FYI - RE SCHEDULE, FOR SUNDAY NIGHT DISCUSSION
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Gregg, Billy Jack BGregg@psc.state.wv.us Date: Sep 21, 2007 2:30 PM Subject: RE: TrAILCo - PSC Case No. 07-0508-E-CN Staff Witness Information To: "Melick, Phil" PMELICK@jacksonkelly.com, "Short, Caryn" CShort@psc.state.wv.us Cc: "Watkins, Joe" JWATKINS@psc.state.wv.us, "Hitt, Richard" RHitt@psc.state.wv.us, "Auville, John" jauville@psc.state.wv.us, "DeHaven, Carrie" CDeHaven@psc.state.wv.us, "Williamson, Derrick" DWilliam@mwn.com, "sriggs@spilmanlaw.com" sriggs@spilmanlaw.com, "rodecker@wvdsl.net" rodecker@wvdsl.net, "bradstephens@comptonlawoffices.com" bradstephens@comptonlawoffices.com, "william.depaulo@gmail.com" william.depaulo@gmail.com, "Palmer, Randall B." rpalmer@alleghenypower.com, "Deaver, Gerald R." gdeaver@alleghenypower.com, "Callas, Chris" CCALLAS@jacksonkelly.com
Folks- Even if the January dates work out, I continue to prefer letting the pro se intervenors put on their cases first, followed by TrAILCo and other parties ending with Staff. This will let the pro se intervenors, who may not be able to attend for very many days, put on their cases and get back to their real lives.
Billy Jack
-----Original Message----- From: Melick, Phil [mailto:PMELICK@jacksonkelly.com] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 2:20 PM To: Short, Caryn Cc: Watkins, Joe; Hitt, Richard; Auville, John; DeHaven, Carrie; Gregg, Billy Jack; Williamson, Derrick; sriggs@spilmanlaw.com; rodecker@wvdsl.net; bradstephens@comptonlawoffices.com; william.depaulo@gmail.com; Palmer, Randall B.; Deaver, Gerald R.; Callas, Chris Subject: RE: TrAILCo - PSC Case No. 07-0508-E-CN Staff Witness Information
Caryn,
TrAILCo intends to oppose the Staff motion in Virginia, which will not be fully briefed until October 4. However, if that motion is granted, then TrAILCo would not oppose your suggestion, provided (i) that all other prehearing dates to which we last agreed remain in place and (ii) that the parties agree to move up the dates for briefs. TrAILCo would like to complete the briefing sooner than we last discussed, in the hope of enabling an earlier Commission order.
Phil Melick Jackson Kelly PLLC P. O. Box 553 Charleston, WV 25322 (1600 Laidley Tower, Court and Lee Streets, Charleston, WV 25301) pmelick@jacksonkelly.com 304.340.1289 (voice) 304.340.1080 (fax)
Pursuant to the requirements related to practice before the Internal Revenue Service, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of (i) avoiding Federal tax penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another person any tax-related matter.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail message from the law office of Jackson Kelly PLLC is for the sole use of the intended recipient or recipients and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, distribution, or other dissemination of this e-mail message and/or the information contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail message, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
________________________________ From: Short, Caryn [mailto:CShort@psc.state.wv.us] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 01:43 PM To: Melick, Phil; Watkins, Joe; Hitt, Richard Cc: Auville, John; DeHaven, Carrie; Gregg, Billy Jack; 'Williamson, Derrick'; 'sriggs@spilmanlaw.com'; 'rodecker@wvdsl.net'; 'bradstephens@comptonlawoffices.com'; 'william.depaulo@gmail.com'; 'Palmer, Randall B.'; 'Deaver, Gerald R.'; Callas, Chris Subject: RE: TrAILCo - PSC Case No. 07-0508-E-CN Staff Witness Information
Joe and others, Please see the news article below where the Staff in VA has sought a delay of the January 14, 2007 evidentiary hearings. If the Virginia State Corporation Commission grants a continuance to the VA Staff and hearings are not to be held in VA, it seems to me that the dates the WV Staff proposed for hearings in WV in its Motion of September 11, 2007, will be available. Assuming the VA SCC grants the continuance, do any of the parties have an objection to hearings in WV in the January 9-18 timeframe? Please advise. Thanks Caryn Staff Seeks Delay in Hearing on Proposed Power Line
By Sandhya Somashekhar
Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, September 21, 2007; Page B06
Virginia utility regulators have asked for more time to study whether Dominion Virginia Power should be allowed to build a high-voltage power line through a 65-mile stretch of rural Northern Virginia.
The staff of the State Corporation Commission has asked the commission, which approves power lines, to postpone arguments scheduled for Jan. 14
Dominion's application is "voluminous" and "both complex and novel," according to a four-page staff request released Wednesday. The staff asked that the Richmond hearing be delayed until Feb. 25.
In addition, staff members said they want additional time to consider whether a high-voltage line proposed for Maryland would affect whether the Virginia power line is needed.
Dominion, which contends that the Virginia line is needed to guard against blackouts, is reviewing the commission staff request, a spokeswoman said. If the commission delays the project for more than a year, the company might be allowed to bypass the state and appeal directly to the federal government under a new federal law.
The Piedmont Environmental Council, a nonprofit organization that is leading opposition to the line, said it is pleased with the staff's request.
They recognize it's not as simple as the scare tactics of, 'Your lights are going to go out if you don't get this line,' " council spokesman Robert W. Lazaro Jr. said. "It is very significant."
The 270-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line, a joint project of Dominion and Pennsylvania-based Allegheny Power, would carry electricity from coal-fired plants in the Midwest to fast-growing Northern Virginia.
Dominion would be in charge of the eastern part of the line, which would begin in Frederick, Va., and end in Loudoun County, slicing through parts of Fauquier, Rappahannock, Culpeper, Warren and Prince William counties. The estimated cost of that portion of the line is $243 million
The other project the commission staff wants to study is a $1.8 billion, 300-mile high-voltage line proposed by Allegheny and American Electric Power. It would start in West Virginia and end in Frederick County, close to the Montgomery County border.
Both proposals have provoked an outcry from preservationists and landowners, who worry that the cables and lofty steel towers will mar the landscape and bring down property values.
In addition, the environmental council has argued that Virginia does not need the Dominion line.
On Monday, the organization published a report that says Dominion and Allegheny misrepresented the data to prop up the case for the line and that they ignored "less costly and less environmentally damaging solutions."
In April, Dominion released a report that warned of "significant problems in the system that will require new transmission facilities by 2011."
This week, the utility company announced energy conservation initiatives to help meet the growing demand for electricity in Virginia.
A hearing examiner for the State Corporation Commission is to decide this fall whether to delay arguments in the case. If the examiner agrees to a delay, anyone who wants to testify Jan. 14 would be allowed to do so.
-----Original Message----- From: Short, Caryn Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 10:43 AM To: 'Melick, Phil'; Watkins, Joe Cc: Auville, John; DeHaven, Carrie; Gregg, Billy Jack; Williamson, Derrick; sriggs@spilmanlaw.com; rodecker@wvdsl.net; bradstephens@comptonlawoffices.com; william.depaulo@gmail.com; Palmer, Randall B.; Deaver, Gerald R.; Callas, Chris Subject: RE: TrAILCo - PSC Case No. 07-0508-E-CN Staff Witness Information
Joe, In accordance with Commissioner McKinney's directive, at the hearing on Friday, I have confirmed that the Staff witnesses will be available for the February hearing dates. The Staff understands that for the February hearing dates TrAILCo will proceed with the presentation of its witnesses first, any remaining intervenor witnesses next and finally the Staff witnesses, both in-house and Consultant. The Staff is willing to work with TrAILCo and any intervenors that have witnesses remaining to be called at the February hearings in order to accommodate the calling of out of town witnesses in an efficient manner. Further it may be appropriate to group the presentation of witnesses by their area of expertise.
Please provide this information to the Commission and let me know if they require anything further. Caryn
Caryn Watson Short Supervising Attorney WV PSC P.O. Box 812 201 Brooks Street Charleston, WV 25323
Ph. (304)-340-0338 Fax: (304) 340-0372
-----Original Message----- From: Melick, Phil [mailto:PMELICK@jacksonkelly.com] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 9:47 AM To: Watkins, Joe Cc: Short, Caryn; Auville, John; DeHaven, Carrie; Gregg, Billy Jack; Williamson, Derrick; sriggs@spilmanlaw.com; rodecker@wvdsl.net; bradstephens@comptonlawoffices.com; william.depaulo@gmail.com; Palmer, Randall B.; Deaver, Gerald R.; Callas, Chris Subject: TrAILCo - PSC Case No. 07-0508-E-CN
Joe,
As you requested on Friday, here is what the attending lawyers agreed to with respect to a procedural schedule, in the event that the Commission determines not to proceed as per the previous Staff memoranda.
Public comment hearings week(s) of October 8 or 15, 2007
Status hearing and Charleston public comment hearing - November 1, 2007
Deadline for Staff and intervenors' testimony, including rebuttal to TrAILCo's testimony - December 5, 2007, 12:00 p.m.
Deadline for propoundment of discovery - December 12, 2007
Deadline for TrAILCo's rebuttal testimony and other parties' cross-rebuttal of each others' testimony - January 7, 2008, 12:00 p.m.
Evidentiary hearing, first phase [everyone's case but TrAILCo] - January 9-11, 14-15, 2008 TrAILCo will pay for expedited transcription of proceedings
Evidentiary hearing, second phase [TrAILCo's case, including oral surrebuttal to evidence adduced in first phase; possibly Staff's witnesses unable to attend first phase] - February 12-15, 19-22, 2008. TrAILCo will pay for overnight transcription of proceedings
Initial briefs and proposed findings/conclusions - March 10, 2008
Reply briefs - March 21, 2008
The Commission might also wish to reflect in an order TrAILCo's stipulation as to how it would expedite discovery. With the understanding that it will not be asked to do anything more expeditiously, TrAILCo has committed to accelerating its responses to discovery as set forth below. (As stated on Friday, discovery outside this protocol will be addressed pursuant to Commission Rule.)
1. Requests should be directed via email to each of rpalmer@alleghenypower.com, gdeaver@alleghenypower.com, hriddle@alleghenypower.com, bmill11@alleghenypower.com, ccallas@jacksonkelly.com, and pmelick@jacksonkelly.com, with the requests in an accompanying document published in Microsoft Word.
2. Requests received before 12:00 p.m. on a business day will be deemed served that day. Requests received thereafter will be deemed served on the subsequent business day.
3. TrAILCo will file and serve its objections within seven calendar days, and its responses within 14 calendar days; provided, that if that day is not a business day, then the time is extended to the subsequent business day.
TrAILCo must reserve the right to take the position that sheer quantity of requests or other circumstances preclude this accelerated response protocol, just as might be the case under standard Commission Rule. By copy of this correspondence to the lawyers who attended our hearing on Friday, we respectfully reiterate our request that parties propound discovery as soon as they are able. In that regard, TrAILCo's case in chief has been of public record since March 30, and TrAILCo has already responded to discovery from the Staff and the WVEUG. We would expect that TrAILCo, and not the other parties, will be the principal server of discovery in the week ending December 7, 2007 (if the Commission adopts the stipulated schedule above).
Joe, please let us know if the you or the Commission have any questions or concerns.
Phil Melick Jackson Kelly PLLC P. O. Box 553 Charleston, WV 25322 (1600 Laidley Tower, Court and Lee Streets, Charleston, WV 25301) pmelick@jacksonkelly.com 304.340.1289 (voice) 304.340.1080 (fax)
Pursuant to the requirements related to practice before the Internal Revenue Service, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used by any taxpayer for the purpose of (i) avoiding Federal tax penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another person any tax-related matter.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail message from the law office of Jackson Kelly PLLC is for the sole use of the intended recipient or recipients and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, distribution, or other dissemination of this e-mail message and/or the information contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail message, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
-
William V. DePaulo, Esq.