Questions 17 to 25, inclusive, of the Rebuttal Testimony of James Kahan
ORA and TURN also move to strike Answers 17 to 25 of James Kahan's Rebuttal Testimony which describe the National Synergy Model. This testimony provides information and context about the model, for example, a description of how "key assumptions" were developed. ORA and TURN claim this information should have been provided in opening testimony, or when information derived from the model was first submitted. Rule 74.3(b). ORA and TURN argue that this information should not be provided for the first time in Rebuttal Testimony, and should therefore be stricken.
ORA and TURN claim that Applicants have not previously provided a clear statement of the assumptions and inputs of this model, as required by Rule 74.3, and that their statements that they did, in fact, provide a Rule 74.3 disclosure are unsupported by any written evidence. ORA and TURN claim that the purported oral disclosure did not name names, inputs or assumptions, or provide even the level of information provided in Kahan's Rebuttal.
Applicants dispute ORA and TURN's claim that the information in Kahan's testimony concerning the synergies model was "provided for the first time in Rebuttal Testimony." Applicants contend that they have responded to hundreds of data requests related to the development of the Models throughout this proceeding, and ORA and TURN later addressed these issues in their reply testimony. Applicants thus argue that Answers 17 through 25 should remain in the record, as they directly counter ORA and TURN's testimony.5
5 The motion cites Rule 74.3(b) for the proposition that this information should have been provided earlier, but the ALJ has already denied ORA's motion contending that Applicants have not complied with Rule 74.3(b).
