Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Conservation Cost Recovery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PURA approves recovery of $1.498 million for Aquarion deferred conservation costs on remand; chair abstains
Summary
The Public Utilities Regulatory Authority on Dec. 10 adopted a supplemental decision allowing Aquarion Water Company of Connecticut to recover $1,498,050 in deferred conservation expenses on remand from the courts; Chairman Tom Weil abstained from the vote because of prior participation in the case.
The Public Utilities Regulatory Authority adopted a supplemental decision on Dec. 10 approving recovery of an additional $1,498,050 in deferred water conservation expenses sought by Aquarion Water Company of Connecticut.
Authority staff attorney Bowman told the panel that the Supreme Court remanded a single issue concerning deferred conservation expense recovery and directed the Authority to reconsider the matter without using impermissible hindsight analysis. Bowman said the record supports a finding that Aquarion reasonably expected net cost benefits when it initiated the conservation measures and recommended adoption of the supplemental decision.
The motion to adopt the supplemental decision was moved and seconded. Interim Chairman Tom Weil said he had recused himself from the docket because of his prior participation in the underlying proceeding and appellate work on behalf of the Office of Consumer Counsel and announced he would abstain from the vote. Vice Chairman David Arconti, Commissioner Jan Beecher and Commissioner Holly Cheeseman voted to adopt the decision, which also adjusts approved operations and maintenance expenses by $249,675 based on a six-year amortization of the additional deferred amount, with carrying costs to be computed at the company’s weighted average cost of capital.
The decision applies the Authority’s 2016 conservation eligibility standard as interpreted to prohibit hindsight analysis and finds the additional documented deferred conservation costs were prudently incurred and just and reasonable under General Statutes §16-19(e)(a) and related authority practice. The panel directed staff to implement the amortization and carrying-cost calculations as described in the decision.
The panel adopted the decision without further amendment; Chairman Weil’s abstention was recorded in the roll call. The Authority did not announce any immediate change to customer rates stemming from this action beyond the accounting and amortization directives in the decision.
