Arizona-American
Water
Company,
Inc.
-
Transaction
with
Maricopa
County
Municipal
Water
Conservation
District
Number
One
On
October
11, 2005, Arizona-American
Water Company ("Arizona-American" or "Company") filed an
application ("Original Application") with the Arizona Corporation Commission ("ACC"
or
"Commission")
requesting
certain
approvals
associated
with
a
transaction
between
the
Company's
Aqua
Fria
Water
District
and
the
Maricopa
County
Municipal
Water
Conservation
District
Number
One
("MWD")
for
the
purpose
of
obtaining
treatment,
at
a
planned
regional
water
treatment
facility,
of
a
portion
of
the
Company's
Central
Arizona
Water
Project ("CAP")
water
allocation.
Arizona-American's
Original
Application
outlined
the
Company's
plans
to
purchase
water
treatment
capacity,
through
a
capital
lease
arrangement,
from
MWD.
At
the
time
of
the
filing,
MWD
had
plans
to
finance,
build,
and
own
a
water
treatment
facility
(the
"White
Tanks
Plant")
that
could
provide
treated
CAP
water
for
the
Company's
Agua
Fria
District
service
territory
located
west
of
Phoenix
and
north
of
Interstate
10,
between
the
White
Tank
Mountains
and
the
Arizona
Loop
101
freeway.
Arizona-American's
Original
Application
sought
the
following:
a)
Commission
pre-approval
of
and
a
finding
of
prudency
for
a
capital
lease
agreement
for
CAP
water
treatment
capacity
between
the
Company
and
MWD;
b)
authority
to
issue
debt;
c)
authority
to
transfer
assets
from
the
Company
to
MWD;
d)
revisions
to
an
existing
Company
hook-up
fee;
and,
e)
preapproval
of
rate
treatment
and
rate
process
for
the
proposed
capital
lease.
RUCO
filed
an
Application
to
Intervene
in
the
case
on
January
4,
2006.
RUCO's
request
was
granted
by
the
ACC's
Hearing
Division
in
a
procedural
order
dated
January
10,
2006.
The
procedural
order
also
set
a
hearing
date
on
the
matter.
On
February
10,
2006
RUCO
filed
direct
testimony
on
Arizona-American's
Original
Application.
ACC
Staff
filed
a
Staff
Report
on
the
same
date.
On
March
2,
2006,
the
ACC
Hearing
Division
issued
a
procedural
order
that
granted
Arizona-American's
request
to
suspend
the
procedural
schedule
(and
the
hearing)
because
of
issues
that
had
developed
between
the
Company
and
MWD.
After
filing
several
status
reports
on
capital
lease
negotiations
between
the
Company
and
MWD,
and
appearing
at
a
procedural
conference
on
August
1,
2006,
Arizona-American
filed
a
revised
application
("Revised
Application")
on
September
1,
2006.
The
Revised
Application
describes
MWD's
decision
not
to
finance,
build,
and
own
the
proposed
White
Tanks
Plant.
The
Revised
Application
also
states
that
the
Company
could
construct,
own
and
operate
the
White
Tanks
Plant
but
would
not
be
able
to
do
so
under
the
conventional
rate-making
process.
Arizona-American's
Revised
Application
is
requesting
that
the
Commission
approve
increases
to
the
Agua
Fria
District's
existing
Water
Facilities
Hook-Up
Fee
("Hook-Up
Fee")
that
will
be
used
to
finance
construction
of
the
White
Tanks
Plant.
The
Hook-Up
Fee
is
currently
being
charged
to
builders
that
are
operating
in
the
Agua
Fria
District.
Arizona-American
presents
two
different
options
for
increasing
the
existing
Hook-Up
Fee
in
the
Company's
Revised
Application.
Arizona-American
is
also
seeking
approval
of
an
accounting
order
that
will
make
the
Company
whole
during
the
construction
of
the
White
Tanks
Plant.
On
September
21,
2006,
RUCO
filed
comments
on
Arizona-American's
Revised
Application. RUCO's
comments
voiced
no
objection
to
the
increases
in
hook-up
fees
requested
by
the
Company.
RUCO
also
stated
its
preference
for
the
Company-proposed
"Option
2
hook-up
fee
increase"
presented
in
the
Revised
Application.
Between
October
23,
2006
and
December
6,
2006,
MWD
and
numerous
developers
filed
for
intervention
in
the
case.
On
October
27,
2006,
ACC
Staff
filed
a
Staff
Report
on
the
Company's
Revised
Application
recommending
approval
of
the
Company's
proposed
hook-up
fee
and
accounting
order
as
requested.
On
December
27,
2006,
the
Administrative
Law
Judge
("ALJ")
assigned
to
the
case
issued
a
procedural
order
that
set
the
evidentiary
hearing
on
the
matter
for
10:00
a.m.
on
March
19,
2007
at
the
ACC's
Phoenix
Offices
at
1200
W.
Washington.
On
January
24,
2007,
RUCO
and
other
intervenors
to
the
case
filed
direct
testimony
on
Arizona-American's
Revised
Application.
RUCO's
direct
testimony
largely
supported
the
Company's
requests
and
reiterated
the
comments
that
RUCO
filed
earlier
in
September
2006.
RUCO
filed
rebuttal
testimony
on
February
21,
2007.
RUCO's
rebuttal
testimony
continued
to
support
the
Company's
requests
and
argued
why
it
was
premature
to
make
any
decisions
on
whether
or
not
the
Company's
estimated
costs
represent
impudent
expenditures.
Surrebuttal
testimony
from
RUCO
was
filed
as
scheduled
on
March
12,
2007.
RUCO's
surrebuttal
testimony
took
issue
with
one
of
the
components
of
a
Company-proposed
formula
that
would
recalculate
the
amount
of
hook-up
fee
to
be
charged
in
the
event
of
third
party
capacity
sales.
The
evidentiary
hearing
on
Arizona-American's
application
was
concluded
on
Monday,
March
26,
2007.
Closing
briefs were filed by the attorneys for the various parties to the case on Tuesday, April 17, 2007. Reply briefs were filed on Tuesday, April
27,
2007.
After weighing all of the evidence presented during the proceeding, the ALJ assigned to the case issued her Recommended Opinion and Order ("ROO") on Tuesday, September 4, 2007. The ROO recommended that Arizona-American's requests for an increase in the Company's hook-up fees and an accounting order that will keep Arizona-American whole during the construction of the White Tanks Plant be granted.
On Tuesday, September 18, 2007, the
five ACC Commissioners adopted an amended version of
the ALJ's ROO by a vote of 5-0.
Return to
Pending Cases
Top of Page
|