Section 17(a) and (b) are not waivable under Section 4(b) because they go to the inherent power of an arbitrator to provide a fair hearing by insuring that witnesses and records will be available at an arbitration proceeding. The other subsections of Section 17, including whether to allow prehearing discovery, can be waived or varied by agreement of the parties under Section 4(a).

2. The authority in UAA Section 7 which is limited only to subpoenas and depositions for an arbitration hearing has caused some courts to conclude that "pretrial discovery is not available under our present statutes for arbitration." Rippe v. West Am. Ins. Co., 1993 WL 512547 (Conn. Super. Ct., Dec. 2, 1993); see also Burton v. Bush, 614 F.2d 389 (4th Cir. 1980) (stating that party to arbitration contract had no right to prehearing discovery). Others require a showing of extraordinary circumstances before allowing discovery. See, e.g., In re Deiulemar di Navigazione, 153 F.R.D. 592 (E.D. La. 1994); Oriental Commercial & Shipping Co. v. Rosseel, 125 F.R.D. 398 (S.D.N.Y. 1989). Most courts have allowed discovery only at the discretion of the arbitrator. See, e.g., Stanton v. PaineWebber Jackson & Curtis, Inc., 685 F. Supp 1241 (S.D. Fla. 1988); Transwestern Pipeline Co. v. J.E. Blackburn, 831 S.W.2d 72 (Tex. Ct. App. 1992). The few state arbitration statutes that have addressed the matter of discovery also leave these issues to the discretion of the arbitrator. Massachusetts - Mass. Gen. Laws. Ann. ch.251, § 7(e) (providing that only the arbitrators can enforce a request for production of documents and entry upon land for inspection and other purposes); Texas - Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 171.007(b) (stating that arbitrator may allow deposition of adverse witness for discovery purposes); Utah - Utah Code Ann. § 78-31a-8 (providing that arbitrators may order discovery in their discretion). Most commentators and courts conclude that extensive discovery, as allowed in civil litigation, eliminates the main advantages of arbitration in terms of cost, speed and efficiency.

3. The approach to discovery in Section 17(c) is modeled after the Center for Public Resources (CPR) Rules for Non- Administered Arbitration of Business Disputes, R. 10 and United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCIRTAL) Arbitration Rules, Arts. 24(2), 26. The language follows the majority approach under the case law of the UAA and FAA which provides that, unless the contract specifies to the contrary, discretion rests with the arbitrators whether to allow discovery. The discovery procedure in Section 17(c) is intended to aid the arbitration process and ensure an expeditious, efficient and informed arbitration, while adequately protecting the rights of