FirstProdRequest_2102.doc

JOHN R. HAMMOND
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
PO BOX 83720
BOISE, IDAHO 83720-0074
[phone]
ISB NO. 5470

Street Address for Express Mail:
472 W WASHINGTON
BOISE ID 83702-5983

Attorney for the Commission Staff

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF THE COMMISSION STAFF REQUESTING THAT THE COMMISSION INVESTIGATE THE BUY-BACK RATES IN THE LETTER AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY IDAHO POWER COMPANY AND ASTARIS LLC.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. IPC-E01-43

COMMISSION STAFF’S FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST TO ASTARIS LLC

The Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, by and through its attorney of record, John R. Hammond, Deputy Attorney General, requests that Astaris LLC (Astaris; Company) provide the following documents and information, pursuant to Rule 225 of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission’s Rules of Procedure, IDAPA 31.01.01, on or before FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2002.
DEFINITIONS
1. “Document” and “documentation” should be interpreted as broadly as possible to include, but not be limited to, the original or any copy, regardless of origin or location, of any book, pamphlet, periodical publication, letter, scrapbook, diary, calendar, canceled check, photograph, form, memorandum, schedule, tax return, telegram, telex, report, record, order or notice of governmental action of any kind, study, minutes, logs, graph, index, tape, disc, internal operating manual, data sheet or data processing card, or any other written, recorded, transcripted, punched, taped, filmed, graphic or retrievable matter or data of any kind, however produced or reproduced, to which you have or have had access. This definition is intended to include, but not be limited to, all documents which have been created and/or which reside in any type of electronic format.
Any document that is not exactly identical to another document for any reason, including, but not limited to, marginal notations or deletions, should be considered to be a separate document.
As to any document related to the matters addressed herein that is not currently in your possession but that you know or believe such a document exists, you are requested to identify and indicate to the best of your ability its present or last known location or custodian.

2. “Person or Entity” should be interpreted to denote, unless otherwise specified, any natural person, firm, corporation, association, group, individual or organization of any type whatsoever.

3. Any request to “identify” or “provide” should be interpreted to mean:
a. With respect to a natural person, that person’s full name, title, job description, and business and home address. Where the identification pertains
to a past period, as to each person identified who is still in your employ, or the
employment of the group with which such person is identified in response to
any requests, provided, in addition, that person’s title and job description as of
the time of such past period. Where the person is no longer in your employ or
the employment of the group with which such person is identified in response
to any request, provide that person’s affiliate, position, home and business
address, if known, or if not known, such person’s last known affiliation,
position, home and business address, or portions thereof as may be known.

b. With respect to an entity other than a natural person, that entity’s name,
business, type of entity, present status and present or last known address.

c. With respect to a document, that document’s title, date, author (and, if
different, the signer), addresses, recipients, or other persons who assisted in
the preparation, subject matter or general nature, and any amendments thereto,
present location and custodian, whether or not such document is in the
respondent’s possession, custody or control and whether or not the document
is claimed to be privileged. The final version and each draft of each
document should be identified and produced separately. Each original and
each non-identical copy (bearing marks or notations not found on the original)
of each final version and draft of each document should be identified and
produced separately.

d. With respect to a physical facility, the location of the facility, the intended
purpose of the facility, the actual use of such facility, the operating dates of the
facility, the installation date of the facility, the date utilization of the facility
terminated if applicable, and whether the facility is subject to the jurisdiction
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission, or any other regulatory body.

4. “Communication” should be interpreted to include, but not be limited to, all forms of communication, whether written, printed, oral, pictorial, electronic or otherwise, including testimony or worn statement, or any means or type whatsoever.

5. “Relating To” or “Related To” means pertaining to, presenting, discussing, commenting on, analyzing, or mentioning in any way.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
6. Where a request can be answered in whole or in part by reference to the response to a preceding or subsequent request, it is sufficient to so indicate by specifying the response to the preceding or subsequent request by number and specifying whether it is claimed that the response to the preceding or subsequent request is a full or partial response. If the latter, the response to the balance of the request shall be completed.
7. If various individuals are the authors of different responses to the Data Requests, please indicate the name of the author and his/her position within Applicants, or if he/she is an expert or a consultant, please provide a current curriculum vitae for each such expert of consultant.

8. As to any requests consisting of a number of separate subdivisions, or related parts or portions, a complete response is required to each part or portion with the same effect as if it were propounded as a separate request. Should objection to a request be interposed it should clearly indicate to which part or portion of the request it is directed.

9. For each document identified in a response which is computer generated, state separately (a) what types of data files or tapes are included in the input and the source thereof, (b) the form of the data which constitutes machine input (punch cards, tapes, etc.), (c) a description of the recordation system employed (including program descriptions, flow charts, etc.), and (d) the identify of the person or persons, during the designated period, who was in charge of the collection of input materials, the processing of input materials, the data bases utilized, and/or the programming to obtain such output.

10. Responses to requests referring to documents shall include all documents relating to the time period specified in each request or in these instructions, whether prepared before, during or after that period.

11. Individual response of more than one page should be stapled or bound, and each page consecutively numbered.

12. If any document covered by this request is withheld for whatever reason, please furnish a list identifying all withheld documents in the following manner:
a. the reasons for withholding;
b. date of the document;
c. name of each author or preparer;

d. name of each person who received the document; and
e. statement of facts constituting the basis for withholding the document.

13. If you assert that documents, records, or information responsive to any requests have been destroyed and are thus not available, state when and explain why any such document, record or information was destroyed, identify the person directing the destruction and identify all documents relevant to such destruction or explanation. If a claim is made that the destruction occurred pursuant to your document destruction program, identify and produce a copy of the guideline, policy, or company manual describing such document destruction program, and any correspondence or communication relating to the destruction of responsive documents, records or information.

14. If any of these requests are not answered on the ground that the material or information requested is confidential, privileged or otherwise immune to discovery, set forth in detail the factual and legal basis which support your decision to withhold production. Please also state whether a protective order or protective conditions regarding disclosure would satisfy or resolve your concern.

15. Each document or written response shall designate the respective question (and subpart of the question) under which it is being produced.

16. Each document produced shall be an authentic original document or a true duplicate of an authentic original document.

17. Each of these requests shall be considered to be continuing and to require supplemental or amended answers as readily as information and knowledge is acquired.

18. If, in answering a request, you encounter any ambiguity in interpreting either the request or a definition or instruction applicable thereto, please secure a clarification by contacting undersigned counsel as soon as the ambiguity is known.

19. The term “and” and “or” should be construed either disjunctively or conjunctively whenever appropriate in order to bring within the scope of each request any information or document which might otherwise be considered to be beyond its scope.

20. The singular form of a word should be interpreted as plural, and the plural form of a word should be interpreted as singular, whenever appropriate in order to bring within the scope of each request any information or document which might otherwise be considered to be beyond its scope.

REQUESTS
Request No. 1: Please provide a schedule showing in detail the calculation of demand charges that would have been paid by Astaris to Idaho Power for the Second Block of power if Paragraph 2 of the Letter Agreement had not been negotiated or if Astaris chose to operate either furnace 1, 4 or both.

Request No. 2: Does Astaris agree that Paragraph 2 of the Letter Agreement could have been negotiated separate from the buy-back agreement? If not, please explain in detail why not.

Request No. 3: Referring to page 5, lines 12 and 13 of Mr. Seder’s testimony he states that, “Astaris was unlikely to be able to secure Block 2 power at cost-effective market rates”.
a. At that time what market rate was cost effective?
b. If Astaris were to evaluate the current feasibility of operating these furnaces, what market rate would be cost effective?

Request No. 4: Assuming power rates were cost effective, please explain in detail whether or not Block 2 power, up to 130 MW, could have been used after March 31, 2001 to operate the other two furnaces. Provide supporting documents and any calculations.

Request No. 5: Referring to page 5, lines 20 through 22 and page 6, line 1 of Mr. Seder’s testimony he states that the Commission Staff implies that Astaris knew in early 2001 that it would be shutting down all furnaces and closing the Pocatello plant during the remaining
term of the contract. Please provide all information that Mr. Seder believes makes this implication.

Request No. 6: Referring to page 6, lines 20 and 21, and again on page 9, lines 6 through 8 of Mr. Seder’s testimony he states that Astaris advised Commission Staff that closure of one of its furnaces under the Letter Agreement Amendment would be irreversible. Please provide any and all documentation that demonstrates that Astaris advised Commission Staff of that fact and the specific Staff members that this was provided to.

Request No. 7: Referring to page 10, lines 7 through 9, Mr. Seder’s testimony states that the Commission Staff wanted to lock in a fixed price and that they were not willing to take the risk that market prices in the region would rise even higher.
a. Please provide any and all documentation demonstrating Staff’s desire and willingness to lock in fixed contract prices.
b. Please identify the dates associated with all documentation.
c. Was Staff involved in the negotiation of the fixed price?

Request No. 8: Referring to page 10, line 7 and page 10, line 15, Mr. Seder’s testimony makes reference to “Idaho Power and the Commission Staff.” Please provide the following information concerning each of those references:
a. Who were the Staff involved?
b. When did the meeting, discussion or information exchange take place?
c. What was the purpose of the meeting, discussion or information exchange?
d. How was the information communicated?
e. Please provide any documents exchanged or discussed as part of the
communication.

Request No. 9: Referring to pages 13 and 14 of Mr. Seder’s testimony he discusses the shut down of the last furnace; please explain in detail why the last furnace was shut down. Include documentation supporting the circumstances and calculations for the business plan.

Request No. 10: Referring to page 5, lines 3 through 5 of Mr. Binz’s testimony that states, “changing the contract after Astaris has responded to these economic implications with an after the fact analysis unfairly undercuts the company’s decisions.” To the extent that the Commission maintains jurisdiction over a contract for the supply of utility services between a utility and its electric customer after initial contract approval, do you believe contract provisions can be changed prospectively during the contract period? If you believe it can be changed, under what circumstances should it be changed? If you believe it cannot be changed please explain why.

Request No. 11: Did Mr. Binz or his staff ever recommend changing a contract for the supply of electric service between a regulated utility and one of its customers after the contract was initially approved by the appropriate regulatory agency? If yes, please identify the case by number. Also provide a copy of all documents and materials included in the case file.

Request No. 12: Please provide copies of all testimony or comments filed by Mr. Binz or a person under his supervision in a case before a utility regulatory commission for the last five years that meet any of the following criteria.
a. Include a utility contract with one of its customers for a utility service.
b. Discuss rate increase impacts on low income customers.
c. If for any reason the testimony or comments cannot be provided, please
provide a summary of the issues and positions taken in the case, case
number and positions identified by party or person.

Request No. 13: Referring to page 15, line 2 of Mr. Binz’s testimony he states, “The contract must stand on its own …”. Please specify whether the word “contract” relates to the Letter Agreement amendment by itself or the Letter Agreement amendment and Electric Service Agreement (ESA) together. Please innumerate the reasons why he believes “the contract must stand on its own…”

Request No. 14: In her testimony Ms. McCarvill identifies 8 types of costs incurred by Astaris to perform its obligations under the Letter Agreement amendment. For each of the 8 types of costs individually, please respond to the following questions.
a. Please provide the detailed calculations, invoices, contracts and any other documents supporting the front-end costs incurred.
b. Please provide the detailed calculations, invoices, contracts and any other documents showing the continuing costs.
c. Would the cost have been incurred without the buy-back? Please explain your answer.
d. Was the cost required by a contract or law or did Astaris have discretion as to whether to incur the cost without direct financial liability? Please explain your answer and provide references to legal authority and copies of contracts that required the costs to be incurred.

Request No. 15: Please prepare and provide a detailed calculation with supporting documents showing the estimated annual costs and revenues that might have occurred if Astaris made the business decision to operate an additional furnace(s) using Second Block power in 2001, 2002 and 2003.

Request No. 16: Referring to page 6, line 9 of Ms. McCarvill’s testimony, she states “Astaris purchased raw materials in the open market to cover the shortfall.”
a. What was the length of purchase?
b. Why was this time frame chosen?
c. Were there contracts for these purchases? Please provide all contracts. If
previously provided, please reference the document number.
d. Who was it purchased from?
e. What would be the estimated cost to produce the materials at the Pocatello
facility?

Request No. 17: Referring to page 7, lines 12 and 13 of Ms. McCarvill’s testimony, please explain why a larger fleet of railcars was needed.
Request No. 18: Referring to page 7, line 13 of Ms. McCarvill’s testimony, please explain why increased shipments of phosphoric acid were needed.

Request No. 19: Referring to page 10, lines 1 through 11 of Ms. McCarvill’s testimony, please explain in detail and provide supporting documentation in response to the following questions:
a. Please provide the dollar amounts and dates booked for the write-offs.
b. Why were booked write-offs reflected associated with the buy-back if the intent was to continue operation after the buy-back ended in March of 2003.
c. Isn’t it true that the write-offs were actually a result of the final shut down of
the Pocatello plant? If your is no, please provide supporting
documentation, contracts, and accounting rules etc. to support this position.

Request No. 20: Referring to page 10, line 17 through 22 of Ms. McCarvill’s testimony, please respond to the following and provide requested supporting documents:
a. When were the notices of lay offs given?
b. Please provide a copy of each type of lay off notice provided with the employee name or any employee identification removed or blackened.
c. Please provide the dollar amount and supporting documentation showing the
labor cost by month for April, May, June and July of 2001.

Request No. 21: If payments from Idaho Power under the Letter Agreement amendment were needed to provide alternatives to production from the First Block furnace that was shut down as a result of the buy-back, why was it reasonable to shut down the last remaining furnace without similar compensation?

Request No. 22: For Astaris Idaho’s and any Astaris operation that the Company claims was affected by the buy-back, annual payroll for each company’s last fiscal year that ended before September 2001?

Request No. 23: When did Astaris officially notify Idaho Power that it would no longer be taking power to operate even one furnace? Please provide a copy of the notification. If there has been no notification, please explain why.

Request No. 24: Please prepare and provide a copy of an Astaris organization chart at March 31, 2001 and currently showing the entities that includes the Pocatello plant, all parents and affiliates.

Request No. 25: For all Astaris entities or affiliates that file Securities and Exchange (SEC) documents please provide the following:
a. Please provide the exact name of each registrant filing SEC documents.
b. Please provide copies of the 10-Ks for 1999, 2000 and 2001 for each
registrant.
c. Please provide the last two10-Qs for each registrant.

Request No. 26: Please provide the following information for Astaris, Astaris Idaho and FMC for the last full fiscal year that ended before September 2001. If provided previously, please provide document reference.
a. Balance Sheet and Income Statements.
b. The owners, except stockholders, and their ownership share of each company.
c. The outstanding shares of publicly traded common stock, if any, and the outstanding shares of common stock for any corporate partners.

DATED at Boise, Idaho, this 1st day of February 2002.

John R. Hammond
Deputy Attorney General

JH: KH:umisc/prodreq/ipce01.43 1st request to Astaris

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2002, SERVED THE FOREGOING FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF THE COMMISSION STAFF TO ASTARIS, LLC., IN CASE NO.  IPC-E-01-43, BY ELECTRONICALLY FILING A COPY THEREOF, POSTAGE PREPAID, TO THE FOLLOWING:

LARRY D. RIPLEY
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
PO BOX 70
BOISE, ID 83707-0070
e-mail: [e-mail]
BARTON L KLINE
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
PO BOX 70
BOISE ID 83707-0070
e-mail: [e-mail]
ROBERT M POMEROY JR
THORVALD A NELSON
HOLLAND & HART LLP
8390 E CRESCENT PKWY, STE 400
GREENWOOD VILLAGE CO 80111
e-mail: [e-mail]
MIQUEL F UGARTE
ASTARIS LLC
622 EMERSON RD
PO BOX 411160
ST LOUIS MO 63141
e-mail: [e-mail]
RICHARD PASQUIER
FMC CORPORATION
1735 MARKET ST
PHILADELPIA PA 19103
e-mail: [e-mail]
RANDALL C. BUDGE
RACINE OLSON NYE ET AL
PO BOX 1391
POCATELLO, ID 83204-1391
e-mail: [e-mail]
PETER J. RICHARDSON
RICHARDSON & O’LEARY
PO BOX 1849
EAGLE ID 83616
e-mail: [e-mail]
ANTHONY YANKEL
29814 LAKE RD.
BAY VILLAGE, OH 44140
e-mail: [e-mail]

/S/
SECRETARY

FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST
TO ASTARIS LLC 11 FEBRUARY 1, 2002

CERTIFICATE