CPUC Jul 26 Transcript

8/9/2019 CPUC Jul 26 Transcript

1/287

1

1 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

2 STATE OF COLORADO

3 -------------------------------------------------------

4 DOCKET NO. 09A-324E VOLUME 9

5 -------------------------------------------------------

6 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF TRI-STATEGENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION, INC., (A) FOR

7 A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FORTHE SAN LUIS VALLEY-CALUMET-COMANCHE TRANSMISSION

8 PROJECT, (B) FOR SPECIFIC FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO EMFAND NOISE, AND (C) FOR APPROVAL OF OWNERSHIP INTEREST

9 TRANSFER AS NEEDED WHEN PROJECT IS COMPLETED.-------------------------------------------------------

10 DOCKET NO. 09A-325E

11 -------------------------------------------------------

12 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF PUBLIC SERVICECOMPANY OF COLORADO (A) FOR A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC

13 CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR THE SAN LUIS VALLEY TOCALUMET TO COMANCHE TRANSMISSION PROJECT, (B) FOR

14 SPECIFIC FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO EMF AND NOISE, AND(C) FOR APPROVAL OF OWNERSHIP INTEREST TRANSFER AS

15 NEEDED WHEN PROJECT IS COMPLETED.-------------------------------------------------------

16

17 PURSUANT TO NOTICE to all parties in

18 interest, the above-entitled matter came on for hearing

19 before MANA L. JENNINGS-FADER, Administrative Law Judge

20 of the Public Utilities Commission, on July 26, 2010;

21 said proceedings having been reported in shorthand by

22 James L. Midyett, Michele Koss, and Harriet S.

23 Weisenthal, Certified Shorthand Reporters.

24 WHEREUPON, the following proceedings were

25 had:


2/287

2

1 APPEARANCES

2 (AS NOTED OF RECORD.)

3 INDEX

4 WITNESS PAGE

5 KAREN T. HYDE 1515Direct Examination by Mr. McGann

6 42Cross-examination by Mr. Douglas179Cross Examination by Ms. Mandell

7 181Redirect Examination by Mr. McGannJAMES R. DAUPHINAIS

8 210Voir Dire Examination by Mr. Sopkin220Direct Examination Con't by Mr. Douglas

9 257Cross Examination by Mr. Nelson262Cross Examination by Mr. Sopkin

10

11 EXHIBITS

12 NUMBER MARKED ADMITTED

13 Exhibit No. 132 3 16Exhibit No. 133 3

14 Exhibit No. 134 3Exhibit No. 135 3

15 Exhibit No. 135-A 3Exhibit No. 136 3

16 Exhibit No. 137 54 68Exhibit No. 138 68 73

17 Exhibit No. 139 91 92Exhibit No. 140 91 101

18 Exhibit No. 141 120 121Exhibit No. 142 157

19 Exhibit No. 143 275

20

21

22

23

24

25


3/287

3

1 PROCEEDINGS

2 (Whereupon, Exhibit Nos.

3 132 through 135, 135 A and 136 marked for

4 identification).

5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Good morning,

6 everyone.

7 This is a continuation of the hearing in

8 Dockets No. 0A-324-E, and Docket No. 09A-325E -- I'm

9 not going to read the titles, they are previously read

10 numerous times into the record.

11 This is continuation of the hearing and a

12 reopened evidentiary hearing held pursuant to Decision

13 No. R10-0486-I.

14 My name is it Mana Jennings-Fader. I'm

15 the Administrative Law Judge assigned by the Commission

16 to hear this case.

17 And I would like to begin this morning by

18 taking appearances beginning with the applicants.

19 MR. DOUGHERTY: Good morning, Your Honor.

20 Tom Dougherty on behalf of Tri-State

21 Generation & Transmission Association.

22 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Good morning.

23 MR. SOPKIN: Good morning, Your Honor.

24 Greg Sopkin on behalf of Public Service

25 Company of Colorado.


4/287

4


2 MR. McGANN: Good morning.

3 David McGann on behalf of Public Service

4 Company of Colorado.

5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you and

6 good morning.

7 MR. SANTISI: Good morning, Your Honor.

8 Michael Santisi, Assistant Attorney

9 General, appearing on behalf of staff of the PUC.


11 good morning.

12 MR. SCHLESINGER: Good morning.

13 Assistant Attorney General Jake

14 Schlesinger, appearing on behalf of the Office of

15 Consumer Counsel. And with me today is First Assistant

16 Attorney General Stephen Southwick, as well.


18 MR. FLANAGAN: Top of the morning to you

19 Your Honor.

20 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Top of the

21 morning to you.

22 MR. FLANAGAN: Tim Flanagan along with

23 Matt Douglas and Tim Macdonald for Trinchera.

24 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you.

25 Any other counsel.


5/287

5

1 MR. NELSON: Thor Nelson, appearing on

2 behalf of Pole Canyon.


4 MS. MANDELL: Good morning, Your Honor.

5 Victoria Mandell on behalf of Western

6 Resource Advocates. And I have with me today Kristin

7 Charipar -- and I'll get you that spelling in a second.

8 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Other counsel

9 present?

10 MS. HICKEY: Thank you, Your Honor.


12 MS. HICKEY: Good morning.

13 Lisa Tormoen Hickey of the law firm

14 Alpern Meyer Stuart, representing Interwest Energy

15 Alliance.


17 good morning.

18 Other counsel?

19 (No response.)

20 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I will not read

21 the folks who have not sent their counsel today as they

22 have not entered their appearance, I'll presume they

23 are not present.

24 I have a few preliminary matters before

25 we get started this morning. The first is, pursuant to


6/287

6

1 Commission policy and procedure, this proceeding is

2 being webcast. I ask whether any party present has an

3 objection.

4 (No response.)

5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Seeing none, we

6 shall continue.

7 I would like to remind the parties about

8 the procedures that we have this morning -- or for

9 today and for Friday -- hopefully not for Saturday; and

10 that is that we'll take a ten-minute break this

11 morning, we'll take a 45-minute break for lunch, and

12 we'll take a 15-minute break this afternoon. If

13 necessary -- again, I hope not, we will continue until

14 7 this evening.

15 We have arranged for court reporters

16 through that time period.

17 I would like to remind the parties that

18 Public Service and Tri-State have a right if they wish

19 to do so to offer oral rebuttal at the conclusion of

20 the presentations today -- excuse me, this week.

21 I would like to direct -- request Public

22 Service and also to Tri-State, would you all -- either

23 or both of you be prepared to identify whether you

24 intend at least to offer oral rebuttal at the end of

25 Mr. Dauphinais's testimony -- with respect to his


7/287

7

1 testimony, obviously not with respect to

2 Dr. Shefferin -- Shefferin; is that correct?

3 MR. DOUGLAS: Yes, Your Honor.


5 (Pause.)

6 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Principally this

7 is for planning purposes; so if you could put that in

8 the back of your mind and maybe tell us after lunch

9 that would be fine.

10 MR. SOPKIN: Thank you, Your Honor.

11 (Pause.)

12 MR. SOPKIN: Clarification, Your Honor

13 you are not suggesting that we would put on rebuttal

14 testimony to Mr. Dauphinais prior to Dr. Shefferin.

15 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: No. I mean, if

16 you would be so kind, if you are inclined, only to

17 inform me and the parties whether or not you intend to

18 offer rebuttal to Mr. Dauphinais, then holding

19 Dr. Shefferin -- obviously no one can know about her

20 testimony until it's given.

21 MR. SOPKIN: Okay, we'll get back to you

22 on that.

23 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: That's fine.

24 Thank you very much.

25 We have pending a motion filed by


8/287

8

1 Trinichera Ranch to take administrative notice which

2 we'll take up as a preliminary matter. I am aware of

3 no other pending motions.

4 Is a party aware of a pending motion of

5 another -- another pending motion as to which no ruling

6 has been made?

7 (No response.)

8 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay. Holding

9 the motion for administrative notice for oral argument

10 in a few moments, has any party any other preliminary

11 matters?

12 MR. NELSON: Yes, I have a short

13 preliminary matter.

14 I passed out to the parties a letter that

15 was submitted to the Commission by the Board of County

16 Commissioners of Heurfano County, sent on June 16,

17 2010. And I just wanted to confirm this morning, as a

18 preliminary matter, that Your Honor is aware of the

19 letter and that the letter is going to be considered as

20 public comment in this proceeding along with other

21 public comment that was made previously in the docket.

22 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you,

23 Mr. Nelson.

24 Let me clarify for the party what's going

25 on with written public comment that has been filed in


9/287

9

1 this proceeding. Not only did Heurfano -- the County

2 Commissioners of Huerfano County file two separate

3 letters, I think one in March and one in June with

4 respect to this matter, there have been a number of

5 other written comments received by the Commission, some

6 by folks who also testified at the two public hearings

7 and also some by folks who did not.

8 It is the Commission's practice to

9 consider, to the extent the Commission considers it

10 prudent, those written public comments. They are

11 technically not in the evidentiary record in this

12 proceeding, unlike the formal statements which were

13 given under oath during the two public hearings to take

14 public comment that were held in this matter; but

15 nonetheless, the Commission does consider them and does

16 give them some weight. What that weight is will be at

17 the discretion of the Commission.

18 MR. NELSON: Thank you, Your Honor.

19 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Certainly.

20 Anything else?

21 (No response.)

22 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: With that, I

23 would like to turn to and start this morning by taking

24 oral argument to the motion for administrative notice.

25 Public Service, insofar as -- and --


10/287

10

1 excuse me, and Tri-State, insofar as I'm aware have not

2 filed written responses; am I correct?

3 MR. SOPKIN: Yes, Your Honor. And if I

4 may, they did not see a request for shortened response

5 time so.

6 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Let me start by

7 saying, there was no request for shortened response

8 time. No one was required to file a written response.

9 I just wish to be sure that I have not somehow missed a

10 filing which was made. So did Public Service file a

11 written response?

12 MR. SOPKIN: No.

13 And if I may continue, we did intend on

14 filing a written response. It was our understanding

15 that since no shortened response time was requested

16 that Trinichera Ranch was not requesting to put in

17 evidence in this proceeding those matters for which it

18 seeks administrative notice; that I'm guessing they

19 probably want to put it in their closing statement of

20 position in this case. So we were intending on

21 responding in writing.

22 That said, if you do want to address it

23 this morning, we're prepared to do so. But our initial

24 inclination was to say that we are going to file a

25 written response opposing it.


11/287

11

1 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Mr. Dougherty?

2 MR. DOUGHERTY: That's consistent with

3 Tri-State's understanding as well.

4 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Well, I would

5 really rather get this resolved sooner rather than

6 later simply because I think it would confuse the

7 record immensely to have something come in after the

8 evidentiary hearing by way of administrative notice

9 which then is evidence to which the other parties have

10 not had an opportunity to respond, assuming the motion

11 is granted.

12 So I would like to proceed if you all are

13 prepared to do so. If not, I will -- I can hold the

14 oral argument until Friday and hear it on Friday, if --

15 I'm also amenable to that.

16 MR. SOPKIN: Your Honor, we would in fact

17 prefer discussing that on Friday.

18 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: With the

19 understanding that if the motion is granted, then

20 you-all would present whatever response you have to

21 present orally; is that correct -- I mean, any evidence

22 in response you would present that orally?

23 MR. SOPKIN: Yes, Your Honor. I would

24 say that because we did not think this was going to be

25 an issue in this proceeding that we have not discussed


12/287

12

1 what witnesses we'll need available but we will

2 certainly take that up in the next couple of days.

3 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Ms. Mandell --

4 and because we're webcasting, I apologize, I'm going to

5 have to ask you to come to the front so the folks can

6 hear -- assuming our best listening audience would like

7 to hear your audience.

8 Yes, ma'am?

9 MS. MANDELL: Your Honor, WRA may also

10 have oral argument on Friday with regard to the motion.

11 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay, thank you.

12 MS. MANDELL: Thank you.

13 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: So, folks, we

14 will hold over the motion for administrative notice

15 until Friday.

16 Mr. Flanagan, Mr. Douglas, Mr. Macdonald,

17 to whom am I to address my next question which was

18 whether you all intended to examine as to those

19 documents, the Public Service's witness?

20 MR. DOUGLAS: I can answer that, Your

21 Honor; and the answer is, no, I did not intend to

22 question Public Service's witness about those

23 documents.

24 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay, good. We

25 won't be facing that issue. Thank you very much for


13/287

13

1 that heads up.

2 All right, so that will be the first

3 order of business on Friday, will be the oral

4 argument -- or the option is you may file something in

5 writing if you wish to do so and I'll decide it on the

6 written pleadings. So --

7 MR. SOPKIN: Thank you.

8 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: -- to me it's

9 not -- as long as it's not 5:00 on Thursday.

10 MR. SOPKIN: Right.


12 I think that takes care of all of those.

13 We'll get the preliminary matters -- excuse me, I have

14 been getting over something and I will apologize in

15 advance for clearing my throat repeatedly during the

16 proceedings.

17 Public Service, are you prepared to

18 proceed?

19 MR. SOPKIN: Your Honor, we did have one

20 preliminary matter we wanted to address.

21 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay.

22 MR. SOPKIN: I'm sorry.

23 Just briefly, Your Honor, we did receive

24 your Decision No. R 10-046-I which ruled on Public

25 Service's two motions in limine with some other rulings


14/287

14

1 in that as well. And we just wanted to, sort of as a

2 heads up, it's our understanding that Public Service

3 can still object on a case-by-case basis in this

4 proceeding if it believes that the matters that are

5 being raised are more properly addressed in other

6 dockets, such as the -- such as resource planning or

7 RES compliance dockets or the application to amend 2007

8 Resource Plan Docket No. 10A-377E; also, if it's

9 otherwise outside the scope of the reopened record, and

10 also if Public Service did not raise the issue in its

11 direct case, for example, reliability issues.

12 So we just wanted to raise that as a

13 heads up because we're guessing there will be

14 objections during this proceeding and we do not wish to

15 try Your Honor's patience in that regard.

16 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: As to each of the

17 three areas, one -- anyone may object as to any of

18 those areas --

19 MR. SOPKIN: Thank you.

20 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: -- on a case --

21 question-by-question basis.

22 So counsel?

23 MR. McGANN: We are prepared, Your Honor.

24 We call Karen Hyde.



15/287

15

1 (Discussion off the record.)

2 KAREN T. HYDE,

3 having been called as a witness, being first duly

4 sworn, testified as follows:

5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you very

6 much.

7 I would like you to have a seat,

8 Ms. Hyde; and if you could be sure the microphone is

9 on.

10 THE WITNESS: It is.


12 And also, counsel, if you have anything

13 to say or objections or whatever, please be sure the

14 mike is on so it will be broadcast.

15 Thank you.

16 DIRECT EXAMINATION

17 BY MR. McGANN:

18 Q Good morning --

19 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, actually I had

20 one preliminary question. Ms. Hyde has already been a

21 witness in this case; may I dispense with preliminaries

22 in terms of her job duties, to move the proceedings

23 along as well?

24 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I think so, yes,

25 unless they have changed.


16/287

16

1 THE WITNESS: No.

2 MR. McGANN: I don't believe they have.

3 BY MR. McGANN:

4 Q Ms. Hyde, could you please take a look at

5 what has been marked for identification as Hearing

6 Exhibit 132 which should be in front of you.

7 A Yes, I have it.

8 Q And can you tell me what that document

9 is?

10 A It is House Bill 10-1001 from this last

11 legislative session.

12 Q Was that the bill that was signed by the

13 Governor?

14 A Yes.

15 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, I move for the

16 admission of Exhibit 132 into the record.

17 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Exhibit 132 for

18 identification has been offered. Voir dire or

19 objection?

20 MR. DOUGLAS: No objection, Your Honor.


22 132 is admitted.

23 BY MR. McGANN:

24 Q Ms. Hyde, I would like to take the next

25 four exhibits together if I could. So if you could


17/287

17

1 take a look at what has been marked for identification

2 as Exhibits 133 through 135-A.

3 A I have them.

4 Q Okay. And can you please describe for

5 me, what is Exhibit 133?

6 A It's our application to amend the 2007

7 Resource Plan.

8 Q And what is Exhibit 134?

9 A It's direct testimony and exhibits of

10 Jim -- of James F. Hill.

11 Q Is that -- is it the testimony that

12 supports that application?

13 A It is.

14 Q And what is Exhibit 135?

15 A It is separately marked Exhibit JFH-1

16 that was also part of the application and one of the

17 exhibits to Hill's testimony.

18 Q And can you tell me what is Exhibit

19 135-A?

20 A It is the confidential version of that

21 exhibit.

22 Q Can you tell me, referring specifically

23 to page 6 of the application which was Exhibit 133 --

24 and when you are there, let me know.

25 A Yes, I'm there.


18/287

18

1 Q Can you tell me in general what relief

2 Public Service sought from -- is seeking from the

3 Commission in its application to amend the 2007

4 Resource Plan?

5 A We sought to have them amend their

6 decision for us to acquire approximately 355 megawatts

7 of solar to instead acquire either 60 megawatts, 90

8 megawatts or 185 megawatts. And we sought relief from

9 the 200 megawatts solar thermal with storage set-aside.

10 Q And referring back to now Exhibits 133

11 through 135-A, are those true and correct copies of the

12 documents Public Service filed with the Commission to

13 seek approval to an amendment to its 2007 Resource

14 Plan?

15 A Yes, they are.

16 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, I move for the

17 admission of Exhibits 133 through 135-A.

18 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I'm going to take

19 them seriatim: Exhibit 133 for identification, which

20 is the application which opened Docket 10A-377E, is

21 offered. Voir dire or objection?

22 MR. DOUGLAS: No objection.

23 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: The application

24 is admitted -- Exhibit 133 is admitted.

25 MR. FLANAGAN: Your Honor, while we don't


19/287

19

1 object to that exhibit, we don't want it to constitute

2 a waiver of the position that that docket can't be

3 opened as long as there is judicial review of the

4 underlying case.

5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: And I appreciate

6 that. That is a matter which, to the best of my

7 knowledge is now pending, has been briefed and is

8 pending in front of the Commission in Docket 10A-377E;

9 and we will proceed here as if the Commission proceeds

10 with that application and we'll have to take up what

11 happens if that application does not go forward. We'll

12 act as if that issue is not in this docket because the

13 Commission will not have taken up amending the Phase 2

14 decision. Okay.

15 MR. FLANAGAN: I just --

16 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I just want that

17 to be clear to everybody.

18 MR. FLANAGAN: We didn't want to be in a

19 position of waiving that.

20 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Nothing done here

21 can or will constitute a waiver of anything in another

22 docket, insofar as I'm concerned.

23 Now, Exhibit 134 for identification is

24 the direct testimony and exhibits of Mr. Hill, prefiled

25 in Exhibit -- excuse me, in Docket 377E.


20/287

20

1 Objections or voir?

2 MR. DOUGLAS: No objection.

3 MR. McGANN: If I may, just one

4 clarification, Your Honor on Exhibit 134, it -- Exhibit

5 134 is actually Mr. Hill's testimony. His exhibit was

6 actually separately labeled as Exhibit 135.


8 Counsel, I have a question --

9 MR. McGANN: Yes.

10 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: -- about 134. My

11 ruling in this case I believe -- I hope was clear that

12 we are not getting into the underlying specifics of

13 what drove -- excuse me, the -- we are looking at

14 potentially the -- no, we're looking at the effects of

15 granting the application, but we are not examining in

16 this proceeding what drove the company to file the

17 application beyond the scope of what Ms. Hyde has

18 identified in her prefiled statement.

19 My concern about admitting Exhibit 134 is

20 that it opens the door for examination on precisely

21 those areas about which I have already said we will not

22 take testimony.

23 Can you help me out?

24 MR. McGANN: I appreciate your caution,

25 Your Honor. First of all -- and I agree with your


21/287

21

1 prior ruling. And our intent in introducing Mr. Hill's

2 testimony was not to somehow do anything to contradict

3 that ruling. To the extent that -- we simply are

4 referring the exhibit and Mr. Hill's testimony for

5 completeness sake. Quite frankly, if you wanted to

6 understand simply the relief we've sought, you could

7 get that from the application which is Exhibit 133 and

8 you do not need Exhibits 134, 135 or 135-A.

9 And to your point, Your Honor, we would

10 agree to simply introduce the application as Exhibit

11 133 because our intent is not to open up the hearing to

12 the issues you have identified.

13 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: And if I could

14 complete the thought there, do you agree with me that

15 if this were to come in as evidence that potentially

16 opens the door to examination on the evidence -- on

17 that evidence?

18 MR. McGANN: I wouldn't, although I think

19 to avoid the issue we should not introduce Exhibit 134,

20 if that would be the -- if that would be Your Honor's

21 understanding of the result if we were to introduce

22 Exhibit 134.

23 I was actually -- when Mr. Sopkin

24 clarified what our position would be with respect to

25 objections during the course of this proceeding,


22/287

22

1 notwithstanding the introduction of these exhibits, we

2 fully intended to object to questions concerning the

3 very issues that you have pointed out.

4 Now, again, to avoid that issue entirely,

5 we have no -- absolutely no objection to and would

6 actually encourage, given your statements here this

7 morning, we would actually at this point proceed and

8 just admit Exhibit 133 and not Exhibits 134, 135 or

9 135-A if there is any suggestion that doing so

10 introduces or somehow opens this proceeding to examine

11 the issues that you have identified.

12 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I would like you

13 to take a moment and consider the question and tell me

14 whether you intend to withdraw the identified exhibits.

15 MR. McGANN: May I consult with my

16 co-counsel?

17 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: You may.


19 MR. McGANN: I believe we have an answer

20 and a further request.

21 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Well, the answer

22 first and then let's see about the request.

23 MR. McGANN: The answer would be we would

24 intend to withdraw at the very least Exhibits 134, 135

25 and 135-A.


23/287

23

1 My request then becomes, if the

2 application, which is Exhibit 133, if all we need to

3 know here is exactly the relief that we have sought in

4 the amended application and Ms. Hyde has already

5 testified to that orally; and if the introduction of

6 the application would get into the issues that Your

7 Honor has identified this morning, we would withdraw

8 Exhibit 133.

9 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay, let me

10 start by cleaning up the record.

11 Exhibit 134 for identification, Exhibit

12 135 for identification, and Exhibit 135-A for

13 identification are withdrawn.

14 Now, as to 133, which is the verified

15 application, I will admit -- I will proceed with 133 in

16 the record simply because it states quite succinctly

17 what the options are that are pending before the

18 Commission and lays the groundwork for the three -- the

19 185, 90, and 60 megawatts, which were the lower limit

20 of what we're talking about in this -- in the current

21 proceeding, and leave it to counsel to do a

22 question-by-question objection. But I can -- I think

23 the application is important to understand the issues

24 in the reopened proceeding.

25 MR. McGANN: Thank you, Your Honor.


24/287

24

1 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I think we're at

2 136.

3 MR. McGANN: Exactly.

4 BY MR. McGANN:

5 Q Now, Ms. Hyde, if you could, take a look

6 at what has been marked as Exhibit 136 for

7 identification.

8 A I have it.

9 MR. McGANN: May I have a moment, Your

10 Honor?


12 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, because we have

13 not offered -- or we have withdrawn our request to

14 submit the testimony of Mr. Hill, I actually see no

15 reason to move forward with Exhibit 136.


17 MR. McGANN: So I would proceed with my

18 examination of Ms. Hyde.

19 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay, let me

20 just -- excuse me while I try to figure out what I have

21 done with all my exhibits.

22 Thank you. You may proceed.

23 BY MR. McGANN:

24 Q Now Ms. Hyde, just so, frankly, I have it

25 straight what's in the record, could you place before


25/287

25

1 you Exhibit 132, which is House Bill 10-1001 as signed

2 by the Governor?

3 A Uh-huh.

4 Q Do you have that in front of you.

5 A I do.

6 Q And could you also place in front of you

7 Exhibit 133 which is the application to amend the

8 Resource Plan?

9 A I have it.

10 Q And can you tell me, does the Renewable

11 Energy Standard amendment enacted in House Bill 10-1001

12 or the application to amend the 2007 Resource Plan

13 impact Public Service's participation in the project?

14 A No. Our plans have not changed. We

15 still want to build the line.

16 Q Now, let's take the Renewable Energy

17 Standard amendment first that was enacted in House Bill

18 10-1001, which was Exhibit 132. Why do you say that

19 the amendment to the Renewable Energy Standard does not

20 change the company's plans?

21 A Well, because although it changes the

22 standard, it doesn't change the basis for the standard

23 and the important parts that were driving our plans in

24 this case. In other words, it did not change the

25 legislative declaration of wanting to increase


26/287

26

1 renewable energy to the maximum practicable extent; and

2 it also didn't change the drive to utilize the 2

3 percent retail rate proceeds to acquire renewable

4 energy.

5 Q Now, you mentioned the 2 percent rate cap

6 in your prior answer. Were there any changes in the

7 new legislation that affected that 2 percent retail

8 rate cap?

9 A Yes, there were a few. We're allowed now

10 to apply interest on the RESA balances and it's clear

11 that we can borrow forward the money that could be

12 acquired in future years. We also have the ability to

13 seek reduction to the 3 percent distributed generation

14 provision if we need to. We can also seek reduction in

15 the standard rebate offer if we need to to make it less

16 than $2 and we can continue to acquire from customers

17 who installed distributed generation, we can continue

18 to acquire money into the RESA on kind of a fair share

19 basis.

20 Q When you say that you can continue to

21 collect moneys from distributed generation customers,

22 how was money collected from distributed generation

23 customers prior to the enactment of this amendment?

24 A It was based on the total bill. So 2

25 percent of the total bill. So when a customer


27/287

27

1 installed solar generation, their bill became smaller

2 and they contributed less money to the RESA.

3 Q And what does the amendment allow the

4 company -- what does the amendment do in terms of

5 assessing that charge to those customers?

6 A It lets us collect money that would be

7 the fair share even if it's in excess of 2 percent of

8 their bill.

9 Q Now moving on to the amended Renewable

10 Energy Standard that's set forth in the amendment, does

11 the company need to construct the line in order to meet

12 the minimum standards set forth in the amended RES for

13 the year 2020?

14 A No.

15 Q Then why has the company asked for

16 permission to construct the line?

17 A Well, first of all, we consider this to

18 be a timing issue. We still want to acquire the

19 additional solar so we need the line in order to

20 acquire that solar in our next acquisition. And we

21 need to acquire additional solar both because it's the

22 public policy in Colorado and also to use the 2 percent

23 rate cap.

24 Q With respect to the construction of

25 transmission lines, is there anything unique about


28/287

28

1 transmitting energy from facilities that generate their

2 power from solar as opposed to other fuels that affect

3 the construction of those lines?

4 A Yes.

5 Q And what is that?

6 A Well, the solar energy falls on the

7 ground in certain places, so you have to build the

8 solar resources where those solar resources are -- you

9 have to build the solar generation where the solar

10 resources are; and in this case, the best resources in

11 the state are in the San Luis Valley. Other plants,

12 say a gas-fired plant or coal-fired plant, you have

13 more flexibility because you can bring the gas and

14 transmission to wherever you want so site those plants.

15 Q Why is the company specifically trying to

16 access solar resources in the San Luis Valley?

17 A Because it's the best solar resource for

18 both PV and solar thermal in Colorado. It's got the

19 best quality of resource. It has developers who are

20 willing to develop projects in that area. And the

21 company is willing to buy those -- to expand our

22 portfolio of solar resources.

23 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, I want to

24 object and move to strike. I think we're being

25 cumulative now of the hearing and I don't believe that


29/287

29

1 last answer related in any way to the issues presented

2 in the reopened hearing.

3 MR. McGANN: I believe the testimony went

4 to my -- my question was -- this whole line of

5 questioning began with why is it the amendment doesn't

6 change our desire for the line? And I think what

7 Ms. Hyde has said and I think what Mr. Douglas has

8 identified is that our reasons haven't changed; the

9 same reasons that we had in the initial hearings are

10 the same reasons that we have today. So to

11 Mr. Douglas' point, is it going to be a reiteration of

12 what we had before, it absolutely will; but I think it

13 has to be stated for this reopened record.

14 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I will overrule

15 the objection.

16 Counsel, if you could be careful in

17 phrasing the question so we can be careful about, does

18 the amendment change whatever, you know, so that we're

19 focused on events which have occurred since the close

20 of the last record.

21 MR. McGANN: I will, Your Honor.

22 Thank you.

23 BY MR. McGANN:

24 Q Ms. Hyde, would you agree with me that as

25 a foundational matter that the company favors and the


30/287

30

1 company established in the first round of hearings that

2 the company favors concentrating solar power facilities

3 over other renewable resources?

4 A In the future, yes, we believe that those

5 will form a good part of our acquisitions.

6 Q Has anything in the amendment changed

7 that from the company's perspective?

8 A No.

9 Q Moving on to the application to amend the

10 Resource Plan, if the Commission were to amend the

11 Resource Plan and set the solar resource acquisition

12 level of 60, 90, or 185 megawatts, would that impact

13 Public Service's participation in the project?

14 A No.

15 Q Why not?

16 A Because none of the issues identified in

17 the reopening have changed our plans. We still want to

18 build the transmission line. We just had to delay the

19 acquisition of those solar resources because we

20 couldn't get the line approved in time; and so we

21 scaled back our acquisition right now, but it's just a

22 matter of timing. We still want to add additional

23 solar thermal and that's why we would continue to push

24 for the approval of the project.

25 Q Would you agree with me that there are a


31/287

31

1 number of things that are uncertain about the future?

2 A Yes.

3 Q Do you have an opinion as to what is

4 certain -- what is certain to occur if the certificate

5 for this transmission line is denied?

6 A If the CPCN is denied, we'll severely

7 curtail the amount of solar resources that we can add

8 in the San Luis Valley, in the future.

9 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, may have a

10 moment?


12 MR. McGANN: I have nothing further, Your

13 Honor.

14 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you,

15 counsel.

16 Let's do it an odd way, does anyone other

17 than Trinichera Ranch have any questions?

18 MS. MANDELL: No, thank you, Your Honor.

19 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you all.

20 Mr. Douglas.

21 MR. DOUGLAS: Thank you, Your Honor.

22 (Pause.)

23 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: And not to slight

24 Blanca Ranch, I'm including them -- or it in the

25 Trinichera Ranch reference.


32/287

32

1 MR. FLANAGAN: That's a conservation

2 easement.

3 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, before I start

4 into the actual questioning of Ms. Hyde, we had some

5 discussion -- or you and Mr. McGann had some discussion

6 about the exhibits that Public Service had marked but

7 not offered.

8 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: They were

9 withdrawn, yes.

10 MR. DOUGLAS: Some of them, yes, were

11 offered and then withdrawn.

12 And, Your Honor, I would like to at this

13 time offer those exhibits into the record. I do not

14 believe that we can have a complete record with respect

15 to the reopened hearing issue relating to the

16 application to amend without those exhibits. There is

17 a significant level of detail in the testimony of

18 Mr. Hill and in the -- and Exhibit 135 is the amendment

19 to 2007 Colorado Resource Plan, itself, that is not

20 contained in the application that I believe

21 specifically relates to some of the issues that in Your

22 Honor's ruling you have allowed questioning into.

23 And I agree with you that there is

24 overlap between -- in those exhibits between what

25 issues you have allowed and what issues you have


33/287

33

1 excluded from consideration in the reopened hearing.

2 And we -- as you may know, we respectfully disagree

3 with some of the -- with the issues that have been

4 excluded; however I believe that in order to explore

5 the issues that Your Honor has opened the record to, it

6 is important that these exhibits be admitted into the

7 record.

8 So with that I would offer -- I believe

9 the foundation was laid by Mr. McGann -- 133, 134, 135,

10 and Exhibit 136 into the record.

11 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Mr. McGann?

12 MR. McGANN: If I may respond, Your

13 Honor, we offered the exhibits -- well, actually let me

14 go back to Mr. Sopkin's preliminary statement which was

15 that based upon the rulings that have been made so far

16 on our motions in limine, to a certain extent we were

17 uncertain as to what the scope of the hearing would be.

18 We certainly agree with Your Honor's ruling that

19 matters that have to be addressed in the Resource Plan

20 or the amendment to address the Resource Plan, Resource

21 Planning dockets, as well as RES Compliance Plan

22 dockets have to be addressed in those particular

23 proceedings.

24 Our offering of the attachments to the

25 application to amend the 2007 Resource Plan was simply


34/287

34

1 for administrative convenience to the extent Your Honor

2 wanted those in the record.

3 For example, when we tendered the

4 disclosure from Ms. Hyde's testimony, we included the

5 entire filing in the tendering of the witness

6 disclosure.

7 Your Honor has pointed out -- and we

8 agree -- that by doing that we run the danger of

9 expanding the scope of this proceeding. And I

10 appreciate Your Honor's caution and we absolutely agree

11 with Your Honor's ruling. And it's pretty clear from

12 Mr. Dougla's offering of those exhibits that that's

13 exactly what Mr. Douglas wants to do.

14 I accepted your ruling, Your Honor, and

15 agree that the scope of this hearing is what is the

16 impact on the line, to the extent that the Commission

17 reduces the amount of solar that the company is ordered

18 to acquire pursuant to the 2007 Resource Plan?

19 That's all. And I agree with Your

20 Honor's ruling that to really tighten the hearing up

21 and make sure we didn't get into extraneous issues,

22 simply introducing the application which gives that

23 lower limit, is all that is needed in order to

24 sufficiently limit the scope of this hearing.

25 So I agree with Your Honor's ruling and


35/287

35

1 we oppose Mr. Douglas' motion to introduce these other

2 exhibits into the record.

3 I want to be clear that our offering was

4 not that we thought that these -- that we were going to

5 rely on these documents or that these documents were

6 relevant to this particular proceeding; it was simply

7 out for administrative convenience that we offered

8 those exhibits. Your Honor has made a ruling that they

9 are not to be admitted and we agree with that ruling.

10 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor.

11 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: You may respond,

12 Mr. Douglas, and then I have a question.

13 MR. DOUGLAS: Okay, Your Honor, I'm not

14 intending to offer those exhibits to expand the issues

15 in the hearing as Mr. McGann argues or to say that

16 offering those exhibits -- or admitting those exhibits

17 into evidence would change your prior rulings on the

18 motion in limine which gave us direction on the topics

19 that you believe are on -- are within limits and off

20 limits.

21 I'm simply saying that there is relevant

22 and admissible information in those exhibits that

23 relates specifically to the areas of testimony that you

24 have allowed in your rulings in this proceeding and

25 that we cannot have a complete record without them.


36/287

36

1 And the fact that there may be other details in there

2 that relate to areas you consider off limits is not a

3 reason to refuse admission of the documents.

4 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: In your opinion.

5 MR. DOUGLAS: In my opinion.

6 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Mr. Douglas, let

7 me ask you two questions: The first is, can you help

8 me to understand why you would need the -- what I'm

9 going to refer to as the reliance documents, that is

10 the testimony of Mr. Hill and the specifics of the

11 underlying information supporting the application to

12 amend the 2007 Colorado Resource Plan in order to --

13 why do you need that information in order to examine

14 Ms. Hyde on the following issue which is -- which is

15 the issue in this docket, quote -- excuse me, in this

16 proceeding with respect to the amendment and that issue

17 is the impact, if any, on the need for the project in

18 the event the Commission grants the application to

19 amend the 2007 Colorado Resource Plan and sets the

20 solar resource acquisition level at 185 megawatts, at

21 90 megawatts or at 60 megawatts period, unquote.

22 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, the answer to

23 that is that Public Service in this case has discussed

24 or put forth as its stated need for the line both

25 short-term solar resource acquisitions which have now


37/287

37

1 dropped to either 60, 90, or 185 in their view and also

2 longer term solar resource acquisitions identified as

3 three solar thermal placeholders totaling 250 megawatts

4 in the years 2016 through 2018.

5 The portions of -- specific portions of

6 both the Hill testimony and the actual amendment,

7 Exhibit 135 to the 2007 Colorado Resource Plan,

8 specifically address issues that were discussed by

9 Ms. Hyde and other witnesses regarding those future

10 solar resource acquisitions which Public Service is

11 relying on at least in part for the need for the line

12 and whether the likelihood of acquisition of those

13 resources has changed in light of the information

14 contained in the amendment, specifically; and that's

15 relevant and that's something that Your Honor had ruled

16 is relevant. And those documents are needed to fully

17 explore that issue.

18 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Now I have yet

19 another question.

20 MR. DOUGLAS: All right.

21 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Where is the

22 reference in -- I assume you are talking about the most

23 recent ruling, the most recent decision.

24 MR. DOUGLAS: Uh-huh. Yes, Your Honor.

25 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: R10-0746-I.


38/287

38

1 MR. DOUGLAS: Yes, Your Honor.

2 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: So where did I

3 say that? I know I address it. I just want the

4 reference.

5 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, in paragraphs

6 52 of that order and also --

7 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Right, discussing

8 Mr. Dauphinais' testimony.

9 MR. DOUGLAS: Right. Specifically, Mr.

10 Dauphinais' testimony specifically referred to the

11 three 250-megawatt solar thermal placeholder resources

12 and then the change of economic circumstances and the

13 amendment that relate to the likelihood of those being

14 developed.

15 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you for

16 identifying that reference.

17 Now to my second question, can you

18 explain to me why you need the documents -- the

19 withdrawn exhibits for identification 134, 135, 135-A,

20 in order to cross-examine Ms. Hyde with respect to the

21 issue of the three solar thermal placeholders?

22 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, specifically

23 those changed economic circumstances that are

24 referenced in Your Honor's ruling are detailed in those

25 specific documents. And what they are -- and then


39/287

39

1 taking those details and asking Ms. Hyde her opinion

2 about whether that affects the likelihood of those

3 resources is something that I can't do without the

4 documents.

5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: You can't do

6 without the documents? I'm unclear as to how you

7 can -- my question is this: Can you not refer to the

8 document or ask questions about the documents whether

9 or not they are in evidence?

10 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, in questioning

11 Ms. Hyde, we could proceed with some of that. There is

12 a lot of detail in the exhibits; whether I cover it

13 all, there is also an opportunity in statements of

14 position to bring together the evidence and we may also

15 be asking Mr. Dauphinais or Dr. Shefferin to comment on

16 those.

17 It's my position that there is a lot of

18 information in those documents that is specifically

19 relevant to these issues and it's otherwise admissible

20 and should be in the record in order for us to not only

21 examine Ms. Hyde but also make the record complete with

22 that evidence that's relevant.

23 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, may I respond?

24 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I have a -- one

25 more question -- and one more question, Mr. Douglas,


40/287

40

1 did Mr. Dauphinais and/or Dr. Shefferin rely on any of

2 these documents in their summary of testimony?

3 MR. DOUGLAS: Yes, they did, Your Honor.


5 Mr. McGann.

6 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, I think the way

7 you have explained the scope of this proceeding is

8 certainly our understanding of the scope and that is

9 very simply that we are to assume that the

10 Commission -- that the Commission will establish the

11 lower end of the company's solar acquisitions in the

12 amended Resource Plan docket; and the question here is

13 how does that impact the need for the line? And

14 that's, quite frankly, a very simple question. And we

15 have had actually Ms. Hyde answer that question without

16 reference to any of the documents that Mr. Douglas has

17 referred to.

18 I think the only reason Mr. Douglas would

19 want to get into those documents is to get behind the

20 reasoning that either Public Service had for seeking

21 the amendment or that the Commission might have for

22 reaching any one of those conclusions or perhaps

23 another conclusion. And I think Your Honor has already

24 stated that that is beyond the scope of this particular

25 proceeding so I see no need for Mr. Douglas to


41/287

41

1 introduce these exhibits for the cross-examination of

2 Ms. Hyde.

3 Now, it's another matter, to the extent

4 that Mr. Douglas, when he's examining Dr. Shefferin or

5 Mr. Dauphinais to try to get those exhibits into the

6 record through either of those witnesses. We'll take

7 that up by objection when those witnesses hit the

8 stand; but in terms of our case and Ms. Hyde's direct

9 testimony, I think Your Honor's ruling is well taken

10 and should stand. And Mr. Douglas's efforts to get

11 these exhibits into the record should be denied.

12 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: You have the last

13 word if you wish to add anything. And this will be the

14 last word except of course for my ruling.

15 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, if I asked

16 questions about these documents to go into an area that

17 has been ruled out, I'm sure Mr. McGann will object.

18 Also, Ms. Hyde answered a very broad

19 question at the end of her testimony about whether

20 anything in the amendment changes the plans of Public

21 Service. And I believe they have opened the door to

22 questions about looking at the specifics and saying,

23 so, wait, this doesn't change your plans, and exploring

24 those in detail. That's all fair game.

25 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: And I agree with


42/287

42

1 you, counsel; but I think you can do that by

2 cross-examination and I do not believe you need the

3 documents in evidence in order to do that.

4 So to that extent, your motion to admit

5 Exhibits 134, 135, and 135-A, at least at this time and

6 through this witness is denied. And I appreciate that

7 that may lengthen the cross-examination.

8 MR. DOUGLAS: All right, may I proceed

9 Your Honor?

10 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: You certainly

11 may.

12

13 CROSS-EXAMINATION

14 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

15 Q Good morning, Ms. Hyde.

16 A Good morning.

17 Q Ms. Hyde, you testified about House Bill

18 10-1001 and I want to go into a little more detail

19 about that statute and what it did, in your

20 understanding. So first of all, House Bill 10-1001

21 requires 30 percent of electric utility sales by 2020

22 to be supplied by renewable energy including banking of

23 credits and in-state bonuses and that sort of thing; is

24 that correct?

25 A It requires you to have Renewable Energy


43/287

43

1 Credits that are equal to 30 percent of your retail

2 sales.

3 Q And Renewable Energy Credits can be from

4 the generation of renewable energy from banked credits,

5 in-state bonuses, those things?

6 A Or purchased credits, yeah.

7 Q Okay. But the bottom line is 30 percent

8 by 2020?

9 A 30 percent Renewable Energy Credits.

10 Q And is it correct a banked Renewable

11 Energy Credit or REC is credit for renewable generation

12 that was generated in a previous year but not used in

13 that year to satisfy the RES requirements and therefore

14 carries over to a future year?

15 A Yes.

16 Q Okay. And the prior Renewable Energy

17 Standard or RES statute required 20 percent credits by

18 Renewable Energy Credits by 2020, including the similar

19 banking and in-state bonuses, correct?

20 A As a minimum, yes.

21 Q And that's a significant increase from 20

22 percent to 30 percent, correct?

23 A Um, our plans that we had in place with

24 the 20 percent satisfies the 30 percent; so the number

25 changed, but it really doesn't change our plans.


44/287

44

1 Q Okay. House Bill 10-1001 also requires 3

2 percent of electric utility sales in 2020 to be

3 supplied by distributed generation; that is correct?

4 A Yes.

5 Q And that 3 percent also -- the 30 percent

6 represent minimum requirements, correct?

7 A Yes.

8 Q You can exceed those if you can fit

9 additional resources that would exceed those minimums

10 within the 2 percent retail rate-impact cap.

11 A Yes.

12 Q Of that 3 percent requirement of

13 distributed generation, at least half must be generated

14 by retail distributed generation as defined in the

15 statute; that is correct?

16 MR. McGANN: I object to the form of the

17 question, Your Honor. Actually I also believe it

18 assumes facts not in evidence. The 3 percent standard

19 is subject to Commission change based on an application

20 by the utility. So I think when we are speaking about

21 that 3 percent, we shouldn't be talking about that as

22 an absolute number. It can be changed by the

23 Commission. I just simply believe that to the extent

24 Mr. Douglas is asking a hypothetical, it ought to be

25 asked in that context.


45/287

45

1 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Can I just --

2 before you respond, Mr. Douglas -- and you may -- give

3 me, please, the reference with respect to the change

4 that the Commission -- isn't that, for the record,

5 following December 31, 2014?

6 MR. McGANN: That is correct. And I

7 believe the context of Mr. Dougla's question was up to

8 2020.

9 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: All right. So I

10 wish to be -- that is the provision to which you are

11 referring; is that correct?

12 MR. McGANN: Yes.

13 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you. Then

14 in that context, the objection to the form of the

15 question is sustained; so if you could clarify the

16 question, sir.

17 MR. DOUGLAS: All right.

18 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

19 Q Ms. Hyde, as the statute is currently in

20 effect -- first of all, let me clarify, I'm asking you

21 right now about the statute as enacted. And you agree

22 there are certain provisions in the statute that may

23 result in changes in the future by the Commission to

24 some of these provisions; is that fair?

25 A Yes.


46/287

46

1 Q But the statute as written requires that

2 at least half of the 3 percent distributed generation

3 requirement be what is defined as retail distributed

4 generation; is that correct?

5 A Yes, by 2020, if it hasn't been changed

6 by the Commission.

7 Q Okay. And the prior statute required

8 that at least 2 percent of that prior 20 percent

9 requirement be met with on-site solar generation; is

10 that accurate?

11 A Yes, by 2020.

12 Q Okay. And you agree that there is no

13 requirement in House Bill 10-1001 that any of the

14 requirements of that statute be met by solar

15 generation, correct?

16 A Correct.

17 Q And you agree that essentially House Bill

18 10-1001 increases the amount of on-site distributed

19 generation from 0.4 percent of the total to 1.5 percent

20 now; is that accurate?

21 A By 2020, yes, it increased the minimum

22 standard, subject to all the caveats we've talked

23 about, from .4 percent to 1.5 percent.

24 Q Okay. And that prior renewable energy

25 statute allowed Public Service to count the on-site


47/287

47

1 solar distributed generation with that in-state bonus

2 of 1.25 times what was actually generated?

3 A Yes.

4 Q And House Bill 10-1001 removes that in-

5 state bonus for retail distributed generation, correct?

6 A Yes.

7 Q You agree that House Bill 10-1001

8 reflects a public policy goal in Colorado to increase

9 the amount of distributed generation?

10 A It dramatically changed the definition of

11 distributed generation from the original bill. So I

12 would need more clarification on what you are -- what

13 specifically you are asking about.

14 Q All right, let's take a look at your

15 deposition.

16 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, may I approach?

17 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: You may, thank

18 you.

19 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

20 Q Ms. Hyde, do you have in front of you a

21 copy of a deposition you gave in this matter on June

22 25th, 2010?

23 A Yes.

24 Q And if you would, please turn to page 25

25 of that deposition.


48/287

48

1 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Counsel, 25 of

2 the quarter pages --

3 MR. DOUGLAS: Yes, it's page 7 at the

4 very bottom, right; but it's deposition page 25.

5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thank you very

6 much.

7 MR. DOUGLAS: On the quarter pages.

8 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Thanks.

9 MR. DOUGLAS: You are welcome.

10 Q Are you with me, Ms. Hyde?

11 A Yes.

12 Q Starting on line 16, you were asked, You

13 mentioned public policy and it's clear from House Bill

14 10-1001, itself, that there is a public policy by the

15 Colorado legislature to increase the amount of

16 distributed generation, correct? And your answer was,

17 Yes. Yes, they want to increase distributed

18 generation. Do you see that?

19 A Yes.

20 Q And that was your testimony that day?

21 A Yes.

22 Q Do you agree that House Bill 10-1001

23 substantially increases the amount of retail renewable

24 distributed generation that Public Service must

25 acquire?


49/287

49

1 A It increases the minimum amount that we

2 need to acquire. It doesn't substantially increase the

3 amount we were planning to acquire.

4 Q Okay. But it does substantially increase

5 the minimum amount that you are required to acquire.

6 A Yes.

7 Q You agree that with banked renewable

8 energy credits and in-state bonuses, Public Service has

9 enough resources -- renewable resources with what is on

10 line today and what is planned in the 2007 Colorado

11 Resource Plan, as proposed to be amended by Public

12 Service to satisfy the House Bill 10-1001 minimum

13 requirements through 2029; is that correct?

14 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, I have an odd

15 objection. I have been letting this questioning go to

16 this point of time. I believe this is friendly cross.

17 We basically said we didn't need the line to meet the

18 minimum standards in the statute. And this entire line

19 of cross has been exploring that issue. We agree. We

20 do not need the line to meet the minimum requirements

21 of the statute. So I object to this as, quite frankly,

22 friendly cross.

23 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: And I will say

24 that is an odd objection coming from the opposition in

25 this case.


50/287

50

1 Mr. Douglas?

2 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, I'm exploring

3 the details of when or how long they will be able to

4 meet the statute.

5 She said we don't need the line to meet

6 the statute and I'm interested in details of when she

7 will need the line. And I think that's perfectly

8 relevant to the issues in this case.

9 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: And I will allow

10 it to continue, provided we move to that topic, having

11 laid the foundation.


13 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Objection

14 overruled.

15 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

16 Q So let me repeat the question: Do you

17 agree that with banked renewable credits and in-stated

18 bonuses Public Service has enough resources with what

19 it has on line today and what's planned in the 2007

20 Colorado Resource Plan as you proposed to amend it

21 downward to satisfy the minimum requirements of House

22 Bill 10-1001 through 2029?

23 A The full amount of the standard?

24 Q The minimum requirements of House Bill

25 10-1001.


51/287

51

1 A No, we're a little short on the retail

2 distributed.

3 Q All right, let's go to what I believe in

4 the documents you produced -- and we'll get there --

5 that Public Service describes as the non-DG

6 requirements, or non-distributed generation

7 requirements of House Bill 10-1001 which is essentially

8 27 percent as opposed to 30 percent; is that fair?

9 A Right. That's how -- the part that

10 doesn't have to be met by distributed.

11 Q Right. Okay, so as to that part does not

12 have to be met by distributed generation; you agree

13 that Public Service has enough resources, enough

14 renewable resources with what's on line today and

15 what's planned in the 2007 Colorado Resource Plan as

16 you proposed to amend it to satisfy the minimum

17 standard of House Bill 10-1001 through 2029?

18 A It meets the minimum REC standard. It

19 doesn't utilize the 2 percent.

20 Q As far as the 27 percent minimum

21 requirement, you can meet that through 2029 without

22 adding additional resources, right?

23 A Yes, it meets the minimum REC

24 requirements.

25 Q And you can only add resources beyond


52/287

52

1 those requirements if you can fit those resources

2 within the 2 percent retail rate-impact cap, correct?

3 A No, we could also add them if they were

4 Section 123 resources.

5 Q That's a good clarification. Let's try

6 that one again.

7 You could only add renewable resources

8 beyond that minimum requirements that you said you can

9 meet through 2029 if they are either Section 123

10 resources or you can fit them within the 2 percent

11 retail rate-impact cap, right?

12 A Yes.

13 Q And so you agree that Public Service can

14 meet that minimum requirement of 27 percent through

15 2029 without acquiring any of the three 250-megawatt

16 solar thermal placeholders that are described in the

17 2010 Public Service RES Compliance Plan, correct?

18 A Yes.

19 MR. McGANN: I object at this point in

20 time, Your Honor. The statute says we can meet a

21 standard through 2020. Mr. Douglas is now asking about

22 through 2029. I fail to see the relevance of this line

23 of questioning. I also think it's quite frankly

24 friendly cross.

25 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Well, as to the


53/287

53

1 friendly cross, I'll overrule the objection because

2 he's moving to the area of the three -- at least as I

3 heard the question, the three 250-megawatt placeholder

4 units that were discussed in the February hearing.

5 So -- but as to the other point with

6 respect to going past 2020 --

7 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, I could ask

8 Ms. Hyde a clarification question but I don't believe

9 the requirements of the statute end in 2020. I believe

10 it's a continuing obligation at this point to have

11 those credits beyond 2020.

12 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I believe that

13 the statute specifically says for the years 2020 and

14 thereafter. So the objection on both grounds is

15 overruled. You may continue -- excuse me, Ms. Hyde,

16 you may answer the question.

17 THE WITNESS: I don't remember what it

18 was.

19 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

20 Q All right. Let me just repeat it rather

21 than have it read back because I think I have it.

22 Do you agree that Public Service can meet

23 the minimum REC requirements of House Bill 10-1001, the

24 non-DG, 27 percent, that we discussed through 2029

25 without acquiring any of the three 250-megawatt solar


54/287

54

1 thermal placeholders that were described in the 2010

2 RES Compliance Plan?

3 A Yes.

4 (Whereupon, Exhibit No. 137 marked for

5 identification.)

6 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

7 Q Ms. Hyde, do you have in front of you

8 what's been marked as Exhibit 137?

9 A Yes.

10 Q And have you seen this document before?

11 A Yes.

12 Q Is this a document that was prepared by

13 Public Service Company of Colorado?

14 A By -- yes, by Kari Clark.

15 Q Karen?

16 A Kari.

17 Q Kari Clark, thank you.

18 And is it correct that this document is

19 the -- what I would call the modeling or the

20 calculation of how Public Service will comply with

21 House Bill 10-1001 through 2030?

22 A I wouldn't say that. I would say that

23 this was a scenario that Kari ran to see what our

24 current plans would accomplish relative to House Bill

25 10-1001.


55/287

55

1 Q And by current plans, you mean what

2 Public Service currently has on line, plus the

3 resources in the 2007 Resource Plan as you propose to

4 amend it?

5 A Yes.

6 Q So, for example, it counts 125 megawatts

7 of solar thermal resources in the San Luis Valley and

8 nothing beyond that?

9 A You said 125 megawatts in the San Luis

10 Valley?

11 Q Yes.

12 A No, it has more than that of generation

13 in the San Luis Valley.

14 Q Well, I was hoping to avoid getting --

15 you are talking about page 2?

16 A Well, I'm trying to see page 2. I have a

17 lot of trouble with this spreadsheet.

18 Q I do have some bigger blow-ups if that

19 would help.

20 A I tried the magnifying glass, doesn't

21 work -- not enough.

22 Q Let me see if I can get us to agree

23 without getting into the details, it's the 125

24 megawatts of solar thermal, plus 60 of PV in the 2007

25 Resource Plan; is that correct?


56/287

56

1 A No, because it also has the Greater Sand

2 Hill and SunE Alamosa.

3 Q Okay, I think we are actually on the same

4 page, so let me just make sure we have this clear. In

5 Exhibit 137, Public Service has done a forecast of its

6 compliance with House Bill 10-1001 through 2030 that

7 includes the resources that are on line on today and

8 then specific to the San Luis Valley, the Alamosa and

9 Greater Sand Hill PV plants, plus the 185 megawatt

10 option that you proposed in the 2007 Resource Plan; is

11 that correct?

12 A I believe that's what's in here. I can't

13 actually see it to verify, but I believe that's in

14 here.

15 Q Well, we can get a magnifying glass or I

16 have a better copy if you want to take issue with it.

17 A A bigger copy, if you want me to verify

18 it; but if you can tell in here, I'm fine; because I

19 believe when I checked, that was what was in here.

20 Q Okay.

21 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, I would offer

22 Exhibit 137 into evidence.

23 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Exhibit 137 for

24 identification has been offered. Voir dire objection?

25 MR. McGANN: Well, Your Honor, I suppose


57/287

57

1 I have an objection. First of all, this isn't a

2 document this witness prepared. Also, this witness was

3 having a difficult time reading the document.

4 Again, I still keep coming back to the

5 fact that this is cumulative of what has already been

6 testified to. So I'm not sure that the facts that Mr.

7 Douglas has elicited through this exhibit are in

8 controversy at this point.

9 So I object to the admission of the

10 document.

11 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Anyone else

12 before Mr. Douglas responds?

13 (No response.)

14 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Mr. Douglas?

15 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, if I may

16 approach for the witness, I have a -- well --

17 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Well, perhaps you

18 can ask one question that starts with: Is this a

19 response to discovery; how did this come into the

20 possession of Trinichera Ranch? Start with that and

21 then show her the big picture.


23 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

24 Q Ms Hyde, do you know whether this

25 document was produced to Trinichera Ranch in discovery


58/287

58

1 prior to the reopened hearing issues?

2 A Yes, it was.

3 Q And you said you are familiar with who

4 prepared this?

5 A Yes.

6 Q Who was that?

7 A Kari Clark.

8 Q And --

9 A K-a-r-i.

10 Q And did Ms. Clark prepare this as part of

11 her regular duties at Public Service Company of

12 Colorado?

13 A Yes -- she is not a Public Service

14 Company of Colorado employee.

15 Q By whom is she employed?

16 A Xcel Energy Services, Inc.

17 Q All right.

18 MR. DOUGLAS: If I may approach, Your

19 Honor?


21 THE WITNESS: Oh, that's much more

22 promising.

23 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Counsel, if you

24 wish to look, you certainly may.

25 THE WITNESS: I don't have a printer this


59/287

59

1 big.

2 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Mr. Douglas, for

3 the record, could you identify -- you have handed her

4 one page of three pages. If you could, identify what's

5 been handed to the witness.

6 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

7 Q Yes, Ms. Hyde, does it appear that what I

8 have just handed you is a large blow-up of page 2 of

9 Exhibit 137?

10 A Yeah, you gave me page 2.

11 Q And I'll represent to you that pages 1

12 and 3 relate to the forecasts of Public Service's

13 compliance with the distributed generation requirements

14 of House Bill 10-1001, and the page about which I

15 intend to ask questions about at the this point is page

16 2, the one I just handed you.

17 A Okay.

18 MR. McGANN: May I have a moment, Your

19 Honor?


21 may.

22 (Pause.)

23 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, may I address

24 the exhibits -- actually with respect to

25 confidentiality, not with respect to --


60/287

60

1 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Why don't you

2 wait until Mr. Douglas has had an opportunity to

3 consult with his colleagues.

4 (Pause.)

5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Are you back with

6 us?

7 MR. DOUGLAS: Yes, I am. I apologize,

8 Your Honor.

9 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: No, that's fine.

10 I believe we now have an issue with

11 respect to confidentiality being raised with respect to

12 Exhibit 137 for identification.

13 Yes, Mr. McGann.

14 MR. McGANN: I believe that these

15 exhibits when expanded contain names of bidders and

16 therefore these are confidential. I don't believe we

17 introduced them to Trinichera Ranch as confidential

18 exhibits; however, I, having taken a look at the

19 exhibits and having consulted with Ms. Hyde, I believe

20 they are. So I would ask that these exhibits be marked

21 as confidential.

22 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: I'm sorry, by

23 these exhibits, you are just referring to Exhibit 137

24 for identification?

25 MR. McGANN: That's correct.


61/287

61


2 I just wanted to be sure. Thanks.

3 In that event, yes, Exhibit 137, on the

4 representation of Public Service that it contains

5 confidential material, will now be Confidential Exhibit

6 137. We will not -- two things will happen, those who

7 have not signed confidentiality -- nondisclosure

8 agreements, please return whatever you may have

9 received; and secondly, the specifics with respect to

10 the exhibit will be discussed in a confidential session

11 of this proceeding.

12 However, I think for purposes of

13 identifying -- by admitting the document, we can

14 proceed.

15 Mr. Nelson?

16 MR. NELSON: Yes, I could make a request,

17 if I understood Mr. McGann's recommendation that the

18 information that is confidential is the names of the

19 individual parties, I was wondering if it would be

20 possible to request that at some point during this

21 process if this is ultimately admitted if Public

22 Service could produce a version of it that has the

23 confidential information redacted for those parties who

24 don't have -- or have not signed a nondisclosure

25 agreement.


62/287

62

1 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Mr. McGann,

2 perhaps -- Ms. Hyde?

3 THE WITNESS: Yes.

4 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Having looked at

5 what is now Confidential Exhibit 137 for

6 identification, you have identified at least page 2

7 some information which in your opinion is confidential

8 information, correct?

9 THE WITNESS: On page 2 and page 3.

10 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay. Could you

11 specifically identify for me and for the record what

12 the information is which in your opinion is

13 confidential?

14 THE WITNESS: Do you want me to point it

15 out to you?

16 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Well, is it in a

17 particular column; can you -- is there some way to

18 describe it or is it everything -- is it a particular

19 column or is it everything about particular entities

20 all the way across the document, if you understand my

21 question?

22 THE WITNESS: Yes, I understand.

23 No, it's very limited information. There

24 would be three pieces of information that would be --

25 that would have to be redacted. Very limited.


63/287

63

1 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: And can you at

2 least identify where that information is found on each

3 page of the document, obviously without revealing the

4 information?

5 THE WITNESS: Right -- on page 2?

6 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Yes.

7 THE WITNESS: Right up here.

8 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: So you are

9 looking at the upper left-hand corner of the document,

10 yes?

11 THE WITNESS: In the first column, under

12 the blue writing.


14 THE WITNESS: That next line.


16 THE WITNESS: That name --

17 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay.

18 THE WITNESS: -- is confidential.

19 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: But not any

20 information which appears proceeding from left to right

21 about that -- about that entity; is that correct? Do

22 you understand my question?

23 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do.

24 We also haven't officially revealed for

25 that same line the exact number of megawatts. So that


64/287

64

1 very next one.

2 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay. And that

3 would be -- that's all the information on page 12?

4 THE WITNESS: Yes.


6 And on page 3?

7 THE WITNESS: On page 3, similarly look

8 in the first column, about halfway down --

9 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Yes. I -- the

10 first column on the left, right?

11 THE WITNESS: The first column on the

12 left, about halfway down in the orange, there is the

13 names of two bidders.

14 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay. And that's

15 confidential.

16 And any information starting with that

17 name and moving right across the sheet, any other

18 information that would have to be removed as

19 confidential?

20 THE WITNESS: No.


22 That helps me to understand the scope of Mr. Nelson's

23 request. Thank you.

24 Public Service?

25 MR. McGANN: I believe we actually, if I


65/287

65

1 can consult for a moment, with my witness.


3 may.


5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Yes, sir?

6 MR. McGANN: Yes, Your Honor, we should

7 be able to provide a redacted copy of this exhibit.

8 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: In which event,

9 the redacted version will be Exhibit 137 for

10 identification. The confidential version will be


12 Mr. McGann, for the folks who don't have

13 access to the confidential version, when might Public

14 Service be able to provide that in that -- excuse me,

15 the public version?

16 MR. McGANN: Your question, Your Honor,

17 was when?

18 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: When, yes.

19 MR. McGANN: May I consult?


21 MR. McGANN: We believe we should be able

22 to provide it right after lunch.

23 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Excellent. Thank

24 you.

25 MR. NELSON: Thank you.


66/287

66

1 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Certainly.

2 We now have two exhibits about which we

3 are discussing, Mr. Douglas; we were trying to admit

4 these exhibits, I believe.

5 MR. DOUGLAS: Yes. And I would renew my

6 request at this time to offer Exhibit 137 and

7 Confidential Exhibit 137-A into the record.

8 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay. Now,

9 Mr. -- all counsel, Exhibit 137 and Exhibit 137-A have

10 been offered, voir dire or objection?

11 MR. McGANN: Your Honor, at this point in

12 time, I would just ask is there any reason to admit the

13 confidential version of the exhibit? Could we simply

14 just go with the public version once we provide it? Is

15 Mr. Douglas intending on going into confidential

16 information?

17 MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, I do not need

18 to go into confidential information, so it would be

19 fine with me to simply offer the public version of 137.

20 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Okay, fine. In

21 that event, that's what we shall do.

22 Exhibit 137 will be a-- or is admitted.

23 That puts some counsel at something of a

24 disadvantage at the moment since they don't have access

25 to the document about which we will be asking


67/287

67

1 questions.

2 We're going to go off the record for a

3 moment.


5 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: We will take a

6 few minutes -- unspecified few-minute break -- this is

7 not our morning break -- for the purpose of allowing

8 Public Service to redact the exhibit.

9 Mr. McGann, if you all would tell the

10 reporter when you are ready to go.

11 MR. McGANN: We will.

12 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: And he'll come

13 get me.

14 MR. McGANN: We will, thank you.

15 (Recess.)

16 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: We'll be back on

17 the record.

18 Mr. Douglas, how went the attempts with

19 this exhibit?

20 MR. DOUGLAS: It went well, Your Honor.

21 Ms. Hyde and Ms. Kittel redacted the

22 various versions and I think we're all on the same

23 page.

24 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

25 Q And correct me if I'm wrong, Ms. Hyde,


68/287

68

1 the version of Exhibit 137 you have in front of you is

2 now a public redacted version?

3 A Yes.

4 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Super.

5 All right. Now, Mr. McGann, I think your

6 only question had to do with confidentiality. Are we

7 now good with Exhibit 137 for identification?

8 MR. McGANN: Yes, we are, Your Honor.


10 Exhibit 137 for identification is

11 admitted.


13 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

14 Q And, Ms. Hyde, before I ask you

15 questions -- I do have a couple questions about Exhibit

16 137 -- I want to mark Exhibit 138.

17 MR. DOUGLAS: I do not believe we have

18 any confidentiality issues with this one because if I

19 may speak to Mr. McGann, Mr. McGann, what I have done

20 is pulled only -- one page out of another one of the

21 documents you gave us that I don't believe has any

22 issues but you can verify.



25 (Whereupon, Exhibit No. 138 marked for


69/287

69

1 identification.)

2 (Pause.)

3 A.L.J. JENNINGS-FADER: Mr. Douglas?


5 BY MR. DOUGLAS:

6 Q Ms. Hyde, do you have Exhibit 138 in

7 front of you?

8 A Yes, I do.

9 Q Was that a doc

Documents

CPUC Jul 26 Transcript