PSC denies Great River Utilities’ 2024 formula rate plan annual report after contentious hearing

The Public Service Commission voted to deny Great River Utility Operating Company LLC’s 2024 formula rate plan (FRP) annual report for water and wastewater operations in a contentious discussion during the commission’s February 2025 open meeting.

Commissioners and members of the public raised repeated concerns about customer bills, service response times, meter-read practices and the underlying data used in the FRP algorithm. Commissioner Carr said many constituents—particularly fixed-income and retired customers—had reported steep increases and poor service, and he pressed Great River and its counsel for granular cost and operational data that he said had not been produced in the hearing.

Counsel Leo Manuel, representing Great River, said the company and staff had negotiated a stipulation and that additional parties intervened on the day of evidentiary hearings, which affected timing. Manuel said the case has been pending since February 2024 and that some administrative steps—holidays and internal attorney‑general office procedures—lengthened the process. He acknowledged the company failed to provide one specific cost breakdown in the hearing and said he would follow up to provide information on licensed operators.

Staff witness (Ms. Krueger) told the commission that the staff had engaged consultants (including Larkin & Associates and an FRP consultant) who reviewed Great River’s expenses and responded to data requests; those materials were on the public record and available to parties of record. The staff recommended approval of the filings as outlined in the stipulation filed in the docket, but several commissioners said they still lacked answers to specific operational and cost questions they had raised.

Commissioner Carr described receiving documents at the “eleventh hour” and said that, across his district, callers were frustrated and confused about tiered rates, flat rates, metering and the lack of credit to customers who conserve. He asked for detail on the cost to extract, treat and deliver water and the number of certified operators; counsel for Great River acknowledged those specifics were not provided in the evidentiary hearing and committed to follow up.

Lawyers and commissioners debated legal pathways if the commission denied the filing, including the effect of bond protection and whether rates could revert to pre‑filing levels. Counsel for Great River said a denial could prompt an appeal and that, by operation of law, rates could revert to the level in effect when the commissioners took office (the company’s precise legal options would depend on the eventual order and any appeals). Staff and counsel clarified that if an appeal were filed, existing bonded rates could remain in effect pending litigation.

After extended remarks, a commissioner moved to deny the 2024 FRP annual report for Great River (dockets 2024‑UN‑206 and 2024‑UN‑207). The motion was seconded and, following a roll-call-style “all in favor” vocal vote in open session, the chair announced the motion carried. The commission did not set revised rates at the meeting; staff and parties will follow up according to commission procedures and any applicable legal process.

Commissioners said they intend to pursue additional oversight and to obtain the outstanding operational details—metering records, certified operator counts and documentation of capital investments—before future FRP filings. The commission’s action leaves open legal and procedural next steps, including potential appeals by Great River.