residential utility consumer office (ruco) pat quinn director 602 364-4838 email [email protected]

13
RESIDENTIAL UTILITY CONSUMER OFFICE (RUCO) PAT QUINN DIRECTOR 602 364-4838 Email [email protected]

Upload: peregrine-bond

Post on 21-Dec-2015

214 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

RESIDENTIAL UTILITY CONSUMER OFFICE

(RUCO)

PAT QUINN DIRECTOR

602 364-4838

Email [email protected]

Water/Wastewater

What You Need to KnowSeptember 17, 2014

Agenda

1. EPCOR Agua Fria Wastewater Consolidation Docket No. SW-01303A-09-0343

2. EPCOR’s Pending Sun City Rate Case Docket No. WS-01303A-09-0343

3. Arizona Corporation Commission’s Docket on Changing the Way APS Files Rate Cases

AGUA FRIA WASTEWATER CONSOLIDATION

EPCOR CASE Cost of Service -Rate Base X Return + Expenses -Cost of service varies by community -Consolidation does not use cost of service by community but by total company costs

RUCO Position -Represents all residential customers -Any change in rates requires full cost of service rate case -Stale test years -Commission and Company want to open up the rate cases from 2008, 2010 and a just filed 2014

-Cost savings of consolidation -Current revenue requirement considering all factors and parties -Current rate design

EPCOR – CONSOLIDATED WASTEWATER RATE PROPOSAL

CURRENT RATES RECOMMENDEDSYSTEM TOTAL Note (3) RATE INC (DEC) PERCENT

Agua Fria Note (1) $ 121.91 $ 34.30 ($ 87.61) ( 71.86 %)

Anthem Note (2) $ 56.26 $ 34.30 ($ 21.95) ( 39.02 %)

Mohave WWater $ 82.79 $ 34.30 ($ 48.49) ( 58.57 %)

Sun City $ 18.11 $ 34.30 $ 16.19 89.40 %

Sun City West $ 30.96 $ 34.30 $ 3.34 10.79 %

Note: (1) Agua Fria and Anthem – Current rates reflect rates scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2015.Note: (2) Mohave Wastewater -- Current rates reflect pending increase in rates as filed in Docket No. WS-01303A-14-0010Note: (3) All rates based on average usage of 7,000 gallons per month

AGUA FRIA CONSOLIDATED

What can you do? -Contact the Corporation Commissioners

-Let them know your position through emails, calls or voicemails, letters, petitions

Timeline -It appears the commission wants to hear this quickly, before end of the year

-Cost of service rate case would take minimum of a year

-It was on the open meeting for September 9th but was pulled

-It will probably show up in some form on the October open meeting

EPCOR 2014 RATE CASE FILING

Recent Commission decision in EPCOR's Chaparral rate case (Fountain Hills) -Majority of Commissioners sided with the company on rate of return and depreciation. -against recommendations of the ALJ, Staff and RUCO -two adjustments alone increased the rates over 26%

-Approved a System Improvement Benefit (SIB) ◦ -doubles rates over the next 5 years

-Approved several other increases tank maintenance and declining usage

-All this added up to a 43% increase for the residential customer, Order approved by Commission says a 20.3 %

-Fountain Hills reviewing options

BUT IT’S GOING TO GET WORSE

CURRENT INITIAL SIB INCREASE INCREASE ADJUSTED

YEAR RATE PER MONTH PERCENTAGE RATES 2014 $ 37.85 $ 7.68 -0-

$ 45.53 2015 $ 45.53 $ 1.76 3.87 %

$ 47.29 2016 $ 47.29 $ 1.69 3.72 %

$ 48.99 2017 $ 48.99 $ 1.73 3.79 %

$ 50.71 2018 $ 50.71 $ 1.73 3.80 % $ 52.45 2019 $ 52.45 $ 1.67 3.65 %

$ 54.11

The Order as approved by the Commission states that the rate increase on the average residential ratepayer is $7.68 per month or 20.3%. In reality, the rates increase each year and at the end of year five the rate has increased to $54.11, a percentage increase of 43.0%.

WE’RE NOT FINISHED YET

COMMISSIONERS APPROVAL vs. ALJ• Additional Depreciation Expense through the use of the Group Depreciation

Method as opposed to the modified Vintage method, and the continuation of over-depreciating Utility Plant Assets.

• Changing the Rate of Return on Rate Base from 8.06 percent to 8.95 percent.

ADDITIONAL APPROVALS Declining Usage $ 22,174 Tank Maintenance Expense (18years) $ 202,184 Additional Post Test Year Plant over what RUCO recommended $ 2,278,882 System Improvement Benefit $ 1,502,514

EPCOR 2014 SUN CITY RATE CASE

What is in the Sun City rate case -Filing includes all the issues that were approved in Chaparral case

◦ -Tank maintenance, declining usage, SIB, depreciation, post test year plant

-Adds new issues: Obama Care (insurance cost increases) -Actual rate increase over next 5 years is double because of SIB

◦ - $3.82 vs $7.64 22% vs 44%

-All numbers come from the EPCOR filing

REVENUE PROPOSED BY EPCOR

Current Revenues $

10,265,553

Total Revenues Requested (this filing) $ 11,912,007

Company Increase Requested $ 1,646,454

Percent Increase - Overall 16.04 %

Percent Increase – Residential (Note 1) 22.00 %

SIB Revenue Increases (over 5 years) $ 1,233,692

Percent Increase - Overall With SIB 28.05 %

Percent Increase - Residential With SIB 44.05 %(Note 1 – 5/8’ X ¾” and ¾” = 90% of residential ratepayers)

SIB RATE INCREASE TO RESIDENTIAL RATEPAYERS

INITIAL SIB

CURRENT INCREASE ADJUSTED YEAR RATE PER MONTH RATES

2014 $ 17.35 $ 3.82

$ 21.17

2015 $ 21.17 $ .79

$ 21.96

2016 $ 21.96 $ .76

$ 22.72

2017 $ 22.72 $ .84

$ 23.56

2018 $ 23.56 $ .70

$ 24.26

2019 $ 24.26 $ .72

$ 24.98

Overall increase from current rates 44.03%

EPCOR 2014 SUN CITY RATE CASE

Current Status -Original schedule

◦ -Filed case found sufficient 4/4/14, interveners' testimony due 10/3, hearing 12/2

-Schedule suspended 9/12 -Staff and RUCO been working with company since April -Company can't defend the accuracy of their beginning numbers -Numbers constantly changing -Not ready to file case -They will have to file new accurate data and schedules -Numbers we have shown you today will change but we don't know degree or direction -Schedule is now on a month to month process where the company, staff and RUCO meet with ALJ to discuss where we are and how to proceed

-Watch docket and we will try to keep you advised

APS REQUEST TO CHANGE RATE CASE PROCESS

Requested change -Normally in a rate case the revenue requirement and the rate design are looked at

simultaneously

-APS wants to bifurcate the rate design from the revenue requirement determination

-Based on discussion at the September 9th open meeting it appears that the majority of the Commissioners support this idea

-There was no written document describing this new process

-Everyone at the meeting besides the Commission, the Staff and APS spoke against the proposal

-The Commission didn't vote on the item but instead directed the Staff to draft a proposal

-All parties will get a chance to make comments on the proposal

-We will keep you informed to the schedule since this could move pretty fast