BEFORE THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION
DOUG LITTLE, CHAIRMAN
BOB STUMP, COMMISSIONER
BOB BURNS, COMMISSIONER
TOM FORESE, COMMISSIONER
ANDY TOBIN, COMMISSIONER
|IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
EPCOR WATER, INC. FOR A DETERMINATION OF THE CURRENT FAIR VALUE OF ITS UTILITY PLANT & PROPERTY & FOR INCREASES/DECREASES IN ITS RATES & CHARGES BASED THEREON FOR UTILITY SERVICE BY ITS AGUA FRIA, ANTHEM,MOHAVE,SUN CITY & SUN CITY WEST WASTEWATER DISTRICTS & FOR CONSIDERATION OF CONSOLIDATION AND DE-CONSOLIDATION PROPOSALS
|Docket No. WS-01303A-16-0145
Mr. Thomas Broderick
DATA REQUEST OF GREG EISERT ON BEHALF OF SUN CITY HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION
One of the factors in this case pertains to the issue of the Consolidation of the Sun City District with the currently and historically remaining four EPCOR Wastewater Districts.
The Sun City Home Owners Association (SCHOA) has been approached by various factions including interveners from the other concerned EPCOR Districts affected by this rate case, for the purpose of entering Settlement Agreement discussions. The main issue of contention is that of the full consolidation of all five EPCOR Districts.
State and Federal cases dating back to 1899 address the issue of “used & useful” pertaining to fair and reasonable value and the notion, that the property thereof must exist and be used & useful for the public.** Historically, regulatory and court opinion prescribes that a utility’s operating expenses may not be recovered in rates, and that even prudently-incurred costs of plant will not be included in rate base, unless a benefit from such expenditures inures to the benefit of present ratepayers. Further notations have been noted in cases that an item may be included in rate base only when it is ‘used and useful’ in providing service. In other words, current rate payers should bear only legitimate costs of providing service to them. The ratepayer cannot be charged for infrastructure that does not yet exist.
Before our group could engage in any discussions regarding a settlement of the consolidation issue we must be reassured of the legality of full consolidation as a base premise from witch to proceed.
As a representative bound to the protection of all ratepayers, we, respectfully petition the Utilities Division to provide SCHOA an opinion as to the legality of forced consolidation within the bounds of the used and useful principle.
Respectfully submitted: __________________________________
Greg Eisert, Director, Chairman Government Affairs
Sun City Home Owners Association
10401 W Coggins Drive
Sun City, AZ 85351
** San Diego Land & Town Co. v. National City, 174 U.S> 739, 756 (1899), Wilcox v. Consolidated Gas Co., 212 U.S. 19, 41 (1909), Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. v. FPC, 561F.2d 955, 958(D.C. Cir. 1977), Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. v. FERC, 606 F.2d 1094 (D.C. Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 920, cert. denied, 447 U.S. 922 (1980)…