experience of other states' concerns about formula rates in other states. Some of the, results that, we've seen in other states that give rise to, some of the baseline for RUCO's protection proposed relating to TEP specific mechanism, it's not just policy, it's not not generalized, or conclusory statement not directed towards TEP.
So I I hope I can leave it at there, but if your honor is at all inclined, to consider staff's motion, I would suggest written briefing so that we can completely, document the record in anticipation of, what comes next. And we may need to extend the hearing date to accommodate that briefing, your honor. Okay. Thank you, miss Barrasco. So first, we can't extricate the policy issues in this case from from the non policy issues. Every party in this case has raised policy concerns.
So I I'm not frankly, I'm not even sure that means. So that said, there are also many other components of that testimony beyond each of those three testimonies, beyond just the policy issues. Like miss Barrio's school mentioned their stuff about Lifeline and it the motion is denied without prejudice, it at a minimum as being overly broad. There is absolutely no way that every component of those three testimonies is irrelevant. Given the long list of questions that I've come up with for those witnesses based
on that testimony, I can tell you that I think it's relevant. Now if staff would like to file a written motion that clearly outlines particular parts of those testimony that you believe are objectionable or irrelevant, you can do that, but we're certainly not gonna strike all of that testimony as irrelevant. That's I I just don't understand it. So I'm gonna have to see it in writing, and you're gonna have to point to particular, sections if you want me to find it irrelevant or objectionable on some other basis.
And if staff really does intend to do that, it needs to be done very quickly so that there's an adequate opportunity, by RUCO and any other party to respond. And I don't think anyone is particularly interested in delaying this hearing, for such things. So if it's gonna happen, it needs to happen quickly and it needs to be very specific and narrowly tailored to particular parts of testimony that you find objectionable. Okay. Anything else that staff has? No.
Nothing further. Thank you, your honor. Okay. Alright. Your honor, if I may? Yes. Regarding your honor's order that any objections be specific, Rugo would just ask that that include page and line numbers of the, of the testimonies so that we can identify them rather than just section, given the short time frame between when this hearing is supposed to start. That would be helpful. I agree with that. Thank you, miss Bright of School. Any any particular portions of the testimony that you're pointing to, we need page numbers and line numbers,
to make sure that everyone can be looking at the same spot and understand exactly what you're referring to. Any questions on that? No, ma'am. Okay. Alright. Miss Johnson, you have some Yeah. I just wanted to add that there's only three business days in between the TEP and the APS hearings. That's something that ERCA has been voicing concern about for some time. So, I mean, I I just can't stress enough that any delay, due to staff's motion in the hearing would be extremely prejudicial to the parties that are participating in both hearings. There would not be a way to delay the hearing and that would not very
substantially hurt us in the APS case. So thank you. I concur, miss Johnson. Thank you. Alright. I'm gonna just go back to you, mister Patton, one more time to see if anything has, you know, been stirred for you, anything that you would like to add at this time. I don't think I have anything to add at this point, your honor. Okay. Alright. I do not like to move forward with our rate case and get it get the hearing behind as, as scheduled. Okay. Thank you, mister. Alright. The motion for leave to file the corrected, sir, rebuttal testimony of mister Bieber is granted.
No one objected to it, and I find it reasonable. I do not have anything else. I'm gonna pause for five seconds. If anyone else has anything they would like to add, you can speak up now. Please identify yourself first. Okay. I am not hearing from anyone. So thank you everyone for your participation today. I will see everyone, next. Your honor? Yes. Go ahead. Oh, I I'm so sorry. I was I totally public the mute thing. This is Thor Nelson with the Arizona large customer group,
and I apologize. I had one, matter that I just wanted to raise that I forgot to raise when you went through me in this cycle. Okay. Go ahead. The, very quickly. So myself and mister Crowley intend to be at the hearing in Tucson. Both of us are admitted prohab viche. Our colleagues, miss King and mister Jensen, are licensed Arizona attorneys, and they may participate in portions of the hearing remotely. But, with your leave, I was hoping that they could be excused from the otherwise requirement to attend the entirety of the hearing.
Yes. That is fine. And likewise, your honor so much. And likewise, your honor. I I apologize. This is Sarah Barrios School from Ruko. Uh-huh. And just so your honor is aware, mister Pozewski is is going to be in person just for select days of the hearing, but we would ask, permission for him to appear remotely as needed. Yes. That's fine. Okay. And and your honor, something else that occurs to me, I have some family obligations this weekend. I I would ask that your honor direct staff if it's going to file its motion to do so by noon on Friday so that I can figure out
whether I need to adjust, some some things to to accommodate dealing with that motion. So we're supposed to start on Wednesday. So I think a deadline for staff to file it as opposed to your honor saying a relative might make some sense. Okay. Let's do this. Any such motion to be filed by staff shall be filed by noon on Friday, April 17. Any response to be filed by Ruko shall be filed by by 5PM on
April 21, which gives everyone a very narrow opportunity of time, to review things before the hearing starts on Wednesday morning, and we can address further arguments and the motion at the start of the hearing on, Wednesday, April 22. Alright. Any comments on that, miss Barrio Barrio School? Yes, your honor. I thank your honor for setting some, from deadlines. Hope this motions practice won't be necessary, but we would reserve our right to file an accelerated motion to continue hearing date,
depending on the scope and nature of the motion. It's just that file. But Okay. And and I understand that, but I think it is it's highly unlikely that we would continue this hearing. I just don't think that that is in the best interest of the parties or the public or the commission. I think if it take if it ends up taking a lot of time on Wednesday to address, then so be it. But I do think that this hearing needs to start on, Wednesday, April 2. But, of course,
the parties can file, whatever motions they wanna file. Thank you, your honor. Alright. Miss Humphrey, do you have anything you need to add? One moment, your honor, if I may. Okay. Your honor, this is Sean Cotton. I think so many large load task force meeting tomorrow and and other legal commitments that I have next couple days, I I won't be able to move that deadline. What I will do is I will I will make more oral motions at trial when those witnesses are are presented and their testimony is is requested to be admitted with specifics. Okay. Then we will deal with it at the time?
Your your honor, yes. I appreciate I appreciate that we all have limitation, and we're all we're all planning on doing other things to get ready for this hearing, but I would object to that. You know, I think that if staff is going to raise objection, to the whole of this testimony, that it does need to be in writing and before the sharing gets started so that Ruko can assess whether or not it needs to seek the relief of asking for a continuance or other relief that may be appropriate in the circumstances. Okay. I I appreciate that, miss Barresco, but
parties are always permitted to object to the testimony of a witness when that witness is called and begins presenting their testimony. So if that's when staff wants to do it, recognizing the time limitations involved, then I then we need to be prepared to address it at that time. I I think that's normal witness testimony and objections. And and I'm not gonna say that, they can't do that. I but I would caution anyone against making broad relevance objections.
They'll have to be specific at the time. And if we have to take a recess for parties to have an opportunity to, to look at those issues, then then that's what we'll have to do. Okay. Does anyone have anything further on that point? Your honor, can you hear me? Yes, sir. Yes. The one thing I would note, we do have a lot of interveners in this case. And I think we're all concerned about how long this case is going to take with with with so many, parties, that some parties, who don't appear in front of the commission a lot, may forget that the pre filed testimony is always admitted into evidence in this case
in these in these cases. And, a lot of time seems to be taken up in hearings with reiterating the the testimony that's already been submitted in pre file form, and and repeating that information on the stand. And it it seems to me, in my experience, that a lot of time could be saved by simply going over and over and over the testimony that's pre filed, and limiting it to more cross type questions and letting the the prefiled testimony stand. I don't know what what your thoughts are on that issue or honor,
but that's just something that I I suggest to the parties as a way of keeping us on track time wise. And I'll get off my soapbox now. Okay. And and, miss Humphrey, I absolutely agree with you, and I think probably everyone on this call agrees with you. So I will use this opportunity to remind everyone that I have read all the pre filed testimony, almost certainly all the parties and their attorneys have read all of the pre file testimony. We don't need to go over pre file testimony in great detail at the hearing
that we should be focusing on our our focusing our time on cross examination, delving into the more nuanced issues, asking questions where there's confusion, and not representing what is in the prefile file testimony. So that is everyone's reminder as you're preparing for the hearing, to direct your preparation in that regard, and I will make that reminder at the start of the hearing as well. Thank you very much, your honor. Okay. Alright. I'm gonna pause again for five seconds for anyone to speak up if they have
anything additional. Yes. Your honor, this is Kyle Smith. I have mister Nelson raised a a request that I feel like I need to make now. I am also an out of state attorney, and I've got my local counsel, Karen White, who has not been participating much in the proceeding. She's an air force attorney at a Tyndall Air Force Base, and I would request that she be excused from needing to attend the hearing. Alright. She is so excused. Thank you. Judge, this is Greg Adams for Calpine Solutions.
I'm I'm actually in the same, situation. So just, would also request that my local council be be excused. She she may attend some some days, but likely not not many or potentially any, if that's acceptable to you on also. It is. I will just say this as a blanket rule for everyone. If you have been admitted your local counsel is not required to appear for the hearing either in person or via Webex so long as you are present or you have told me on that
on a particular day you would like be excused. Okay. One more last chance. Okay. Thank you everyone for your participation today and for everyone who participated in helping get the witness schedule, and the joint issued matrix put together. I do appreciate that. Make sure those witness summaries get filed on time. And with that, thank you, everyone. We are adjourned and can go off the record. Please do not disconnect immediately in case our court reporter, Jennifer, has any questions. I do not have questions.
Thank you, your honor. Alright. Everyone can go ahead and disconnect. I will see you next week. Thank you.