20200916Mark Pecchenino to IPC 1-2.pdf

i,**fli'd[;*
September 16,2020 it?liEilf 1fi, &S 8: l+8
;1 i -,:";i-'i ;" i.il-ir-iC;
.-: i i"!:- i :* i;:: *';,.]*j;*ifri ;5$i#$*Re: Case No. IPC-E-20-29
Mark Pecchenino vs. Idaho Power Company
Response to IPC Second Production Request
Dear Ms. Noriyuki: Attached for electonic filing is the Complainant's response to the Idaho
Power Company Reissued First Production Request. The request is not in accordance with Idaho
Rules of Civil Procedure specifically RP 225 01. (b), whereas the request seeks a copy of
recorded audio and/or any other supporting documentation concerning matters of opinion or
policy or the application of law, and/or policy statements of opinion by Idaho Power
employees and/or their alleged contractor. Therefore, this request is not reasonably calculated
to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence as the information requested is of opinion in nature
and not address the core issues of the Complaint, trespass, arbitrary and cupreous policies,
takings without due process and no ADA policies as addressed in the Complaint by t6he
Complainant.
Therefore, the Complainant is denying their request for this reason and the reasons stated below
As previously stated, if the PUC deems this information curtail to their deliberation of the
Complaint and findings of fact, the Complainant would respond promptly to any such requests
directly from the PUC.
REQUEST NO. l: Please provide a copy of any outdoor video surveillance of the Property for
Friday, March 27,2020, and Monday, March 30,2020.
RESPONSE NO, 1:
1. The request is overly broad and unduly burdensome as no specific date or time was
requested just two day (48 hours).
2. Idaho Power has repeatedly claimed to have proof of notice. The Complainant has
provided exhaustive testimony on this issue. This request is not reasonably calculated to
lead to the discovery of relevant evidence as the information requested will not produce
evidence to the matters at hand, addressing the core issues of the Complaint, trespass and
arbitrary and cupreous policies. The Complaint has stated in the Formal Complaint " . . .
the policy suggests that by noticing they can do what they want on the Property without
regard to private property rights or trespass issues. Their policy states. ". . .we do like to
notify our customers when access to their Trees or property is necessary.. . " This policy
is an attempt to circumvent private property rights and statutes by implying that by
"notify our customers " somehow relieves the Respondent from trespass laws. . ." Again
the policy is arbitrary and capacious as it states "we do like to notifu" when it should say
we shall notifr. All of the Respondents policies are written to benefit them and not their
customers.
REQUEST NO. 2: Please provide a copy of recorded audio and/or any other supporting
documentation to substantiate the claims of statements made by Idaho Power Company
personnel or personnel of its contractor, Asplundh, to Complainant as explicitly quoted in the
formal complaint on page nurnbers 6-14,25-26,29-31,37, and 39. DATED at Boise, Idaho, this
Z7thday of August 2020.
RESPONSE NO, 2:
l. This request is overly broad and unduly burdensome. It is vague lacking specificity as it
requests page numbers without specific questions.
2. The request is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence and
has no bearing of the matters at hand, addressing the core issues of the Complaint,
trespass and arbitrary and cupreous policies.
3. The request is not in accordance with Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure specifically RP 225
01. (b), whereas the request seeks a copy of recorded audio and/or any other supporting
documentation concerning matters of opinion or policy or the application of law,
and/or policy statements of opinion by Idaho Power employees and"/or their alleged
contractor. Therefore, this request is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery
of relevant evidence as the information requested is of opinion in nature and not address
the core issues of the Complaint, trespass, arbitrary and cupreous policies, takings
without due process and no ADA policies as addressed in the Complaint by t6he
Complainant.