Corix Utah City Heating and Cooling LLC asked the Utah Public Service Commission on Dec. 5 to grant a certificate of public convenience and necessity to operate a regulated district heating and cooling utility for the Utah City development in Vineyard, Utah. Jason Michael Owen, Corix’s vice president for project development, told the commission the Utah City District Energy Utility (UCDEU) would be built in phases and could serve roughly 16,000,000 square feet of residential space and 1,600,000 square feet of commercial space at full buildout.

Owen said the system will deliver up to 58 megawatts of heating and 81 megawatts of cooling capacity from centralized plants distributed through a four-pipe network to building-level energy transfer stations. "UCDEU is a proposed regulated thermal energy utility that will provide centralized heating and cooling services to the Utah City development in Vineyard, Utah," Owen said. He described modular interim energy centers leading to permanent plants, with the first interim center scheduled for service in March 2026.

The Division of Public Utilities and the Office of Consumer Services both reviewed Corix’s filings and recommended the commission approve the CPCN. Ron Slusher, a utility technical consultant for the Division, said the Division reviewed the application, related documents and applicable statutes and concluded Corix provided the information required by Utah Code to obtain a CPCN. "The division concludes that Corix has met the requirements for a CPCN and the public interest will be promoted by the commission granting Corix a CPCN," Slusher said.

Alex Ware of the Office of Consumer Services likewise recommended approval while reserving detailed consumer-protection questions for the subsequent rate proceeding. Ware said OCS will participate in the future rate case "by promoting terms and conditions that will help ensure that end users are treated fairly and have transparent information about the services that they receive directly or indirectly from Corix."

Commissioners focused on the regulatory framework and customer relationships. Commissioner Clark asked whether Corix expects a regulatory regime more like telecom or more like gas and electric utilities; Owen said Corix will provide a detailed proposal in the rate filing but expects regulation "somewhere in between" and that the level of oversight should match the utility’s scale and impact. Commissioner Harvey pressed whether the eventual tariff could include guaranteed rate-of-return treatment and what recourse building occupants—who will not have direct billing relationships with Corix—would have if service problems arise. Owen responded that Corix’s contractual relationship will be with building owners and that details on billing, tenant protections and extension policies will be addressed in the forthcoming tariff proceeding.

Corix acknowledged some permits listed in confidential filings remain outstanding. On that point the commission and Corix discussed a conditional CPCN tied to receipt of required permits; Corix said it would not object to a certificate conditioned on obtaining permits. Corix estimated a January filing for its rate case and noted a timing "chicken and egg" where some permits issue only after construction work begins.

Owen outlined technical parameters and claimed savings: heating supply temperatures up to about 140°F, chilled-water supply around 40°F, pre-insulated HDPE-jacketed pipe assemblies with roughly 1.5–2.5 inches of insulation, and typical annual thermal losses near 5% for heating. He estimated roughly a 20% capital-expenditure savings from aggregated equipment and diversity of load, plus ongoing operational and maintenance efficiencies.

Regulatory staff and OCS characterized key outstanding issues for the later rate case: how the tariff will be structured, whether tenants will have direct remedies or transparency, and how Corix’s proposed form and intensity of regulation should be implemented. Both staff witnesses said those details are appropriate to resolve in the rate proceeding rather than in the CPCN decision.

Chairman Fenn noted that, given the Division and OCS recommendations and the lack of opposition from major utilities, it is unlikely the commission would deny a CPCN. He cautioned that the commission has statutory deadlines and workload constraints and could not promise an immediate order. Corix said it can begin providing service under contract with the developer before the commission finalizes rate regulation and will work with commission staff on the timing of the rate filing.

The commission admitted Corix’s verified application and prefiled testimony into the record, treated a previously confidential exhibit as highly confidential, and received statements from division and OCS witnesses. No formal vote was taken at the hearing; commissioners directed staff to proceed with drafting the order and signaled they expect to address outstanding technical and consumer-protection issues in the subsequent rate docket.

The Commission’s staff attorney and parties said they will coordinate filing dates and procedural steps for the next regulatory phase. Corix representatives and staff left the hearing available for follow-up and the commission indicated it will issue an order as expeditiously as workload allows.