Telephonic Procedural Conference - W-01427A-25-0126 - Liberty Utilities (Litchfield Park Water and Sewer) Corp. SW-01428A-25-0127 - Liberty Utilities (Litchfield Park Water and Sewer) Corp. SW-01428A-25-0163 et al Tucson

meeting

Arizona Corporation Commission 11 min 8 agenda items transcribed 3 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: agenda · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What docket numbers and rate increase proposals are being considered?

Belinda Martin 0:00

This is the time set for a procedural conference and docket numbers W-01427-A-25-0126 and SW-01428A-25-0127 for rate increases for the water and wastewater divisions. Excuse me, I'm sorry, I'm getting over a cold, so my voice may cut in and out, I'm sorry. and for docket numbers W-01427A-25-0163 and SW-01428A-25-0163 for approval of a financing application. Good morning. Welcome to the Commission. This is Belinda Martin, the Administrative Law Judge assigned to this matter. And at this time, excuse me, I'd like to take appearances here today on behalf of Liberty Litchfield.

Tim Szabo 1:06

Good morning, Your Honor. This is Tim Saba with the law firm of Osborne Maladon appearing on behalf of the applicant. And we also have on the line Mr. Stephen Amede, the in-house counsel for the applicant also making an appearance.

Belinda Martin 1:25

Good morning. I'm here today on behalf of RUCO.

Sarah Barrios-Cool 1:30

Good morning, Your Honor. Sarah Barrios-Cool on behalf of RUCO. And also on the line is RUCO's Chief Counsel, Dan Pazewski.

Who are the legal representatives appearing for Liberty Litchfield and RUCO?

Belinda Martin 1:39

All right. Good morning. And on behalf of staff.

Bridget Humphrey 1:43

Good morning, Your Honor. Bridget Humphrey on behalf of staff. And with me today here is Robert Ridenour, Co-Counsel on the matter.

Belinda Martin 1:51

Great. Thank you. And I don't think we're waiting for anybody else. I thank everybody for their for their filings. They're very helpful. Before we dig into those. So I just, I don't know. After seeing the most recent schedule. I don't know if those help or not, but I thought I would put it out there in case it might help.

Why is the hearing start date being debated and what are the proposed options?

Belinda Martin 2:12

But currently the hearing is scheduled to begin on the 23rd and I'm I know it won't go all five days, and I thought if it would be helpful, we could move the hearing start date back. Whoops, I'm in 27. I'm getting way ahead of myself. Let's try 26. Move the hearing back to let's say Wednesday. I would still do the public comment on Monday. But if it would be helpful to have a couple of days and start on the 25th, we can do that. But if you're really ready for this current iteration, we can do that too. So let me check with Ms. Humphrey first.

Bridget Humphrey 2:53

I don't think it really makes any difference to staff whether we start on Monday or Wednesday. We could go either way. I guess I'd like

Belinda Martin 3:05

to know how, I'm

Bridget Humphrey 3:06

sorry.

Belinda Martin 3:06

I'm sorry.

What arguments are made for preserving all five hearing days for the CSRM case?

Belinda Martin 3:08

I was just trying to, you know, give it a little extra breathing room. But as I said, looking at the schedule this morning, it doesn't seem to be necessary. So let me go to Mr. Pazewski. Well, and just so

Bridget Humphrey 3:19

you know, Your Honor, I think both RUCO and staff are going to be appearing in the TEP case, which follows the Liberty case. So we may want more time in between those two cases. That's true. That's

Belinda Martin 3:32

definitely true. That's

Bridget Humphrey 3:35

absolutely true. I

Belinda Martin 3:36

understand that. Let me check with Ms. Husevsky.

Sarah Barrios-Cool 3:41

Actually, to be me, Your Honor.

Belinda Martin 3:42

Oh, sorry. Sorry.

Sarah Barrios-Cool 3:43

It's

Belinda Martin 3:43

cool.

Which states have adopted formula rates for water and wastewater utilities?

Sarah Barrios-Cool 3:44

Thank you, Your Honor. RUFO believes that we should preserve all five hearing dates. And the reason for that is that we believe that the question of the CSRM, which is the company's formula rate mechanism, should not abide to Phase 2. We intend to identify all of the reasons why the CSRM is bound up with the determination of the ROE, whether it's appropriate to include post-test year plan and make other pro forma adjustments with respect to formula rates. And we take the position that everything should be tried at once rather than improperly bifurcating the case and kicking the can down the road and in that respect we think it will take five days and we should start on monday even if that's not the case and particularly given that it doesn't make any difference to staff we think it makes the most sense to to get started on monday as scheduled and then move forward

Belinda Martin 4:46

okay that's and that's fine i don't i don't mind starting on monday i just i need help let me go to mr fabo

Tim Szabo 4:58

Your Honor, I think I would agree with Ms. Barber. It's cool that we should preserve all five days. We probably have a different perspective on the phase two issues, which we can talk about at the appropriate time. But not knowing how long it's going to take, I think the best course of action is to keep all five days. And if we don't need them all, that's great.