COMMISSION WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND ) TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, ) Complainant, ) vs. )DOCKET NO. UG-971695 CASCADE NATURAL GAS ) CORPORATION, )Volume 1 Respondent. )Pages 1 - 12 --------------------------------- A prehearing conference in the above matter was held on April 17, 1998 at 9:30 a.m., at 1300 South Evergreen Park Drive Southwest, Olympia, Washington, before Administrative Law Judge DENNIS J. MOSS. The parties were present as follows: CASCADE NATURAL GAS CORPORATION, by JOHN L. WEST, Attorney at Law, 601 Union Street, Suite 4400, Seattle, Washington, 98101-2352; and PETER A. SCHWARTZ, Director, Planning-Rates, 222 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, Washington, 98109. WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION STAFF, by SALLY G. JOHNSTON, Assistant Attorney General, 1400 South Evergreen Park Drive Southwest, Olympia, Washington, 98504-0128. Kathryn T. Wilson, CCR Court Reporter P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S JUDGE MOSS: We are here today for the first prehearing conference in the proceeding captioned Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission v. Cascade Natural Gas Corporation, Docket Number UG-971695. My name is Dennis Moss. I'm the presiding administrative law judge in this proceeding. Today is April 17th, 1998, and we are convened in the hearing room at the Commission's offices in Olympia. This case concerns certain tariff revisions filed by Cascade Natural Gas Corporation to affect a general increase in the company's rates for gas service in the state of Washington. Broadly speaking, the issues concern the purchase gas adjustment and deferral amortization components of the company's rates. The cumulative effect of the proposed tariff revisions is an increase in annual revenues of approximately 8.6 million dollars. The proposed effective date is January 1, 1998. First order of business is to take appearances, and in our day of modern electric communications, I'll ask that in addition to your name, business address, and telephone number that you provide a facsimile number, and if you have an e-mail address that you use provide that for the record as well, and we'll start with the company. MR. WEST: My name is John West. I'm appearing for Cascade Natural Gas Corporation. My address is 4400 Two Union Square, Seattle, 98101. My telephone number is (206) 622-8484. My fax number is (206) 622-7485, and my e-mail address is west@millernash.com. MS. JOHNSTON: For Commission staff, Sally G. Johnston, assistant attorney general. My address is 1400 South Evergreen Park Drive Southwest, Olympia, Washington, 98504. Telephone number is (360) 664-1193. Fax, (360) 586-5522; e-mail sally@wutc.wa.gov. JUDGE MOSS: We don't have a representative for public counsel today? MS. JOHNSTON: Apparently not. I have not communicated with public counsel regarding that. JUDGE MOSS: And I have no motions to intervene. Is there anyone here who wishes to intervene? It does not appear that we are going to have any intervenors. Are there any other preliminary matters that we need to take up before getting onto, I guess, the procedural schedule? MR. WEST: Your Honor, the only other matter would be the request by the company for a protective order in the standard form since there will be confidential material involved without much doubt. JUDGE MOSS: Okay. MS. JOHNSTON: I would request that the discovery rule be invoked. JUDGE MOSS: As I remarked off the record, everyone here is familiar with the procedures, and you have all anticipated everything on my agenda here. Hearing no objection, and I think it's certainly well within the compass of the Commission's rules, the discovery rule will be invoked in this proceeding, and in like kind, I hear no adverse comment to the idea of a protective order, and the company does anticipate that confidential information will be required in the proceeding. Anything further on that? Okay, the Commission will issue a protective order. You referred to the standard form. I will simply let you know that the standard form is undergoing some changes right now. It is going to be essentially what you've seen before, but there will be some changes in language probably reflected in this order. That's an ongoing process within our division, but that will be issued. MR. WEST: Thank you. JUDGE MOSS: Off the record, we had a distribution of the company's prefile testimony. Staff, do you have that? MS. JOHNSTON: Yes, I do. JUDGE MOSS: I have a copy as well. There being no other parties, that seems to be covered. I also was handed, before we started this morning -- and I'll say in passing that I appreciate this -- was handed a proposed hearing schedule, which provides for dates which I understand are acceptable to the company? MR. WEST: That's correct, your Honor. JUDGE MOSS: Let me just ask, and I'll say here too, I know from reputation that you have all been here many times. I am relatively new at the Commission. I started in November, and I have done work as an administrative law judge for about the past six years in Florida before coming here, and before that, a bit of work in Washington DC for about 10 years. The procedure whereby we cross the company and then have the prefile direct testimony, my question to you simply is, is that the standard procedure for these types of cases rather than having all the testimony presented in a single hearing session? MS. JOHNSTON: Yes. It's usually staggered prefiling. JUDGE MOSS: Prefile, do the cross? MR. WEST: That's correct, sir. JUDGE MOSS: I'm on a learning curve so I appreciate your letting me in on that. Do you all desire to have any cutoff date for discovery, or are we going to allow that to proceed right up to the hearing? MS. JOHNSTON: I would suggest that no data requests be issued within five days of any hearing absent agreement of parties. Is that acceptable to you? MR. WEST: That's quite fine. Thank you. JUDGE MOSS: The normal response time for data requests under the rules is 10 days. Would that pose a problem if someone filed one six days in advance of the hearing? MS. JOHNSTON: I don't believe so. I would like to leave that open and give us that flexibility. I want to avoid the situation which we have seen in several other cases recently where staff is issued data requests the week just preceding a hearing when they're endeavoring to prepare their testimony. JUDGE MOSS: So no data requests later than five days before the hearing. I'll make that part of the order, and I will issue a prehearing order. It will include the procedural schedule that you suggested, and I will insert a date for that. MR. WEST: Subject to agreement between the counsel. JUDGE MOSS: I understood counsel were in agreement on this point. MS. JOHNSTON: But if Mr. West called me and said, "Please, will staff consider responding to this." JUDGE MOSS: Sure. The rules provide for informal agreements between parties with respect to discovery anyway, so you're free to go outside that, but we'll note that date in there, and if you guys want to go around it, I don't know why I would care. MS. JOHNSTON: You wouldn't. MR. WEST: Thank you. JUDGE MOSS: I understood too that some data requests are already outstanding; is that right. MS. JOHNSTON: That's my understanding. The company responded to all outstanding requests as of this morning. JUDGE MOSS: So things are already moving along. That's good to know. I did mention off the record -- and I will memorialize it now -- that the Commission will not sit in this proceeding, and so the normal procedure under our rules calls for an initial decision followed by an opportunity for administrative review on the petition followed by final order by the Commission. Do parties wish to waive the initial decision in this case? MR. WEST: The company would like to waive. MS. JOHNSTON: No objection. JUDGE MOSS: We will note that in the prehearing order that the initial decision was waived. I would normally put the question to public counsel whether we need specially designated hearing sessions to hear from the members of the public. In the absence of public counsel, I suppose I will put that question to staff counsel. MS. JOHNSTON: I would like the opportunity to contact public counsel to find out whether or not they're going to be participating on any level in this docket. I haven't had that opportunity yet; although, at this juncture I don't believe a public hearing will be necessary. JUDGE MOSS: I think in view of their absence from our prehearing session this morning that in the event that contact demonstrates that they do wish to participate and they feel the need for a separate hearing to take testimony from members of the public that they should make that request in writing so the company would have an opportunity to respond as would Commission staff, so you might pass that along to them in your conversation. MS. JOHNSTON: Okay. JUDGE MOSS: We've set a schedule for the evidentiary proceedings in accordance with the proposed hearing schedule of staff, which I will adopt for purposes of the prehearing order. For my information, what did the parties anticipate in terms of the number of witnesses? The company? MR. WEST: Probably just one, your Honor. JUDGE MOSS: Staff? MS. JOHNSTON: Probably two. Two or three, your Honor. JUDGE MOSS: Possibly three. Even so, what I'm thinking in terms of is, of course, the Commission has quite a bit of activity going on this year. The schedules are filling up for rooms already, and so I want to be sure that we block out sufficient time for our cross-examination session, but it does appear to me with that number of witnesses that the one day in each phase would be adequate. Unless someone tells me to the contrary, I will reserve rooms accordingly. MR. WEST: I would be surprised if it were any different than that. JUDGE MOSS: I think too we have a little flexibility in terms of room size. Since we only have the two parties participating, it would appear that if public counsel were to decide to join us that still would be a small enough group that it gives us some flexibility in that regard, and too, we're far enough out I don't think it's going to be a serious problem. As I look through my notes here, I don't see anything else in particular that we need to take up today, but I will ask the parties if there is anything that I'm skipping over that we need to consider this morning, or if there's anything that they wish to bring up at this time that we should consider this morning. MR. WEST: No, your Honor. I don't think there's anything else from the company's standpoint. MS. JOHNSTON: No. I think you've addressed everything. JUDGE MOSS: It's not unheard of that I miss a point. I want to remind the parties that fact stipulations are encouraged under the Commission's rules. I point you particularly to WAC 480-09-470, and parties are encouraged too to consider alternative dispute resolution and settlement discussions under WAC 480-09-465 and 470 in an effort to resolve their differences prior to hearing. We do ask, and I'll probably put a statement in the prehearing order to the effect that the Commission be kept informed of any progress in that regard. And, of course, we do have some flexibility in the procedural schedule. If we need to make accommodations, then bring that to my attention and we'll certainly try to do everything we can to facilitate those efforts by the parties. I will issue a prehearing order in a day or two. It will include the procedural schedule and other matters. Some of the things I normally include is the exchange of witness lists. Given the small number of witnesses, we may just dispense with that in this case. I will, however, ask you at the outset of the evidentiary proceedings to give me estimates of cross-examination time. That helps me manage the day, so be mindful of that as you go through the process. The prehearing order will remind you to have your exhibits ready. Probably all that will have been exchanged in advance. Again, it's a small proceeding. We will convene a session for half an hour or 45 minutes before the evidentiary proceedings to mark everything, take care of that, so we'll do that in both sessions that are scheduled. Okay. Anything else? Thank you all very much for being here. Let's go off the record. (Proceedings adjourned at 10:00 a.m.)