44970 IURC RESPONDENTS EXHIBIT NO 2 10 03 2017

Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page VERIFIED SETTLEMENT TESTIMONY OF TIMOTHY R CAISTER IURC Ql Please state your name, business address and title Al My name is Timothy R Caister My business address ,€~Alb~ i~~'-~/~~~ -:615 Street, Suite 600, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 I am Vice President of Regulatory Policy for NIPSCO Q2 Please briefly describe your educational and business experience A2 I am a graduate of Alma College in Alma, Michigan, with a Bachelor of Arts degree I received my Juris Doctor from Chicago-Kent College of Law at the Illinois Institute of Technology in December 2004 I have also taken courses towards a Masters of Business Administration at the Stuart 10 Graduate School of Business at the Illinois Institute of Technology Upon 11 my graduation from Alma College, I was employed by NiSource 12 Corporate Services Company ("NCS") in various positions including 13 Federal Regulatory Policy Specialist and Manager of Regulatory Policy 14 After graduating from Chicago-Kent, I was employed by NCS as an 15 attorney providing regulatory legal support to NIPSCO' s gas and electric 16 businesses in proceedings before the Indiana Utility Regulatory Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page2 Commission ("Commission") In June 2007, I accepted a position as Associate General Counsel with Ameren Services Company (" Ameren") in St Louis as part of its Federal Regulatory Team In that position, I handled a variety of legal and regulatory issues including those associated with the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc ("MISO"), of which Ameren Corp.'s utility subsidiaries are members Specifically, during my tenure at Ameren I was responsible for advising on matters in front of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") and associated wholesale power and transmission contracts I returned to NCS 10 in November 2008 as Director of Regulatory Policy, which was 11 transitioned to NIPSCO in January of 2009 I was promoted to my current 12 position of Vice President of Regulatory Policy on September 1, 2016 13 Q3 14 15 - Have you previously testified before this or any other regulatory agency? A3 Yes I have previously submitted testimony in requests for new 16 environmental projects in Cause No 44311, new critical infrastructure 17 projects in Cause No 44340, a spaceheating discount transition plan in 18 Cause No 44436 as well as for approval of new and revised tariffs and 4' ~ Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page3 riders in Cause Nos 42348, 42480 and 44520 I also previously submitted testimony in Cause No 43566 regarding the Commission's demand response generic investigation, and in Cause No 43426-Sl regarding MISO I also submitted testimony in support of settlement agreements in Cause Nos 38706-FAC80-S1 and 43674 I have submitted testimony regarding demand side management in Cause No 43912, testimony regarding feed-in tariffs and net metering in Cause No 43922 and testimony regarding an asset sale in Cause No 43989 I also submitted testimony regarding NIPSCO' s request for approval of a Green Power 10 Rider pilot program in Cause No 44198 as well as NIPSCO's semi-annual 11 adjustment filings (Cause No 44198-GPR-X) and modification of 12 NIPSCO's Green Power Rider in Cause No 44520 I submitted testimony 13 in NIPSCO' s electric and gas Transmission, Distribution, and Storage 14 System Improvement Charge tracker proceedings (Cause No 44733- 15 TDSIC-X and Cause No 44403-TDSIC-X) 16 testimony in NIPSCO' s federal mandated CCR and ELG compliance plan 17 filing in Cause No 44872 18 Q4 Most recently I submitted What is the purpose of your testimony in this proceeding? Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page4 A4 The purpose of my testimony is to explain why the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement (the "Agreement") executed between NIPSCO and the Pipeline Safety Division of the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (the "Commission") (the "Division") (collectively, the "Settling Parties") in consistent with the public interest and should be approved QS Please provide an overview of the Agreement AS The Agreement was reached between NIPSCO and the Pipeline Safety Division (the "Division") of the Commission and reflects resolution of all issues associated with two Notices of Potential Violation issued by the 10 Division on November 30, 2016 alleging 261 individual violations of 11 specific state and federal performance standards related to the locating of 12 underground facilities 13 violations and has agreed to commitments in four principal areas: 14 communications, information exchange, pipeline safety management 15 systems, and civil penalties Mr Stone provides additional detail about 16 each of those commitments in his testimony 17 Q6 Under the Agreement, NIPSCO admits those Why has NIPSCO chosen to address these issues through settlement? Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page A6 NIPSCO has not disputed any of the facts underlying the specific damages at issue, and is focused on improving its damage prevention and pipeline safety performance consistent with its obligation to provide safe and reliable service to its customers NIPSCO recognizes that it is important to continue its efforts to reduce the number of damages to its underground facilities To that end, it made more sense to work with the Division to improve not only NIPSCO' s performance in this area but to also improve the level of communication and information exchange so that NIPSCO and the Division can help each other develop the best program 10 performance possible 11 Q7 Is the Agreement in the public interest? 12 A7 Yes The Agreement is in the public interest because it promotes 13 implementation of best practices in damage prevention including 14 improved communication and development of an enhanced safety culture 15 around pipeline safety and compliance consistent with industry leading 16 practices The focus of the Agreement is on improvement and facilitation 17 of safety and promotion of public awareness 18 significant civil penalty penalizes NIPSCO for violations of state and Finally, payment of a Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page6 federal performance standards and expectations This payment is made in recognition of the fact and resolves past violations as alleged in the Notices of Probable Violation In addition, it is important to note that the Agreement does not solely address past issues or violations Rather, it also incorporates a prospective mechanism or matrix for assessing future damages would be in the public interest with this aspect, but it does not stop there To the extent NIPSCO is able to achieve specific milestones relative to those damage metrics, NIPSCO is able to mitigate or eliminate the level of 10 penalties through 2019 This is aligning the public interest with NIPSCO's 11 performance insofar as improved performance leads to less or no 12 penalties By rewarding achievement of industry leading performance 13 across the full spectrum of damage prevention activities including public 14 outreach and excavator engagement, the public interest is well served 15 through improvements achieved in safety and construction practices 16 When considered, the Agreement is in the public interest for the reasons 17 stated above 18 The Agreement Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page Q8 Does this conclude your prefiled settlement testimony? AS Yes VERIFICATION I, Timothy R Caister, Vice President, Regulatory Policy for Northern Indiana Public Service Company, affirm under penalties of perjury that the foregoing representations are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief ~ TimotKy K Laister Dated: August 3, 2017 ··, ... ~ Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page3 riders in Cause Nos 423 48, 424 80 and 44 520 I also previously submitted testimony in Cause No 43566 regarding...Petitioner's Exhibit No Cause No 44970 Northern Indiana Public Service Company Page2 Commission ("Commission") In June 20 07, I accepted a position as Associate General... demand side management in Cause No 439 12, testimony regarding feed-in tariffs and net metering in Cause No 43 922 and testimony regarding an asset sale in Cause No 43989 I also submitted testimony