[15:20] thanks testing done atomic
[15:26] dominic [Bell dominic dot dot
[15:39] dot dot
[20:24] testing testing
[20:29] >>
[28:51] testing testing?
[28:54] ?
[28:58] Dominic [Bell
[29:32] ringing] [Bell ringing] [Bell
[29:32] dominic.
[29:35] [Bell
[29:53] ringing]
[29:58] >> good afternoon everyone I
[29:58] hope everyone's doing well
[30:00] today is DECEMBER 14 and we
[30:02] will call this the hearing
[30:03] meeting to order.
[30:10] >> notice published AUGUST 28
[30:16] 26 this time and place was set
[30:17] for prehearing conference and
[30:22] docket number 202 626? Te the
[30:23] purpose of the agreement is set
[30:26] out to the notice.
[30:30] >> good afternoon.
[30:35] I am entertain dominic charles
[30:36] rehwinkel here on behalf of
[30:44] city gas and made an appearance
[30:51] along with andrea deas.
[31:00] >> great, thank you.>> good
[31:00] afternoon?
[31:00] I am beth keating
[31:03] I'm here for florida city.
[31:09] >> good afternoon
[31:10] commissioner, matthew vodrasek
[31:11] with the air force department
[31:11] here on behalf of federal
[31:14] executive agencies.
[31:14] >> maj. Thompson and alisha
[31:15] had sent.
[31:19] >>. Helton is here along with
[31:25] your general counsel adrian
[31:25] harper.
[31:26] >> thank you staff. Other any
[31:27] pulmonary matters we need to
[31:30] address before we get into the
[31:31] prehearing border.
[31:36] >> do you have any matters?
[31:40] See none, let's go to the
[31:44] prehearing order now. I will
[31:44] identify the sections and i
[31:45] want the parties to let me know
[31:46] if there is any corrections or
[31:50] changes that need to be made.
[31:51] I MAY go through it relatively
[31:51] quickly.
[31:55] Let me know if there is a
[31:55] change or correction that has
[32:00] to get made.
[32:00] Sections 1, two, three anything
[32:06] in those resections and
[32:06] changes?
[32:12] See none, let's go to section 4
[32:12] procedures and handling
[32:13] confidential information.
[32:26] >> when confidential
[32:26] information is used in the
[32:27] hearing parties must have
[32:28] copies for the commissioner,
[32:28] necessary staff and court
[32:29] reporter in red envelope
[32:29] clearly marked with the nature
[32:30] of contents. I staff count that
[32:31] results in approximately 16
[32:31] copies. Any party wishing to
[32:32] examine the confidential
[32:32] material not subject to an
[32:33] order of confidentiality shall
[32:40] be provided in the same fashion
[32:41] as commissioners, subject
[32:42] education of any agreement with
[32:42] the owner of the material.
[32:47] >> yes?
[32:51] Did you have something?
[32:52] >> at the end of the
[32:55] confidentiality paragraph,
[32:55] there is a paragraph that
[32:58] starts out, the conclusion of
[33:00] the portion of the hearing, the
[33:04] second sentence says
[33:05] confidential exhibit has been
[33:07] admitted into evidence.
[33:07] Copy provided to the court
[33:09] recorder shall be retained in
[33:11] the office of commission
[33:14] clerk's file.
[33:19] The reason I bring this up is,
[33:19] on a couple of recent large
[33:22] hearings we had a little bit of
[33:26] controversy about what the
[33:33] official confidential is for
[33:33] purposes of the file. At one
[33:36] point we assumed in the old
[33:40] days of court reporter was a
[33:45] suppository. We were told that
[33:46] we had to provide a copy to the
[33:46] clerk. I want to confirm the
[33:58] court reporter copy will be
[33:58] available.
[33:59] >> it's my understanding that
[34:00] language is added to the
[34:00] prehearing order to address
[34:01] issues that he is referring to
[34:04] . It's my understanding that
[34:08] the confidential document that
[34:09] will be provided to the court
[34:13] reporter will be the official
[34:22] copy maintained by the clerk.
[34:22] >> I appreciate that. I just
[34:23] wanted to confirm. Thank you
[34:23] everyone.
[34:24] >> great. Thank you.
[34:26] We are all on the same page.
[34:31] Awesome, let's move to section
[34:44] 5, the prefiled testimony of
[34:45] exhibits and witnesses.
[34:45] >> staff knows there's a typo
[34:46] in the draft prehearing order
[34:47] or witness summaries of five
[34:47] minutes. Given the number of
[34:48] witnesses that suggest witness
[34:49] ceremony testimony be no longer
[34:49] than three minutes.
[34:50] Both direct and rebuttal
[34:55] testimony should be three
[34:56] minutes for direct entry
[34:56] minutes for rebuttal.
[34:57] >> thank you, are we okay with
[34:58] that?
[35:05] >> yes, the public counsel was
[35:05] brought down by the taxpayers
[35:06] of the state of florida.
[35:13] The company has filed a
[35:18] testimony of 17 witnesses of
[35:23] direct and rebuttal.
[35:24] I feel like that counseling
[35:25] customers are getting penalized
[35:28] we have to cut down our time
[35:29] because of the mass of
[35:32] witnesses the company brings.
[35:33] I am not challenging the
[35:35] company's decision to do that.
[35:37] I would prefer we have no less
[35:37] time.
[35:41] >> okay.
[35:44] Any other further thoughts on
[35:45] that?
[35:53] Are you okay with three
[35:54] minutes?
[35:54] >> yes. This will probably
[35:55] come back again in the next
[35:57] section.
[36:01] We are fine with three minutes.
[36:04] We are going to propose that
[36:06] certain witnesses, civic staff
[36:06] and the commissioner are
[36:10] minimal could be taken up at
[36:15] the same time for direct and
[36:15] rebuttal for purposes of
[36:18] efficiency. In that situation
[36:19] it would be appropriate for the
[36:20] witness to have five minutes to
[36:24] summarize both direct and
[36:25] rebuttal.
[36:27] We are fine with opc having
[36:33] five minutes were there
[36:33] witnesses.
[36:34] In fact I don't want to divide
[36:41] and be any different.
[36:41] Let's go five minutes across
[36:42] the board is what I am leaning
[36:43] on saying.
[36:49] I hope we can run an efficient
[36:50] hearing. I believe we can and
[36:51] we will. That is fine. Let's go
[36:51] ahead and go to five minutes
[36:52] across the board and try to
[36:57] work together to combine when
[36:57] we can.
[37:01] >> absolutely.
[37:07] >> I think that is somewhat
[37:08] settled. Let's move to the
[37:13] order of witnesses.
[37:14] >> there are no stipulations
[37:15] on witness testimony at this
[37:15] time. Parties MAY stipulate
[37:20] before the hearing. If there
[37:21] are stability witnesses that
[37:21] the parties would like to
[37:22] suggest that will confirm with
[37:22] each commissioner that
[37:27] identified witness can be
[37:28] excused. Commissioners don't
[37:29] have questions of this
[37:29] witnesses the witnesses MAY be
[37:30] excused from the hearing and
[37:30] testimonies would be entered
[37:36] into the hearing.
[37:38] >> thoughts or comments?
[37:43] >> yes, commissioner.
[37:44] It came to florida city gas is
[37:44] attention late last week that
[37:48] we have two of her expert
[37:49] witnesses who are scheduled for
[37:49] hearing in another state the
[37:56] same week this hearing is
[37:56] scheduled.
[37:56] We have taken a look at
[37:57] potentially moving them in the
[38:01] witness order. That led to
[38:02] some further discussions about
[38:05] the order of witnesses that we
[38:05] have put together. We have
[38:08] conferred with both public
[38:13] counsel and with faa. I
[38:14] understand we MAY have some
[38:16] alterations of their own.
[38:17] We provided this list to
[38:25] commission staff on friday and
[38:25] there are two main witnesses
[38:26] that have the conflict. We have
[38:30] become up to third and fourth.
[38:30] There are other witnesses that
[38:31] it given the scope of their
[38:32] direct rebuttal we are willing
[38:34] to offer to have their direct
[38:36] and rebuttal taken up at the
[38:41] same time for purposes of
[38:41] efficiency.
[38:47] >> all right, opc?
[38:52] >> the outline of witnesses
[38:57] that the company says is
[39:05] acceptable, will continue to
[39:06] work. The only change we would
[39:20] ask is if MR. Walters and
[39:24] leapfrog, our order would be
[39:25] walter, colin.
[39:25] >> any concern with that?
[39:37] >> number john boehner.
[39:37] [Bell.
[39:53] >> any issues with that?
[39:53] .
[40:00] Let's move on to the basic nts
[40:01] to party 70 changes to the
[40:05] basic positions?
[40:06] >> florida city gas has one
[40:08] numeric change in a basic
[40:09] position on page 9. We can
[40:14] provide that to staff after
[40:14] this.
[40:17] >> any other changes?
[40:20] Can we have that to stop by
[40:20] tomorrow?
[40:21] >> we can have it by end of
[40:26] day today.
[40:26] >> let's go ahead and move to
[40:31] section 8, issues and position.
[40:33] I will go through issues by
[40:33] section. We will proceed
[40:35] through the issues in the order
[40:40] they appear here in the
[40:40] prehearing order any parties
[40:41] have any changes to any
[40:46] positions please speak up at
[40:46] the appropriate time. Staff,
[40:47] any additional comments before
[40:55] we get into issues?
[40:56] >> yes, as noted, a party that
[40:56] takes no issue on a party by
[40:57] the time of the prehearing
[40:57] conference or at a later time
[40:58] presented by the office to
[41:01] conduct cross-examination on a
[41:05] ship, staff originally set for
[41:06] SEPTEMBER 15 as a potential
[41:08] follow-up date.
[41:14] As I understand, opc and seg
[41:14] have discussed extending that
[41:15] to SEPTEMBER 16. There is no
[41:17] objection to that.
[41:22] >> thank you commissioner.
[41:28] The discovery cutoff is
[41:28] wednesday.
[41:37] We took significant number of
[41:37] depositions and the court
[41:38] reporter is working in an
[41:39] expedited case and around the
[41:41] other hearings she has to
[41:45] handle lately.
[41:46] We have a few depositions
[41:48] coming in this week. We think
[41:52] we are allowed to provide our
[41:56] positions no later than the
[41:57] close of business on wednesday,
[41:58] that will give us an optimal
[42:00] amount of time to review
[42:06] deposition transcripts and
[42:07] decide if you need to modify
[42:08] our position. We have several
[42:12] positions that send a position
[42:15] in place of discovery.
[42:18] Will have a great answer on
[42:19] those, and will get a final
[42:24] answer to the commission.
[42:27] If that is acceptable?
[42:28] I have one other thing to state
[42:30] about the issues.
[42:37] I thought I could send it out
[42:37] but the system is holding my
[42:38] message in the mailbox. I have
[42:45] revised order with edits that I
[42:46] will provide all the parties
[42:51] and staff.
[42:51] I will not take your time by
[42:52] commenting on any issues in
[42:54] here because I will provide the
[42:57] revisions I had to staff and
[43:00] parties today with the caveat
[43:02] that if we have an amendment in
[43:05] deposition pending will get
[43:09] those to staff by wednesday if
[43:14] that is okay with you.
[43:15] >> let me think there's any
[43:16] objections. Other objections to
[43:16] be to SEPTEMBER 16 on
[43:17] wednesday?
[43:29] >> that's just to modify that
[43:29] position?
[43:30] >> yes, it is just the ones
[43:32] that talk about pending
[43:35] completion of discovery I will
[43:40] get everything else that we
[43:42] need. We just because few that
[43:50] are selected. Just a handful.
[43:51] >> the company is fine with
[43:55] that.
[43:56] Let's no objection.
[43:56] >> any concerns with that
[43:56] stuff?
[44:01] >> no.
[44:02] >> I will allow that to be
[44:07] reflected.
[44:11] Let's go ahead and go through
[44:12] issues. I will go through the
[44:16] entire blocks and call them
[44:16] out.
[44:17] Speak up if there's any
[44:18] concerns. Starting the test
[44:23] period and test issues 1-5
[44:25] fencing objections let's move
[44:26] to the quality of service which
[44:30] is issue six. Say no
[44:33] objection, let's move to the
[44:35] right base which is issue 7-21.
[44:39] >> will have a modification to
[44:42] issue nine. Anticipate will be
[44:44] able to provide that to staff
[44:47] by close of business today.
[44:56] >> anything else in section
[44:57] 721.
[44:57] It's been a zero cost of
[45:00] capital which is issue six
[45:00] 2230.
[45:05] Seeing that, is meant to
[45:11] operating income if she is
[45:11] 3150.
[45:11] >> florida city gas has a
[45:12] slight modification to the
[45:14] position on the issue 33 and
[45:14] will have that to stop by close
[45:16] of business.
[45:21] >> any other issues or
[45:21] concerns?
[45:25] Let's move to revenue
[45:35] requirements just issues 51-52.
[45:36] None let's move to the cost of
[45:37] service and great design just
[45:44] issues 53-69.
[45:46] On smooches the camera she is
[45:52] which is 70-71.
[45:59] Other issues?
[46:01] Those that were mentioned are
[46:07] noted let's slip to lester
[46:07] staff.
[46:07] >> staff has prepared a
[46:08] comprehensive exhibit list and
[46:11] those exhibits that wish to
[46:12] include in the record. A draft
[46:16] list prior to the hearing to
[46:19] see if there any objections to
[46:19] be entered into the record.
[46:23] >> any changes that list?
[46:25] Thank not, let's move to the
[46:30] proposed stipulations.
[46:31] >> staff is not aware of any
[46:32] public body situations for
[46:33] parties at this time.
[46:33] >> parties?
[46:34] Good?
[46:38] Let's move to sections 11-12
[46:42] pending motions and pending
[46:44] confidentiality motions.
[46:44] >> there are no pending
[46:47] motions except for
[46:48] confidentiality request at this
[46:49] time.
[46:52] Much to seven pending
[46:55] confidentiality motions.
[46:57] Stop all work to address those.
[47:06] >> thank you.
[47:06] Sing order concerns there let's
[47:07] move to section 13 posting
[47:07] procedures. Staff?
[47:08] What certain issues are
[47:08] stipulated to the parties
[47:10] agreed to wait weeks parties
[47:11] agreed to make a bench decision
[47:13] but are ever if there are any
[47:16] positions after the hearing
[47:19] researcher OCTOBER 21, 2026.
[47:22] They shall be no more than 50
[47:22] pages and staff suggest
[47:24] amending that term preorders.
[47:31] >> 100 pages go ahead.
[47:34] >> we appreciate 100 pages.
[47:36] Michener, I would ask that the
[47:42] word limit or positions of the
[47:44] amended to 75 words.
[47:47] 75 words is customary up I am
[47:51] not mistaken.
[47:53] I would also vastly be willing
[47:59] to add sentence after the word,
[48:03] it says each party MAY provide
[48:08] a position that 225 words on up
[48:12] to two dishes of its choosing.
[48:12] The reason I suggest that since
[48:17] there are often times case that
[48:18] has been complicated like this
[48:20] one. There MAY be selected
[48:25] issues that take a little bit
[48:32] to synthesize a position as of
[48:33] the this is been done on
[48:36] occasion in the past.
[48:41] We can pick any two that we
[48:41] want.
[48:47] We can have a little bit longer
[48:47] discussion.
[48:48] I would ask your indulgence for
[48:54] us to be able to achieve the.
[48:54] >> I will take that under
[48:55] advisement and talk to my staff
[48:57] about that and it will be
[48:58] reflected on the decision I
[49:00] make in the final order.
[49:05] Is there anything else?
[49:10] Okay, thank you.
[49:10] >> that sentence will be in
[49:17] the document.
[49:22] >> okay, excellent.
[49:22] Step is that okay to proceed
[49:24] that way?
[49:26] >> that is fine.
[49:29] Let's move to rulings in
[49:33] section 14.
[49:33] >> staff recommends you make a
[49:35] ruling that opening statements
[49:35] should not exceed five minutes
[49:40] per party.
[49:41] >> are all partisan agreements
[49:41] of five minutes?
[49:43] I think we are good.
[49:52] >> the public counsel would
[49:55] ask, this is not the case of a
[49:59] bigger electric case or even
[49:59] the case we had last time we
[50:01] had more parties.
[50:05] The public counsel and company
[50:11] are the ones that would carry
[50:12] most of the time on opening
[50:14] statements. I don't think, I
[50:21] briefly discussed it with fda,
[50:21] I don't think they have a lot
[50:23] of arguments.
[50:27] This case presents a very
[50:33] interesting issues that are
[50:36] novel.
[50:38] We would ask that we be given,
[50:43] I would suggest 10 minutes.
[50:43] That is the request of the
[50:44] public.
[50:51] >> karen 10 minutes let me go
[50:52] to the other parties, did he
[50:52] recall that let's hear from
[50:52] you.
[50:53] >> no objection, will be brief
[50:54] with our matters, but it others
[50:54] want to take longer that is
[50:54] fine.
[50:59] >> of course we will abide by
[51:00] whatever you decide.
[51:05] >> thank you, the feeling we
[51:08] will net the same amount of
[51:08] time.
[51:16] Go ahead and call it 10
[51:16] minutes.
[51:17] Congratulations getting your 10
[51:17] minutes of opening statements.
[51:18] Are there any other matters
[51:20] that need to be addressed in
[51:21] the prehearing conference?
[51:22] >> commissioner, I apologize.
[51:24] I do have one other request for
[51:33] you to consider.
[51:33] And that would be the date per
[51:34] provision for exhibits is
[51:37] identified as SEPTEMBER 22,
[51:38] given some of the extensions in
[51:43] the amount of discovery, and
[51:44] the stock we ask that be
[51:47] extended to the 24th.
[51:56] >> staff, let me ask you on
[51:56] the calendar.
[52:02] >> we typically aim for week
[52:02] for provisioning of exhibits.
[52:03] Maybe not to the 24th gives two
[52:03] business days before the
[52:07] hearing begins.
[52:07] It would be the close of
[52:08] business on the 24th. That
[52:13] gives one business day.
[52:14] >> that my understandings are
[52:20] typically cross-examination
[52:20] exhibits.
[52:20] I would not anticipate this
[52:24] would be all documents, at
[52:28] least for me.
[52:29] >> I'm not sure he could say
[52:32] the same for everyone.
[52:42] >> public counsel I don't
[52:46] think, in the past many people
[52:58] have lengthy exhibits.
[52:59] that would take a lot of the
[53:04] typical volume of exhibits.
[53:04] I have been putting my exhibits
[53:07] together for the hearing for a
[53:10] couple weeks now.
[53:10] I can represent year we will
[53:14] not have the volume you have
[53:24] seen in the past.
[53:25] You have 50 or so, maybe a bit
[53:26] more than that. It will not be,
[53:35] I can tell you, I would support
[53:45] the company's quest.
[53:45] This case has generated a lot
[53:46] of discovery. The company has
[53:56] been extremely, the word is
[53:57] they have worked with us to
[54:02] make sure the discoveries
[54:02] answered.
[54:07] I have not been rigid about the
[54:08] limits. We have done a lot of
[54:11] depositions in this case.
[54:16] It is very well litigated.
[54:19] The discovery has been
[54:19] thorough.
[54:22] Which I think helps narrow down
[54:23] a number of exhibits. I can
[54:25] represent to you commissioner,
[54:27] the volume will not be anything
[54:32] like what you might have seen.
[54:38] We will be judicious about it.
[54:39] I hope the group but the
[54:40] commission staff in the lurch.
[54:43] >> staff is able to
[54:46] accommodate that, however we
[54:47] request instead of close of
[54:54] business on thursday we make it
[54:55] 10 on thursday so we can
[55:00] incorporate everything.
[55:00] >> does that sound like a
[55:03] compromise?
[55:03] >> yes it does.
[55:03] > we are
[55:09] going to say 24th, 10 am.
[55:09] >> commissioner, if I can say
[55:11] one other thing just following
[55:13] that, the word I was looking
[55:19] for that was escaping me was
[55:19] cooperative.
[55:20] His hearing conference for a
[55:21] case that is been this
[55:24] contentious in terms of the way
[55:27] testimony has proceeded,
[55:29] discovery has proceeded has
[55:33] been done the right way.
[55:34] I think a complement should go
[55:37] to the company or the way they
[55:40] have handled things.
[55:43] I have been very zealous in
[55:46] their efficacy. Staff also
[55:51] reached out and we had a timely
[55:52] issue identification. For the
[55:55] first time I think of her
[55:55] results issues without having
[55:58] to take it to you, the
[56:00] prehearing officer for
[56:00] resolution.
[56:02] That says a lot about the way
[56:07] your staff was engaged in the
[56:11] way the party is cooperated.
[56:12] I wanted to let you know that I
[56:18] felt like this is been done
[56:18] right.
[56:22] I appreciate you giving us the
[56:23] time.
[56:23] >> sure. I appreciate everyone
[56:25] acting professional and working
[56:31] in a collaborative manner. Our
[56:32] staff works extremely hard five
[56:33] appreciate them. I am so
[56:34] thankful that they had to get
[56:37] to me yet at least.
[56:41] Thank you and I look forward to
[56:47] a smooth hearing.
[56:48] Staff, I have lots right hand.
[56:48] Am I on other matters?
[56:52] >> yes, there are no other
[56:54] action steps perspective. The
[56:56] parties have reached a
[56:56] conclusion.
[57:00] >> any other business?
[57:01] I will go ahead and call this
[57:05] prehearing adjourned. I look
[57:06] forward to seeing everybody
[57:07] here soon. Thank you for your
[57:11] professional matter.
[57:17] >> thank you, commissioner.