Hearing - E-01345A-25-0105 - Arizona Public Service Company - Jul 06, 2026

meeting

Arizona Corporation Commission 7h 58m 8 agenda items transcribed 1 day ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: agenda · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What procedural matters and transparency concerns are raised at the beginning of the hearing?

Your Honor 0:00

Record. Morning everyone. Welcome back. This Monday after a long weekend, happy birthday America. Um So I hope everybody's refreshed and uh ready to go on day thirty. In the application of Arizona Public Service for an increase in its rates and charges. Before we get started, I believe where we left off. We're going to be resuming with the Examination of Miss Potter, but actually don't see міс Потер. In the WebEx. So I guess I'll ask APS or um either Mr McCoy or Mr. Prolano. Oh, there she is. Boom. All right. Okay. I see uh Miss Potter there, so good morning, Miss Potter. And before we get started with the resumption, there are any procedural matters we need to address this morning before we uh get started.

Your Honor 0:58

Ruco.

Mr. Pazowski 0:59

Yeah, I'll bring up the elephant in the closet.

Your Honor 1:03

Elephant in the closet, that's a mighty big closet. It's fresh, isn't it? Uh the elephant's in the room, I think. It could be a closet, I guess.

Mr. Pazowski 1:12

I I I'm just wondering there's a current motion. Uh see I'm just uh so I know whether uh what your thoughts are, just so I know if you're expecting responses from everybody.

Your Honor 1:27

I I'm not necessarily expecting I assume you're talking about the uh Tetlow. Request.

Unknown 1:33

Your Honor 1:34

yeah, I I've seen the motion from Aresia. I've seen APS's response to it. Uh as of this time, I don't know that we necessarily need to recall Mr. Tetlow per se, in as far as the testimony that was in question that drew the uh questions with regard to Choya and the conversion have been addressed. He did have his uh Uh, prior statements that were made on the record that APS helpfully provided in a quotation inside their response. It's not necessarily strictly speaking contradictory, but it does uh add some color to uh there being more to be developed on those points. Uh to the extent that Aresia managed to reduce their questions to writing, it would seem to me that. Insofar as these are topics that are appropriate for consideration, that it could be resolved through a written uh sort of supplemental written testimony that could be responsive at least to those questions that were posed in Aresia's request, and we could resolve it that way.

Your Honor 2:35

I don't know that we necessarily need to bring Mr. Tetlow back in order to resolve those questions, um, other than just to get into what did you know and when did you know it, but I think that's actually addressed through those questions. So I would suspect that a written response would be more than adequate to provide those responses. Uh Mr. Allman, any any thoughts on that?

Mr. Allman 2:54

Um yeah, Your Honor, I think that our um our written response in the record, um I think first and foremost starts with the You know, the the basic point that we don't you know, we don't believe that additional development of this issue in the record is necessary in this case. Um, you know, there are you know, innumerable other opportunities for the commission to address this issue um outside of the rate case, which, you know, we think are the more appropriate ones given that they'd more directly deal with the the resource planning issues that um that Aresia is raising. Um and, you know, in it in addition, I think there there there was a lot of notice that this has been something that the company's been considering for a long time.

Mr. Allman 3:41

And I think that, you know, if if Aresia had those questions at that point in time, they could have could have raised them then. Um but, you know, to the extent that your Honor believes that that there would be some benefit to having additional information about it in the record, um, you know, we can we can certainly consider doing that through um through written through basically something that's written and as opposed to recalling uh Mr uh Mr Tatlow. Certainly that would be our our preference, all things considered. Um again I think we would We would hope that that would be, I think, sort of just uh handled as kind of a late filed exhibit that would not otherwise, you know, to the extent that, you know, we have witnesses scheduled for tomorrow and we're able to wrap things up, um, that that would that would be the close of the hearing and then this would be a, you know, we'd file as a late filed exhibit uh after that at some, you know, within some short period of time afterwards, um, similar to what we would do if we were responding to discovery.