Procedural Conference - WS-01303A-26-0110 - Epcor Water Arizona Inc. - Aug 14, 2026

meeting

Arizona Corporation Commission 15 min 2 agenda items transcribed 4 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: agenda · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the purpose of this procedural conference and who are the parties involved?

Sarah Harpring 0:02

Okay, everybody. Let's go on the record. Good afternoon. I am Administrative Law Judge Sarah Harpring and I've been assigned to preside over this matter. This procedural conference is being held for docket member WS01303A-260110. In the matter of the application of for water, Arizona Inc gateway, the hobby. Paradise Valley, Rio Verde, Sonora and some city and some city West water districts for a determination of its water utility plant and property for increases in its rates and charges for water utility service. Excuse me and for consideration of consolidation proposals. I'll now take the appearances of the parties, starting with EPCOR.

Jason Gellman 0:54

Good afternoon, Your Honor. Jason Gellman on behalf of the applicant at Core Water Arizona, Inc.

Sarah Harpring 0:59

Thank you, Mr. Gellman. And for RUCO?

Daniel Kaczewski 1:03

Good afternoon, Your Honor. Daniel Kaczewski on behalf of RUCO.

Sarah Harpring 1:07

Thank you. And then finally, for the Utilities Division?

Bridget Humphrey 1:11

Good afternoon, Your Honor. Bridget Humphrey on behalf of staff.

Sarah Harpring 1:15

Great. Thank you. And this procedure conference was called to discuss the scheduling for this matter. And I've seen the filing that the parties made with the proposed schedule. And of course, those are my job. So hold on one moment. Sorry.

Unknown 1:34

And of course, what?

Sarah Harpring 1:36

Those are my dogs being one moment.

Sarah Harpring 1:55

Sorry about that. I have four dogs and they are very reactive if there's any activity.

Sarah Harpring 2:06

So I've seen the filing and it appears to me that the schedule would necessitate an extension of the time clock by about a month. Mr. Gelman, does that accord with your understanding

Jason Gellman 2:25

and really thought precisely about the time clock but if that's what we need to to make things work then we'll uh we're okay with the 30 days okay great

Sarah Harpring 2:39

um i also noticed that the proposed hearing dates include two contingency open meeting dates which i think you all know are always subject to either being used or not being used. Do you really think that we're going to need 10 days? And if we do, are you okay with going a little bit into May, the first week of May? Mr. Gellman, I'll take you first.

Jason Gellman 3:09

Yeah, I guess discretion is the better part of valor. Having the 10 days and not needing it maybe is better than suddenly needing the 10 days and not having it, but we would certainly hope to get it done quicker. If we need to go a couple of days into May, I think that's fine with us. I was trying to avoid graduation season to be quite frank.

Sarah Harpring 3:34

Okay. And it's been so long for my kids, I don't remember what it is. Mr. Pazewski, does that work for you?

Daniel Kaczewski 3:45

Yeah, Your Honor, I... I haven't talked to my client particularly about days on what was scheduled. But I'm not seeing any notices coming up on my text or anything. So I think it's far enough in advance that if it's problematic, we could probably work something out. But at this point, I think it's fine.

How do the parties address the proposed scheduling and possible extensions of the time clock?

Sarah Harpring 4:07

Okay. And how about you, Ms. Humphrey?

Bridget Humphrey 4:12

Nobody has any problem on behalf of staff. So we're okay with going into May.

Sarah Harpring 4:16

Okay, great. I noticed something in the application. Mister Gellman and actually a couple things that I'm hoping that you can help me. One is that the application references the tank maintenance. Program if the air is not improved and it mentioned her.

Unknown 4:41

I'm sorry it references the what

Sarah Harpring 4:43

the tank maintenance program. Okay, if the a ram a ram is not approved. To include Parker. Which is formerly Brookwater. I didn't see Parker mentioned elsewhere in the application. So you could you clarify for me where it falls exactly in terms of what Service area it's in our district.

Jason Gellman 5:17

Yeah, let me give it a shot. Those were the, I think, six separate water systems that EPCOR acquired from Book Utilities. I want to say in the middle, the commission decision was in the middle of 2020. I want to say the decision number is something like 77690, but I can double check that. So I think there's been some, I think it's been kind of renamed as the, or referenced as the Parker Systems Commission. Mark Warren, In in other cases, we might have made mention of it here as part of the have a sue. Sometimes your references have a sue slash Parker. Mark Warren, But that's what that's in reference to Okay,