20230215York Direct with Exhibits.pdf

BEFORE THE
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE
APPLICATION OF VEOLIA WATER
IDAHO, INC. FOR AUTHORITY TO
INCREASE ITS RATES AND
CHARGES FOR WATER SERVICE
IN THE STATE OF IDAHO
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. VEO-W-22-02
Direct Testimony and Exhibits of
Jessica A. York
On behalf of
Micron Technology, Inc.
February 15, 2023
RECEIVED
2023 February 15, 4:38PM
IDAHO PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION
York, Di i
Micron Technology, Inc.
Table of Contents
I. SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 2
II. CLASS COST OF SERVICE STUDY .............................................................. 3
II.A. VWID’s Error in the Allocation of T&D Mains and Accessories .......... 4
II.B. Certain Large Customers Do Not Use the Distribution System.......... 7
III. REVENUE APPORTIONMENT .................................................................... 10
IV. RATE DESIGN ............................................................................................. 15
IV.A. Existing Volumetric Block Rate Structure ........................................ 15
IV.B. Large Customer Rate Options ............................................................ 17
IV.C. Potential Special Contract .................................................................. 20
IV.D. DSIC ...................................................................................................... 21
Qualifications of Jessica A. York ................................................. Appendix A
Exhibits Nos. 419 & 420

York, Di 1
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS. 1
A Jessica A. York. My business address is 16690 Swingley Ridge Road, Suite 140, 2
Chesterfield, MO 63017. 3

Q WHAT IS YOUR OCCUPATION? 4
A I am a consultant in the field of public utility regulation and an Associate at 5
Brubaker & Associates, Inc., energy, economic and regulatory consultants. 6

Q PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND AND 7
EXPERIENCE. 8
A This information is included in Appendix A to my testimony. 9

Q ON WHOSE BEHALF ARE YOU APPEARING IN THIS PROCEEDING? 10
A I am appearing on behalf of Micron Technology, Inc., a large customer of Veolia 11
Water Idaho Inc. (“Veolia,” “VWID,” or “the Company”). 12

Q WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY? 13
A The purpose of my testimony is to address the Company’s class cost of service 14
study (“COSS”), proposed revenue apportionment, base rate design, and 15
proposed Distribution System Improvement Charge (“DSIC”). My silence with 16
respect to any issues addressed by any other party’s testimony in this proceeding 17
should not be taken as tacit approval or agreement regarding those issues. 18

York, Di 2
Micron Technology, Inc.
I. SUMMARY
Q PLEASE SUMMARIZE YOUR CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 1
A My conclusions and recommendations are as follows: 2

• The Company’s COSS follows the generally accepted Base-Extra Capacity 3
cost allocation method, which is a reasonable approach. However, the 4
Company’s COSS needs to be modified to improve the accuracy of the 5
measurement of its cost of providing service to each customer class. 6

o Specifically, the Company’s COSS does not recognize the fact that some 7
large customers are connected directly to transmission mains, and do not 8
utilize the smaller distribution mains. An adjustment should be made to the 9
allocation factors used for distribution main cost allocation for each class 10
to reflect this distinction in the infrastructure used to provide service. 11

• The Company’s proposed revenue apportionment should be rejected, as it 12
does not make a meaningful movement toward cost of service for each 13
customer class, and continues the interclass subsidies that have existed for 14
years. 15

o I recommend an alternative revenue apportionment where all classes are 16
brought to cost of service in this case, subject to the limitation that no class 17
receives an increase greater than 1.25x the system average increase. Any 18
remaining revenue deficiency can be spread to classes that would receive 19
a rate change below the system average, in proportion to each of the non-20
capped class’s total cost of service. 21

• The Company has not adequately supported the continuation of its existing 22
inclining block volumetric rate structure. I recommend the Commission direct 23
the Company to develop and present a declining block volumetric rate structure 24
in the next rate case. 25

• I recommend that the Company’s tariffs be modified to provide an economic 26
development rate, and/or to allow for service to be provided under a special 27
contract for certain qualifying customers. 28

• I recommend the Commission reject the Company’s proposed DSIC 29
mechanism. But, if the Commission adopts the Company’s proposed DSIC 30
mechanism, I recommend that the proposed DSIC be modified to track 31
changes in total net-plant investment related to the replacement and/or 32
rehabilitation of distribution system transmission and distribution mains, 33
services, hydrants, valves, meters and other infrastructure, and should not 34
track only incremental plant investments. Also, if the DSIC is adopted, it should 35
account for not only incremental rate base changes resulting from investments 36
made under the rider, but should also account for the change in legacy net-37
plant or rate base value during post-test year periods. 38

York, Di 3
Micron Technology, Inc.
II. CLASS COST OF SERVICE STUDY 1
Q HAVE YOU REVIEWED THE COMPANY’S CLASS COST OF SERVICE 2
STUDY? 3
A Yes. The Company’s COSS is sponsored by Ms. Ann Bui. Her COSS is based 4
on the test year ended March 31, 2023, and uses the widely accepted Base-Extra 5
Capacity method for functionalizing, classifying and allocating costs to VWID’s 6
various customer classes. Investment in water utility plant and operating costs are 7
first functionalized according to the role they play in providing water service: water 8
supply, pumping, treatment, transmission, distribution, metering, and billing. Next, 9
these costs are classified into cost categories that reflect the causation of these 10
costs: Base, or average day rates of flow; Extra Capacity-Maximum Day and Extra 11
Capacity-Maximum Hour rates of flow; and Customer-related costs, such as 12
metering and billing. 13

Q IS THE COMPANY’S COSS REASONABLE? 14
A In general, the Base-Extra Capacity cost allocation method is a reasonable 15
approach to cost allocation. However, the Company’s COSS does not accurately 16
measure the cost of providing service to each customer class. Therefore, it should 17
not be relied upon as the basis for revenue apportionment in this proceeding. 18

Q WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE COMPANY’S COSS DOES NOT 19
ACCURATELY MEASURE ITS COST OF PROVIDING SERVICE TO EACH 20
CUSTOMER CLASS? 21
A There are two reasons. First, the Company initially made an error when allocating 22
depreciation expense and rate base investment associated with Transmission and 23

York, Di 4
Micron Technology, Inc.
Distribution (“T&D”) Mains and Accessories. This error overstates VWID’s cost to 1
serve the Commercial class and understates the cost to serve Residential 2
customers. As discussed below, the Company acknowledged this error in 3
discovery and an adjustment has been made to reflect the correction. 4
Second, certain large customers are connected directly to VWID’s large 5
transmission mains, and therefore do not use and should not be allocated the costs 6
associated with the smaller distribution mains. However, there is no distinction in 7
the allocation of distribution mains costs to reflect this reality. As a result, the 8
Company’s COSS over-allocates distribution costs to customers that do not use 9
smaller distribution mains. 10
I discuss each of these reasons in further detail below. 11

II.A. VWID’s Error in the Allocation of T&D Mains and Accessories 12

Q PLEASE DISCUSS THE COMPANY’S ALLOCATION OF COSTS ASSOCIATED 13
WITH TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION MAINS AND ACCESSORIES. 14
A In the COSS included as Exhibit 14-2 to Ms. Bui’s direct testimony, transmission 15
and distribution costs were not separated by main size, and instead were lumped 16
together in one category. As shown on Bui Exhibit 14-2, page 5 of 40, O&M 17
expenses associated with T&D mains are allocated using Factor 6, which is 18
appropriate for these expenses because it reflects a base, maximum day, 19
maximum hour, and fire protection component. While the Company had correctly 20
allocated the O&M expenses associated with T&D mains on Factor 6, it did not 21
correctly allocate the corresponding plant investment in T&D mains, or the 22
associated depreciation expense. 23

York, Di 5
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q PLEASE DISCUSS THE COMPANY’S ALLOCATION OF DEPRECIATION 1
EXPENSE AND PLANT INVESTMENT ASSOCIATED WITH T&D MAINS. 2
A The Company allocated the depreciation expense associated with T&D Mains and 3
Accessories using Factor 3.1 Similarly, the Company allocated the T&D Mains and 4
Accessories rate base using Factor 3.2 5
Factor 3 includes a base, maximum day demand, and fire protection 6
component. However, unlike Factor 6, it does not reflect a maximum hour extra 7
capacity demand component, and therefore does not accurately allocate the 8
distribution main-related expenses and rate base that are included in these line 9
items of the COSS. 10

Q DID YOU SUBMIT A DISCOVERY REQUEST TO THE COMPANY REGARDING 11
THIS ISSUE? 12
A Yes. Micron’s Discovery Request No. 47 to VWID raised questions about these 13
allocations.3 In response to this request, the Company acknowledged that its 14
original proposed allocations were in error.4 In addition, the Company provided a 15
corrected version of its COSS model and exhibits with that discovery response. 16
The Company has now correctly separated T&D plant investment and expenses 17
in its COSS, and allocated transmission costs using Factor 3, and distribution costs 18
using Factor 6. 19

1 Exhibit 14-2, Page 8 of 40.
2 Id.at 10.
3 Attached as Exhibit No. 419, pp. 1-29.
4 Id.

York, Di 6
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q WHAT WAS THE IMPACT OF THIS CORRECTION ON THE COMPANY’S 1
COSS RESULTS? 2
A A comparison of VWID’s original COSS results to its corrected COSS results is 3
presented below in Table 1. 4

As can be seen from the Table 1, this error was overstating VWID’s cost to serve 5
the Commercial class by $545,4525, and understating the cost to serve Residential 6
customers by about $469,031.6 7
While VWID acknowledged and corrected this error, the issue of the 8
distinction in main size used to serve some large customers must be resolved in 9
order to produce a more accurate measure of the cost of providing service to each 10
customer class. 11

5 $2,726,433 - $3,271,885 = $545,452.
6 $10,146,076 - $9,677,046 = $469,031.
Current
Line Customer Class Revenues1 Amount Percent Amount Percent
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)
1 Residential 35,139,116$ 9,677,046$ 27.5%10,146,076$ 28.9%
2 Commercial 15,042,723 3,271,885 21.8%2,726,433 18.1%
3 Public Authority 155,695 3,858 2.5%9,638 6.2%
4 Private Fire 1,344,703 (845,560) -62.9%(774,918) -57.6%
5 Total 51,682,238$ 12,107,228$ 23.4%12,107,228$ 23.4%
Source
1 VWID's revised cost of service study provided in response to Micron Data Request No. 47.
2 Exhibit 14-1, A. Bui, page 1 of 40.
Cost of Service2 Cost of Service1
Corrected Rate
TABLE 1
Veolia Water Idaho Inc.
VWID's Original vs. Corrected COSS Results
Original Rate
Change to Reach Change to Reach

York, Di 7
Micron Technology, Inc.
II.B. Certain Large Customers Do Not Use the Distribution System 1

Q HOW DOES THE COMPANY DISTINGUISH TRANSMISSION MAINS FROM 2
DISTRIBUTION MAINS INSTALLED IN ITS SYSTEM? 3
A The Company defines transmission mains as those that have diameters of 12-4
inches and larger.7 VWID defines distribution mains as those with diameters of 5
less than 12-inches.8 6

Q HAS THE COMPANY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT SOME LARGE CUSTOMERS 7
DO NOT TAKE SERVICE FROM SMALL DISTRIBUTION MAINS, BECAUSE 8
THEY ARE CONNECTED DIRECTLY TO TRANSMISSION MAINS? 9
A Yes. The Company has acknowledged that there are at least two 8-inch meters 10
that are served from transmission mains.9 One meter is associated with a 24-inch 11
diameter main, and the other is associated with a 12-inch diameter service line.10 12
It is my understanding that Micron takes service directly from transmission mains 13
as well. 14

Q DOES THE COMPANY’S ALLOCATION OF COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH 15
DISTRIBUTION MAINS REFLECT THE FACT THAT SOME CUSTOMERS DO 16
NOT TAKE SERVICE FROM DISTRIBUTION MAINS? 17
A No. As a result, the Company’s COSS allocates distribution costs to customers 18
that are connected directly to the transmission system, and that do not take service 19
from the smaller distribution mains. This does not accurately reflect cost causation 20

7 VWID’s Response to Micron’s Discovery Request No. 17, attached as Exhibit No. 419, p. 30.
8 VWID’s Response to Micron’s Discovery Request No. 18, attached as Exhibit No. 419, p. 31.
9VWID’s Response to Micron’s Discovery Request No. 7, attached as Exhibit No. 419, p. 32.
10 Id.

York, Di 8
Micron Technology, Inc.
and is inequitable to large customers that are connected directly to the 1
transmission mains. 2

Q DO WATER UTILITIES IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS RECOGNIZE THE 3
DISTINCTION IN MAIN SIZE USED TO PROVIDE SERVICE IN THEIR COSS 4
MODELS? 5
A Yes. Several subsidiaries of American Water Works Company reflect such a 6
distinction in their COSS models, including Virginia-American Water Company 7
(Virginia State Corporation Commission (“VSCC”) Docket No. PUR-2021-00255), 8
Illinois-American Water Company (Illinois Commerce Commission (“ICC”) Docket 9
No. 22-0210), Indiana-American Water Company (Indiana Utility Regulatory 10
Commission (“IURC”) Cause No. 45142), and Missouri-American Water Company 11
(Missouri Public Service Commission (“MPSC”) Case No. WR-2022-0303). The 12
distinction in main size is appropriate based on cost causation principles and has 13
been agreed to by parties, or approved for use by these various state 14
Commissions. 15

Q HOW SHOULD THE DISTINCTION IN MAIN SIZE USED TO SERVE 16
CUSTOMERS BE REFLECTED IN THE COSS MODEL? 17
A The best approach is to establish a separate class in the COSS and for rate design 18
purposes for large customers that take service directly from transmission mains 19
and do not use the smaller distribution mains. The Commission should direct the 20
Company to create this separate class in the COSS for the next rate case. 21
In the meantime, an alternative approach would be to make an adjustment 22
to the allocation factors used to allocate distribution main costs to reflect the fact 23
that some customers do not use the distribution mains. 24

York, Di 9
Micron Technology, Inc.
As an example, Missouri-American Water Company recognizes that there 1
are some customers in the commercial, industrial, and public authority classes that 2
are connected directly to the transmission system, and do not use the small 3
distribution mains. Therefore, it has historically reduced the amount of water 4
consumption used to develop its distribution cost allocation factors for these 5
classes. 6
For its Industrial class, Missouri-American Water Company has historically 7
relied on an analysis of the length of small distribution mains serving Industrial 8
customers as a fraction of the total distribution main installed on the system and 9
concluded that the Industrial units of service should be reduced by 90% in the 10
development of its distribution cost allocation factors for that class.11 11
In other jurisdictions, utilities are estimating the portion of water 12
consumption in the non-residential classes served directly from the transmission 13
system, and removing that portion of usage from an allocation of distribution 14
costs.12 While I do not agree with developing customer class distribution 15
multipliers strictly based on water usage, this approach could be used to improve 16
the accuracy in the measurement of VWID’s COSS in the instant case, while the 17
Company conducts a more detailed review of this issue prior to the next rate case. 18

11MPSC Case Nos. WR-2008-0311, WR-2017-0285, WR-2020-0344. MPSC Staff proposed to
continue the same distribution multiplier in WR-2022-0303.
12 VSCC Docket No. PUR-2021-00255, Direct Testimony of Charles Rea at 48. ICC Docket No. 22-
0210, Direct Testimony of Charles Rea at 47. IURC Cause No. 45142, Direct Testimony of
Constance Heppenstall at 10-11.

York, Di 10
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q ARE YOU RECOMMENDING A MODIFICATION TO THE COMPANY’S COSS 1
TO RECOGNIZE THE DISTINCTION IN SIZE OF MAINS USED TO SERVE 2
VARIOUS CUSTOMERS? 3
A Yes. I recommend the Commission direct VWID to recognize the fact that some 4
large customers take service directly from the transmission system, and therefore 5
should not be allocated costs associated with the smaller distribution mains that 6
are not used to provide service to them. I recommend that for the next rate case, 7
the Commission direct VWID to create a separate class in the COSS model and 8
for rate design for customers that are served directly from the transmission mains. 9
However, for purposes of this case, VWID should recognize this distinction 10
in the infrastructure used to provide service by developing a distribution multiplier 11
to remove the units of service that are not served by the distribution system from 12
the development of distribution main cost allocation factors by class. At this time, 13
VWID has not provided the data necessary for Micron to make a specific proposal 14
as to what distribution multipliers would be appropriate for each class. However, 15
at a minimum, allocation factors should be adjusted such that the test year units of 16
service for the two 8-inch meters identified by VWID in response to Micron’s 17
Discovery Request No. 7 are removed from an allocation of distribution costs. 18

III. REVENUE APPORTIONMENT 19
Q PLEASE DISCUSS THE COMPANY’S PROPOSED REVENUE 20
APPORTIONMENT. 21
A The Company’s proposed revenue apportionment does not reflect its actual cost 22
to serve each customer class, as demonstrated by its COSS. A comparison of the 23

York, Di 11
Micron Technology, Inc.
Company’s proposed revenue apportionment to its COSS results is presented in 1
Table 2. 2

As shown above in the Table 2, the Company proposes no rate change for the 3
Private Fire class, despite the fact that the COSS shows a rate decrease is 4
warranted. The Company proposes to spread the remaining revenue deficiency 5
on an equal percentage basis across the Residential, Commercial, and Public 6
Authority classes, even though the COSS results do not support an equal 7
percentage increase. 8

Q IS THE COMPANY’S PROPOSED REVENUE APPORTIONMENT 9
REASONABLE? 10
A No. The Company’s proposed revenue allocation does not make meaningful 11
movement toward cost of service for all customer classes. Indeed, the Company’s 12
proposed revenue allocation maintains rates that are below cost of service for the 13
Current
Line Customer Class Revenues Amount Percent Amount Percent
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)
1 Residential 35,139,116$ 10,146,076$ 28.9%8,451,646$ 24.1%
2 Commercial 15,042,723 2,726,433 18.1%3,618,134 24.1%
3 Public Authority 155,695 9,638 6.2%37,448 24.1%
4 Private Fire 1,344,703 (774,918) -57.6%- 0.0%
5 Total 51,682,238$ 12,107,228$ 23.4%12,107,228$ 23.4%
Source
VWID's revised cost of service study provided in response to Micron Data Request No. 47.
Cost of Service Increase / (Decrease)
TABLE 2
Veolia Water Idaho Inc.
Cost of Service vs. Proposed Revenue Allocation
Increase / (Decrease)
to Reach VWID Proposed

York, Di 12
Micron Technology, Inc.
Residential class, and significantly above cost of service for all other classes 1
perpetuating existing cross-subsidies among rate classes. Further, the 2
Company’s proposed revenue apportionment is based on a COSS model that does 3
not accurately reflect its cost of providing service to its customers, as further 4
discussed above. Finally, an across-the-board increase has been applied in the 5
last several VWID rate cases, which suggests that there has been essentially no 6
movement toward cost of service for years. As a result, I recommend that the 7
Company’s proposed revenue allocation be rejected. 8

Q HOW LONG HAVE INTERCLASS SUBSIDIES EXISTED FOR VWID’S 9
CUSTOMERS? 10
A The subsidies have existed since at least the 2006 rate case, when VWID was still 11
United Water. Despite the COSS results presented in each rate case, the 12
Commission approved settlement agreements that resulted in an equal percent 13
increase for all customer classes in the 2006, 2009, 2015, and 2020 rate cases.13 14
In the 2011 rate case, a slightly different approach was taken where the parties 15
agreed to a two-step phase-in of the rate increase.14 16

Q HAS THE COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY RECOGNIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF 17
MOVING CUSTOMER CLASS RATES CLOSER TO COST OF SERVICE? 18
A Yes. In a previous Idaho Power Company rate case, the Commission noted the 19
following: 20
“Nonetheless, the passage of time since the Commission’s last 21
examination of IPCo’s rates has allowed several classes to drift 22
further away from cost-of-service rates. Recognizing that cost-of-23

13 See Settlement Agreement and Orders in Dockets UWI-W-06-02, UWI-W-09-01, UWI-W-15-011,
and SUZ-W-20-02.
14 See Settlement Agreement and Order in Docket UWI-W-11-2.

York, Di 13
Micron Technology, Inc.
service studies are not precise, we think it is important that cross 1
subsidies among customer classes should be minimized. 2
Accordingly, as outlined below, we take significant steps to move 3
each class closer to its indicated cost of service.”15 4

Q ARE YOU RECOMMENDING AN ALTERNATIVE REVENUE 5
APPORTIONMENT? 6
A Yes. I recommend bringing each class to cost of service in this case, based on 7
my recommended corrections to the Company’s COSS model discussed above, 8
with the limitation that no class receive an increase greater than 1.25x the system 9
average increase. Any remaining revenue deficiency could be spread to classes 10
that would receive a rate change that is less than the system average percentage 11
increase, in proportion to each non-capped class’s allocated cost of service. 12
An example of this proposed revenue allocation is shown in Table 3 below. 13
For illustrative purposes, Table 3 assumes that my recommended correction to the 14
allocation of distribution main costs would show that the Residential class requires 15
a 1.26x system average increase to reach cost of service. However, the actual 16
impact will need to be determined by VWID, and may not create a need for any 17
class to be capped.16 18

15 Idaho Public Utilities Commission Case No. IPC-E-94-5; Order No. 25880 at 20.
16 The Company’s COSS shows that the Residential class needs a 1.23x system average increase
to reach cost of service. If my recommended correction to the COSS does not increase this index
above 1.25x, then no cap would be needed.

York, Di 14
Micron Technology, Inc.

Table 4, below, shows the results of the revenue apportionment presented in 1
Table 3 based on Mr. Gorman’s recommended revenue increase of $6.4 million, 2
or 12.4%. 3
Current
Line Customer Class Revenues Amount Percent Index Amount Percent Index
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)
1 Residential 35,139,116$ 10,396,076$ 29.6%1.26 10,289,737$ 29.3%1.25
2 Commercial 15,042,723 2,476,433 16.5%0.70 2,578,490 17.1%0.73
3 Public Authority 155,695 9,638 6.2%0.26 10,601 6.8%0.29
4 Private Fire 1,344,703 (774,918) -57.6%(2.46) (771,599) -57.4%(2.45)
5 Total 51,682,238$ 12,107,228$ 23.4%1.00 12,107,228$ 23.4%1.00
Note:
*For illustrative purposes, this example assumes that Micron's recommended corrections to the allocations
of distribution main costs would show that the Residential class requires an increase of 1.26x system average
to reach cost of service. The actual impact of this recommended correction will need to be determined by VWID.
Reach Cost of Service*
(Decrease) Needed to
Example Increase /
Mitigated Proposed
Increase / (Decrease)
TABLE 3
Veolia Water Idaho Inc.
Example Revenue Apportionment Limiting the Residential Class to 1.25x System Average

York, Di 15
Micron Technology, Inc.

My recommendations will move away from inequitable across-the-board rate 1
increases and take meaningful steps toward aligning customer rates. 2

IV. RATE DESIGN 3
IV.A. Existing Volumetric Block Rate Structure 4

Q PLEASE DISCUSS VWID’S CURRENT RATE STRUCTURE. 5
A Currently, VWID has a rate structure that consists of a fixed meter charge by size, 6
and volumetric charges that vary by season. For the winter period from October 7
through May, a single flat volumetric rate per hundred cubic feet (“CCF”) applies. 8
The summer period consists of two volumetric rate blocks where the first block is 9
priced at the same rate as the winter period and captures the first 3 CCF of usage. 10
The second summer rate block captures all additional CCF and is more expensive 11
than the first block. 12
This rate structure applies to all customer classes. 13
Current
Line Customer Class Revenues Amount Percent Index Amount Percent Index
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)
1 Residential 35,139,116$ 5,495,468$ 15.6%1.26 5,439,256$ 15.5%1.25
2 Commercial 15,042,723 1,309,067 8.7%0.70 1,363,015 9.1%0.73
3 Public Authority 155,695 5,095 3.3%0.26 5,604 3.6%0.29
4 Private Fire 1,344,703 (409,630) -30.5%(2.46) (407,875) -30.3%(2.45)
5 Total 51,682,238$ 6,400,000$ 12.4%1.00 6,400,000$ 12.4%1.00
Note:
*For illustrative purposes, this example assumes that Micron's recommended corrections to the allocations
of distribution main costs would show that the Residential class requires an increase of 1.26x system average
to reach cost of service. The actual impact of this recommended correction will need to be determined by VWID.
Reach Cost of Service*Increase / (Decrease)
TABLE 4
Veolia Water Idaho Inc.
Example Revenue Apportionment Limiting the Residential Class to 1.25x System Average
Example Increase /
(Decrease) Needed to Mitigated Proposed
at Mr. Gorman's Recommended Revenue Requirement

York, Di 16
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q HAS VWID PROPOSED ANY CHANGES TO ITS EXISTING RATE 1
STRUCTURE? 2
A No. VWID proposes to maintain the existing rate structure, with all rate 3
components increased by an equal percentage to recover the Company’s 4
requested revenue requirement. 5

Q HAS THE COMPANY EXPLAINED WHY IT BELIEVES IT IS REASONABLE TO 6
MAINTAIN ITS INCLINING BLOCK RATE STRUCTURE? 7
A No. The Company’s testimony does not specifically address this issue. 8

Q DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THE COMPANY’S INCLINING BLOCK 9
VOLUMETRIC RATE STRUCTURE? 10
A Yes. First, if the purpose of this rate structure is to promote water conservation, it 11
is not clear that the existing rate structure accomplishes this objective. The first 12
summer rate block captures the first 3 CCF, or about 2,200 gallons, of usage. For 13
the Residential class, only about 6% of summer usage falls into the first block with 14
the remaining 94% in the second, more expensive block.17 For the Commercial 15
class, the first summer block captures about 2% of the summer water usage, and 16
98% falls into the second block.18 Thus, since the second block is essentially 17
unavoidable, this rate structure does little or nothing to encourage customers to 18
use less water during the higher priced summer period. 19
Second, under the Company’s existing volumetric rate structure, 20
customers with seasonal water use may not be making a great enough contribution 21
to the Company’s recovery of fixed costs during the non-summer months. As a 22

17 VWID’s workpaper WP 14.6, Proof of Revenue.
18 Id.

York, Di 17
Micron Technology, Inc.
result, large water customers with relatively steady water use year-round may be 1
subsidizing customer classes with seasonal peak water demands. 2
In addition, an inclining block rate structure could inhibit economic 3
development by deterring potential new large water users from locating in the 4
Company’s service territory or deter existing large water users from expanding 5
operations. 6
A declining block volumetric rate structure that primarily targets fixed cost 7
recovery in the more expensive first blocks, and volumetric cost recovery in the tail 8
block would be more appropriate. In the event that the Commission determines it 9
is appropriate to maintain a single rate structure for all customer classes, then a 10
declining block rate design could be used to more closely align rates with the cost 11
of providing service to each class and support economic development. The 12
Company should be directed by the Commission to explore a new rate structure 13
prior to its next rate case or provide evidence explaining why its proposal to 14
maintain the existing volumetric rate structure is just and reasonable. 15

IV.B. Large Customer Rate Options 16

Q ARE THERE ANY OTHER RATE DESIGN ISSUES THAT YOU WOULD LIKE 17
TO RAISE? 18
A Yes. The Company’s current COSS and rate design do not separately identify an 19
Industrial class, as the Company claims that no customers currently meet its 20
definition of an Industrial customer. As noted by Ms. Bui, the Company’s current 21
tariff includes an Industrial classification, but no active customers are in this 22
class.19 Further, in response to a discovery request from Staff, the Company 23

19 Bui, Appendix B at 8.

York, Di 18
Micron Technology, Inc.
claimed that based on the Company’s existing definition of Industrial customers, 1
no customers currently meet this definition.20 2

Q WHAT IS THE COMPANY’S CURRENT DEFINITION OF AN INDUSTRIAL 3
CUSTOMER? 4
A The Company’s tariff defines an industrial customer as follows: 5
“Industrial customer shall designate any building or combination of 6
buildings in the same compound whose primary use is for the 7
manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any product.”21 8

Q DOES MICRON FIT WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF AN INDUSTRIAL 9
CUSTOMER? 10
A According to the Company, Micron does not currently fit the definition of an 11
Industrial customer. VWID indicates that currently Micron’s water use is primarily 12
for office space and private fire protection, and therefore it fits the definition of a 13
Commercial customer.22 14

Q SHOULD THE DEFINITION OF AN INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMER BE TIED TO THE 15
PURPOSE FOR WHICH WATER IS USED? 16
A No. The definition of customer classes should take into consideration load 17
characteristics and the infrastructure used to provide service. The purpose for 18
which water is used is not relevant. 19

20 VWID’s Response to Staff’s Discovery Request No. 154, attached as Exhibit No. 419, p. 34.
21 Sheet No. 36 of the Company’s Current Tariff, attached as Exhibit No. 420.
22 VWID’s Response to Micron’s Discovery Request No. 42, part c (ii), attached as Exhibit No. 419,
pp. 35-37.

York, Di 19
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q IS MICRON EXPECTED TO FIT WITHIN VWID’S DEFINITION OF AN 1
INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMER IN THE FUTURE? 2
A Yes. It is public knowledge that Micron is doing a major expansion in Boise, Idaho. 3
Indeed, Micron has announced plans to invest about $15 billion through the end of 4
the decade in advanced memory manufacturing in Boise.23 Construction is 5
expected to begin in 2023 with production beginning in 2025.24 Micron’s expansion 6
will include a water treatment facility to ensure incoming water meets high-purity 7
specifications for manufacturing.25 Water sources will include on-site groundwater 8
and service from Veolia.26 Water will be a crucial element to Micron’s 9
manufacturing process, and its water consumption is expected to increase 10
significantly when operations commence. Thus, Micron will require industrial use 11
water from VWID. 12
In addition, Micron’s expansion is expected to create over 17,000 Idaho 13
jobs, including 2,000 direct Micron jobs.27 Micron also intends to increase 14
investment in K-12 STEM education programs, build on partnerships with 15
community colleges and universities, and identify new ways to provide education 16
and training to underrepresented and rural populations.28 17

23 Micron Breaks Ground on Leading-Edge Manufacturing Fab in Boise, Idaho.
September 12, 2022. https://investors.micron.com/news-releases/news-release-details/micron-
breaks-ground-leading-edge-manufacturing-fab-boise-idaho
24 Id.
25 Micron Boise Expansion Plans Coming into View, October 28, 2022.
https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/local/growing-idaho/boise-micron-expansion-planning-zoning-
new-fab-semiconductor/277-35909baa-0305-430a-8dda-9492a1a6a105
26 Id.
27 Micron Breaks Ground on Leading-Edge Manufacturing Fab in Boise, Idaho.
September 12, 2022.
28 Id.

York, Di 20
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q WHEN MICRON’S EXPANDED MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS 1
COMMENCE, WILL IT BE APPROPRIATE FOR MICRON TO BE INCLUDED IN 2
THE COMMERCIAL CLASS? 3
A No. Micron’s consumption will increase significantly and will be used for purposes 4
that fit the current Industrial class definition. In addition, it is my understanding that 5
Micron takes service directly from VWID’s transmission mains, and therefore it 6
should not be paying for the costs associated with small distribution mains through 7
its rates. 8
It is clear that at least one of VWID’s largest customers will qualify as an 9
Industrial customer in the next couple of years. If the utility cannot or will not 10
negotiate a special contract, or offer an economic development rate as discussed 11
below, then at the very least, I recommend that the Commission direct VWID to 12
identify a separate class in its next COSS, such as the Industrial class, for large 13
water users connected directly to the transmission system and establish a 14
separate rate that recovers that class’s cost of service. 15

IV.C. Potential Special Contract 16

Q WOULD IT BE REASONABLE FOR MICRON TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A 17
SPECIAL CONTRACT OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RATE WITH VWID? 18
A Yes. Micron is already one of VWID’s largest customers in terms of annual water 19
consumption, and its water usage is expected to grow.29 As explained above, 20
given Micron’s significant investment in Boise and the associated benefits to the 21
state and local community, it would be reasonable for VWID to provide service to 22
Micron’s facilities under a special contract or economic development rate that more 23

29 VWID’s Response to Micron’s Discovery Request No. 44, attached as Exhibit No. 419, p. 38.

York, Di 21
Micron Technology, Inc.
accurately reflects VWID’s cost of providing service to Micron. In addition, Micron’s 1
expansion plan includes groundwater as a source of supply, as well as the 2
development of its own water treatment facility. A special contract or economic 3
development rate that more accurately reflects VWID’s cost of providing service to 4
Micron could improve the competitiveness of VWID’s rates relative to the cost of 5
Micron’s own water treatment process. 6

Q DOES VWID’S CURRENT TARIFF PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF 7
A SPECIAL CONTRACT, OR AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RATE? 8
A It does not appear that VWID’s current tariff identifies either of these approaches 9
as an option for new customers or existing customers with increasing consumption. 10

Q WHAT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION WITH RESPECT TO A SPECIAL 11
CONTRACT OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RATE? 12
A I recommend that the Commission direct VWID to analyze the potential for offering 13
special contracts, or an economic development rate to certain customers, and 14
present its analysis and recommendations in the next rate case. 15

IV.D. DSIC 16

Q PLEASE DISCUSS THE COMPANY’S PROPOSAL WITH RESPECT TO THE 17
DSIC MECHANISM. 18
A The Company proposes to establish a DSIC mechanism related to the 19
replacement and/or rehabilitation of distribution system transmission and 20

York, Di 22
Micron Technology, Inc.
distribution mains, services, hydrants, valves, meters, and other infrastructure.30 1
This mechanism would allow the utility to increase rates between general rate case 2
proceedings, which specifically relate to non-revenue producing investments to 3
replace aging utility infrastructure.31 4

Q DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THE COMPANY’S PROPOSAL TO 5
IMPLEMENT A DSIC? 6
A Yes. First, this request is an example of single issue ratemaking, as it proposes 7
to focus on a single component of the utility’s cost of providing service and address 8
it separately from a general rate case. The Commission has previously rejected 9
single-issue, or piecemeal, ratemaking as it considers a single cost item without 10
considering other potentially offsetting revenues, and can lead to an improper 11
matching of costs and revenues and potentially unjust and unreasonable rates.32 12
Second, the Company’s proposed method of calculating the DSIC 13
incremental revenue requirement ignores offsetting reductions in the value of plant 14
investment included in base rates. 15
In light of these concerns, the Commission should reject the DSIC. 16

30 Direct Testimony of James Cagle at 3. Note that the page numbering may be mislabeled, and
the correct page number may be 2 (i.e., the second page of questions and answers in the
testimony).
31 Id. at 4.
32 See Intermountain Gas Company Case No. INT-G-17-07, Order No. 34090 at 6-7, where the
Commission rejected Intermountain Gas Company’s proposed Infrastructure Integrity Management
Mechanism.

York, Di 23
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q IN THE EVENT THE COMMISSION APPROVES THE COMPANY’S DSIC 1
PROPOSAL, DO YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTED CHANGES? 2
A Yes. The Company’s capital investment costs from the replacement of DSIC 3
eligible investments should be synchronized with the investment costs included in 4
base rates. Currently, base rates include the return “of” and “on” investments 5
related to distribution system transmission and distribution mains, services, 6
hydrants, valves, meters, and other infrastructure. 7
Specifically, the Commission should ensure that VWID’s investment 8
included in base rates is synchronized with the incremental eligible investment that 9
would be subject to the DSIC. Synchronizing a utility’s total investments is fair to 10
both the utility and its customers and will ensure that a utility does not recover 11
excessive charges from its customers. 12

Q WHAT IS YOUR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION? 13
A The level of depreciation expense included in base rates associated with the same 14
type of infrastructure that is proposed to be eligible for the DSIC should be used to 15
offset the DSIC eligible investment prior to the rate of return calculation for the 16
DSIC surcharge. This will ensure that the utility properly recovers the incremental 17
revenue requirement associated with eligible infrastructure replacement and that 18
the utility is not allowed to charge excessive surcharges through the DSIC. 19
Once rates are set in a rate case, the utility recovers depreciation expense 20
in post-test year periods, which increases accumulated depreciation and reduces 21
net-plant balances, ultimately reducing test year rate base in the post-test year 22
periods. Post-test year plant investments offset this decline in rate base because 23
plant added to rate base offsets the increase in accumulated depreciation. If rate 24
base investments are recovered in base rates, the utility can time rate cases to 25

York, Di 24
Micron Technology, Inc.
adjust rates only if a rate adjustment is justified. However, recovering post-test 1
year plant additions in a separate rate mechanism, like the DSIC, has the real 2
potential to harm ratepayers, via excess charges, for total net-plant investments 3
being used to provide service. 4
The proposed DSIC surcharge does not appear as though it would reflect 5
the decline in rate base that has occurred since base rates were last set. Thus, in 6
the years between rate cases, customers would be charged both depreciation 7
expense for plant already depreciated and new depreciation expense for new 8
investments through the incremental DSIC charge. As such, the DSIC charge as 9
proposed by VWID would result in excessive charges to customers and would 10
harm customers. It is a fundamental tenant of cost of service ratemaking that if 11
new investments cause rate base to grow at the level of depreciation, all other 12
things held constant, it is unnecessary to change customer rates for the utility to 13
fully recover the costs of the new investments. 14
My proposal will synchronize the net-plant balance for transmission and 15
distribution mains, services, hydrants, valves, meters, and other infrastructure that 16
would not be subject to DSIC replacement with the increased net plant investment 17
levels associated with the DSIC eligible investment. In this way, total charges to 18
customers, including base tariff rates and the DSIC, will track net-plant investment 19
being used to provide service during post-test year periods. 20

Q WHY SHOULD DEPRECIATION EXPENSE IN BASE RATES BE REQUIRED AS 21
AN OFFSET TO RATE BASE WHEN DETERMINING THE APPROPRIATE 22
LEVEL OF SURCHARGE REVENUE? 23
A Depreciation expense that is included in a utility’s base rates increases the utility’s 24
internal cash flow, which is used as a funding source for new plant investments 25

York, Di 25
Micron Technology, Inc.
including the plant investments necessary to replace a utility’s aging or obsolete 1
infrastructure. In terms of rate base, recovering this depreciation expense in a 2
utility’s existing base rates reduces test year rate base via increases to 3
accumulated depreciation, and is used as an internal cash source to fund new 4
infrastructure capital investments that are included in post-test year utility rate 5
base. 6
This can be illustrated with an example. Assume that a certain utility has 7
annual rate case proceedings and has $10 million in annual depreciation expense 8
and $10 million in annual new capital investment. If post-test year capital 9
investment is at the same amount as post-test year depreciation expense 10
recovery, the utility’s net-plant and rate base will not grow in the post-test year 11
period. In which case, the base tariff rate revenue recovered by the utility will 12
provide it sufficient revenue to fully recover its cost of service in the post-test year 13
period. A separate charge, like the DSIC, above the base tariff rates for the 14
incremental plant investments in this example would result in excessive rates that 15
are not just and reasonable, and customers would be harmed. 16
Now assume the utility implements a rider surcharge, without recognizing 17
the declining value to existing rate base (depreciation offsets), instead of annual 18
base rate proceedings. In the case of the utility recovering the incremental 19
revenue requirement for new investment through a rider surcharge, customer rates 20
would go up to account for the $10 million spent by the utility on eligible 21
infrastructure, but the surcharge would not reflect the reduction for the $10 million 22
of depreciated rate base. Customers would pay higher bills, via the combination 23
of existing base tariff rates and the incremental DSIC, despite the utility’s net-plant 24
investment amount remaining the same. 25

York, Di 26
Micron Technology, Inc.
Q PLEASE SUMMARIZE YOUR RECOMMENDATION WITH RESPECT TO THE 1
DSIC. 2
A The DSIC mechanism, as proposed by the Company, should be rejected. If the 3
Commission adopts the DSIC, I recommend modifying the DSIC revenue 4
requirement calculation to reflect depreciation expense for similar plant included in 5
base rates as an offset to the incremental DSIC plant investment for the purpose 6
of calculating a return on DSIC investment. 7

Q DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY? 8
A Yes, it does. 9

Appendix A
York, Di 27
Micron Technology, Inc.
Qualifications of Jessica A. York 1
Q PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS. 2
A Jessica York. My business address is 16690 Swingley Ridge Road, Suite 140, 3
Chesterfield, MO 63017. 4

Q PLEASE STATE YOUR OCCUPATION. 5
A I am a consultant in the field of public utility regulation and an Associate with the firm 6
of Brubaker & Associates, Inc. (“BAI”), energy, economic and regulatory consultants. 7

Q PLEASE IDENTIFY THE JURISDICTIONS IN WHICH YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY 8
SPONSORED TESTIMONY. 9
A I have sponsored expert testimony in front of the Illinois Commerce Commission, the 10
Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, the Michigan Public Service Commission, the 11
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, the Missouri Public Service Commission, the 12
Public Utilities Commission of Nevada, and the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. 13

Q PLEASE STATE YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND AND PROFESSIONAL 14
EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE. 15
A I graduated from Truman State University in 2008 where I received my Bachelor of 16
Science Degree in Mathematics with minors in Statistics and Actuarial Science. I 17
earned my Master of Business Administration Degree with a concentration in Finance 18
from the University of Missouri-St. Louis in 2014. 19
I joined BAI in 2011 as an analyst. Then, in March 2015, I joined the consulting 20
team of BAI. 21
I have worked in various electric, natural gas and water and wastewater 22
regulatory proceedings addressing cost of capital, sales revenue forecasts, revenue 23
Appendix A
York, Di 28
Micron Technology, Inc.
requirement assessments, class cost of service studies, rate design, and various policy 1
issues. I have also conducted competitive power and natural gas solicitations on behalf 2
of large electric and natural gas users, have assisted those large power and natural 3
gas users in developing procurement plans and strategies, assisted in competitive 4
contract negotiations, and power and natural gas contract supply administration. In the 5
regulated arena, I have evaluated cost of service studies and rate designs proffered by 6
other parties in cases for various utilities, including in Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, 7
Kansas, and others. I have conducted bill audits, rate forecasts and tariff rate 8
optimization studies. 9
I have also provided support to clients with facilities in deregulated markets, 10
including drafting supply requests for proposals, evaluating supply bids, and auditing 11
competitive supply bills. I have also prepared and presented to clients reports that 12
monitor the electric market and recommend strategic hedging transactions. 13
BAI was formed in April 1995. BAI and its predecessor firm have participated 14
in more than 700 regulatory proceedings in forty states and Canada. 15
BAI provides consulting services in the economic, technical, accounting, and 16
financial aspects of public utility rates and in the acquisition of utility and energy 17
services through RFPs and negotiations, in both regulated and unregulated markets. 18
Our clients include large industrial and institutional customers, some utilities and, on 19
occasion, state regulatory agencies. We also prepare special studies and reports, 20
forecasts, surveys and siting studies, and present seminars on utility-related issues. 21
In general, we are engaged in energy and regulatory consulting, economic 22
analysis and contract negotiation. 23
In addition to our main office in St. Louis, the firm also has branch offices in 24
Corpus Christi, Texas; Detroit, Michigan; Louisville, Kentucky and Phoenix, Arizona. 25
DECLARATION OF JESSICA A. YORK 1
I, Jessica A. York, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of 2
Idaho: 3
1. My name is Jessica A. York. I am employed by Brubaker &4
Associates, Inc. (“BAI”) as an Associate and consultant in the field of public utility 5
regulation. 6
2. On behalf of Micron Technology, Inc., I present this pre-filed direct7
testimony and Exhibit Nos. 419 through 420 in this matter. 8
3. To the best of my knowledge, my pre-filed direct testimony and9
exhibits are true and accurate. 10
I hereby declare that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge 11
and belief, and that I understand it is made for use as evidence before the Idaho 12
Public Utilities Commission and is subject to penalty for perjury. 13
SIGNED this ___ day of February 2023, at Chesterfield, Missouri. 14
Signed: 15
16
17
20891152_v1 18
14
Declaration York, Di 29 Micron Technology, Inc.
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF VEOLIA WATER IDAHO INC. FOR AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS RATES AND CHARGES FOR WATER SERVICE IN THE STATE OF IDAHO
))))
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
EXHIBIT NO. 419 TO ACCOMPANY THE
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF JESSICA A. YORK
VEOLIA WATER IDAHO, INC. CASE VEO-W-22-02 MICRON’S SECOND SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS TO VEOLIA WATER IDAHO INC
Preparer/Sponsoring Witness: Bui
REQUEST NO. 47:
Please refer to the class cost of service study provided as Exhibit 14-2 of Ms. Bui’s direct
testimony.
a.Please confirm that plant investment and expenses associated with transmission and
distribution (“T&D”) mains should be classified to the Base, Max Day, and Max
Hour functions. If not confirmed, please provide a detailed explanation supporting
the response.
b.Please refer to Exhibit 14-2, page 5. Please confirm that expenses associated with
the Maintenance of T&D Mains (Labor, Other, and Fringe Benefits) have been
classified to the Base, Max Day, and Max Hour functions, and have been allocated
on the basis of Factor 6.
c.Please refer to Exhibit 14-2, page 8. Please explain why depreciation expense
associated with Trans. & Distrib. Mains & Accessories has been allocated on
Factor 3, which reflects base and max day, rather than Factor 6, which reflects base,
max day, and max hour components.
d.Please refer to Exhibit 14-2, page 10. Please explain why rate base associated with
Trans. & Distrib. Mains & Accessories has been allocated on Factor 3, which
reflects base and max day, rather than Factor 6, which reflects base, max day, and
max hour components.
RESPONSE NO. 47:
a.Yes, we are confirming that plant investment and expenses associated with
transmission and distribution mains should be classified to the Base, Max Day and
Max Hour, as appropriate.
b.This is an error. Exhibit 14-2, page 5 has been revised to reflect the separation of
transmission and distribution. Transmission and distribution have been separated
using the total inch-feet of main analysis shown in Factor 6. Based on the revised
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 1 of 38
Exhibit 14-2, transmission has been allocated based on Factor 3 while distribution
has been allocated based on Factor 6.
c.Exhibit 14-2, page 8 has been revised to reflect the separation of transmission and
distribution, as described in (b). Exhibit 14-2, page 10 has been revised to reflect
the separation of transmission and distribution, as described in (b).
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 2 of 38
Exhibit 14‐1
COMPARISON OF ADJUSTED COST OF SERVICE WITH REVENUES UNDER EXISTING AND PROPOSED RATES
FOR TEST YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
Cost of Service Revenues, Present Rates Revenues, Proposed Rates Proposed Increase Cost of Service
Customer Classification  Amount   Precent   Amount   Precent   Amount   Precent   Amount   Precent   Percent Increase 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)
Residential 45,285,193 71.0% 35,139,116 68.0% 43,590,762 68.3% 8,451,646 24.1%28.9%
Commercial 17,769,156 27.9% 15,042,723 29.1% 18,660,857 29.3% 3,618,134 24.1%18.1%
Public Authority 165,333 0.3%155,695 0.3%193,144 0.3%37,448 24.1%6.2%
Private Fire Service 569,785 0.9% 1,344,703 2.6% 1,344,703 2.1%0 0.0%‐57.6%
Total Sales 63,789,466 100.0% 51,682,238 100.0% 63,789,466 100.0% 12,107,228 23.4%23.4%
Other Revenues 35,620 35,620 35,620 0 0.00
Total 63,825,086$       51,717,858$       63,825,086$       12,107,227$       23.4%23.4%
Total Revenue Requirements $63,825,086
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 3 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES
SOURCE OF SUPPLY EXPENSES
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 2 68,558 44,753 23,624 181 0 0
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 2 23,939 15,627 8,249 63 0 0
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 27,060 17,664 9,324 71 0 0
Operation Labor 2 57,703 37,667 19,884 152 0 0
Operation Expenses 2 7,452 4,865 2,568 20 0 0
Operation Fringe Benefits 2 21,873 14,278 7,537 58 0 0
Purchased Water 1 316,694 203,683 111,938 1,073 0 0
Miscellaneous 2 1,119 730 386 3 0 0
Rents 2 3,385 2,210 1,167 9 0 0
TOTAL SOURCE OF SUPPLY EXPENSE ‐ OPERATION 527,783 341,476 184,677 1,630 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Engineering ‐ Labor 2 10,609 6,925 3,656 28 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Engineering ‐ Other 2 49,301 32,183 16,989 130 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 3,181 2,076 1,096 8 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Engineering ‐ Rivers and Intake 2 2,559 1,671 882 7 0 0
Maintenance of Wells and Springs ‐ Chemicals 1 6,094 3,919 2,154 21 0 0
Maintenance of Wells and Springs 2 1,129 737 389 3 0 0
TOTAL SOURCE OF SUPPLY EXPENSE ‐ MAINTENANCE 72,873 47,511 25,165 197 0 0
TOTAL SOURCE OF SUPPLY EXPENSES 600,656$             388,987$             209,842$             1,827$                  ‐$ ‐$ 
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 4 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
PUMPING EXPENSES
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 3 132,841 84,876 44,807 344 560 2,256
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 3 72,647 46,416 24,504 188 306 1,233
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 40,173 25,667 13,550 104 169 682
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Labor 3 1,291 825 436 3 5 22
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Other 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Power Costs 1 2,036,784 1,309,964 719,920 6,900 0 0
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Amort Power Costs 1 534,778 343,944 189,022 1,812 0 0
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pumping Expense ‐ Labor 3 1,223,332 781,617 412,626 3,164 5,155 20,771
Pumping Expense ‐ Other 3 177,759 113,575 59,958 460 749 3,018
Pumping Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 487,000 311,156 164,263 1,259 2,052 8,269
Miscellaneous Expenditures 3 60,830 38,866 20,518 157 256 1,033
TOTAL PUMPING EXPENSE ‐ OPERATION 4,767,435 3,056,905 1,649,603 14,391 9,252 37,284
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 3 2,206 1,409 744 6 9 37
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 3 306 196 103 1 1 5
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 583 373 197 2 2 10
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Labor 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Other 3 215,808 137,885 72,791 558 909 3,664
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Power Production Equipment ‐ Labor 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Power Production Equipment ‐ Other 3 65,176 41,642 21,984 169 275 1,107
Maintenance of Power Production Equipment ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Pumping Equipment ‐ Labor 3 3,631 2,320 1,225 9 15 62
Maintenance of Pumping Equipment ‐ Other 3 6,893 4,404 2,325 18 29 117
Maintenance of Pumping Equipment ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 1,669 1,066 563 4 7 28
TOTAL PUMPING EXPENSES ‐ MAINTENANCE 296,273 189,296 99,932 766 1,248 5,030
TOTAL PUMPING EXPENSES 5,063,708$          3,246,201$          1,749,535$          15,157$               10,501$               42,314$               
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 5 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
WATER TREATMENT
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 2 789,279 515,219 271,975 2,085 0 0
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 2 34,541 22,548 11,903 91 0 0
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 28,048 18,309 9,665 74 0 0
Chemicals 1 519,783 334,300 183,722 1,761 0 0
Operation Labor and Expenses ‐ Labor 2 73,295 47,845 25,256 194 0 0
Operation Labor and Expenses ‐ Other 2 156,821 102,368 54,039 414 0 0
Operation Labor and Expenses ‐ Lab Testing 2 159,423 104,067 54,935 421 0 0
Operation Labor and Expenses ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 311,750 203,501 107,425 823 0 0
Miscellaneous Expenses ‐ Labor 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Expenses ‐ Other 2 30,285 19,769 10,436 80 0 0
Miscellaneous Expenses ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Amortization Miscellaneous 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL WATER TREATMENT EXPENSE ‐ OPERATION 2,103,225 1,367,926 729,356 5,943 0 0
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Labor 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Other 2 61,281 40,002 21,117 162 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Lab Testing 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Water Treatment Equipment ‐ Labor 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Water Treatment Equipment ‐ Other 2 53,146 34,692 18,313 140 0 0
Maintenance of Water Treatment Equipment ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL WATER TREATMENT EXPENSE ‐ MAINTENANCE 114,427 74,695 39,430 302 0 0
TOTAL WATER TREATMENT EXPENSE 2,217,652$          1,442,620$          768,786$             6,245$                  ‐$ ‐$ 
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 6 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION EXPENSES
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 10 47,635 30,759 16,469 159 49 198
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 10 4,334 2,798 1,498 14 4 18
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 10 13,319 8,601 4,605 45 14 55
Storage Facility Expense 5 10,059 7,171 2,235 36 122 494
Trans. Mains Expense ‐ Labor 3 2,016 1,288 680 5 8 34
Trans. Mains Expense ‐ Other 3 18,421 11,769 6,213 48 78 313
Trans. Mains Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 713 455 240 2 3 12
Distrib. Mains Expense ‐ Labor 6 2,602 1,741 700 8 30 123
Distrib. Mains Expense ‐ Other 6 23,778 15,906 6,400 74 278 1,121
Distrib. Mains Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 6 920 615 248 3 11 43
Meter Expense ‐ Labor 8 426 278 146 1 0 0
Meter Expense ‐ Other 8 50 33 17 0 0 0
Meter Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 8 193 126 66 1 0 0
Miscellaneous Expense ‐ Labor 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Expense ‐ Purchased Power 1 455,256 292,800 160,915 1,542 0 0
Miscellaneous Expense ‐ Other 10 64,904 41,910 22,440 217 67 270
Miscellaneous Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL T&D EXPENSE ‐ OPERATION 644,626 416,251 222,874 2,155 665 2,681
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 7 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering 11 49,435 39,715 8,901 101 143 576
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Labor 11 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Other 11 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Fringe Benefits 11 15,020 12,067 2,704 31 43 175
Maintenance of Distribution Reservoirs and Standpipes 5 197,877 141,073 43,974 713 2,409 9,708
Maintenance of Trans. Mains ‐ Labor 3 260 166 88 1 1 4
Maintenance of Trans. Mains ‐ Other 3 14,765 9,434 4,980 38 62 251
Maintenance of Trans. Mains ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 95 61 32 0 0 2
Maintenance of Distrib. Mains ‐ Labor 6 335 224 90 1 4 16
Maintenance of Distrib. Mains ‐ Other 6 19,060 12,749 5,130 59 223 899
Maintenance of Distrib. Mains ‐ Fringe Benefits 6 122 82 33 0 1 6
Maintenance of Services ‐ Labor 9 1,545,679 1,269,297 273,400 2,982 0 0
Maintenance of Services ‐ Other 9 307,427 252,456 54,378 593 0 0
Maintenance of Services ‐ Fringe Benefits 9 607,892 499,195 107,524 1,173 0 0
Maintenance of Meters ‐ Labor 8 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Meters ‐ Other 8 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Meters ‐ Fringe Benefits 8 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Hydrants ‐ Labor 7 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Hydrants ‐ Other 7 25,960 0 0 0 5,161 20,799
Maintenance of Hydrants ‐ Fringe Benefits 7 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous 11 2,468 1,983 444 5 7 29
TOTAL T&D EXPENSE ‐ MAINTENANCE 2,786,397 2,238,501 501,678 5,698 8,056 32,464
TOTAL T&D EXPENSE 3,431,023$          2,654,752$          724,552$             7,853$                  8,721$                  35,145$               
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 8 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS
Supervision ‐ Labor 12 76,463 67,066 7,472 77 1,847 0
Supervision ‐ Other 12 10,649 9,341 1,041 11 257 0
Supervision ‐ Fringe Benefits 12 29,341 25,735 2,867 30 709 0
Meter Reading ‐ Labor 13 338,593 278,049 59,890 653 0 0
Meter Reading ‐ Other 13 86,715 71,209 15,338 167 0 0
Meter Reading ‐ Fringe Benefits 13 130,559 107,214 23,093 252 0 0
Customer Records and Collection ‐ Labor 12 1,329,401 1,166,027 129,918 1,340 32,116 0
Customer Records and Collection ‐ Other 12 770,888 676,151 75,336 777 18,623 0
Customer Records and Collection ‐ Fringe Benefits 12 516,452 452,984 50,471 521 12,477 0
Transportation Costs ‐ Other 12 0 0 0 0 0 0
Uncollectible Accounts 12 (683,545)(599,542)(66,801)(689)(16,513)0
Miscellaneous Other 12 13,881 12,175 1,357 14 335 0
TOTAL CUSTOMER ACCOUNTING EXPENSES 2,619,397 2,266,409 299,984 3,153 49,852 0
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 9 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
ADMINISTRATIVE AND GENERAL EXPENSES
A&G Labor 14 1,907,210 1,414,783 461,761 4,112 12,517 14,037
Fringe Benefits Transferred 16 (3,704,510) (2,799,358)(853,874)(7,545)(25,457) (18,276)
Employee Pension Cost 16 623,218 470,942 143,649 1,269 4,283 3,075
Post Retirement Health Care Accrue 16 (523,756)(395,783)(120,724)(1,067)(3,599) (2,584)
Employee Group Health & Life 16 2,103,710 1,589,695 484,896 4,285 14,456 10,378
Employee 401k 16 456,431 344,907 105,205 930 3,137 2,252
Other Employee Benefits 16 14,634 11,059 3,373 30 101 72
Other Awards 16 22,785 17,218 5,252 46 157 112
Materials and Supply ‐ A&G and Customer Cares 14 932,132 691,462 225,681 2,010 6,118 6,860
Management Fees ‐ Other 14 4,566,635 3,387,565 1,105,643 9,845 29,972 33,610
Contract Services 14 150,202 111,421 36,366 324 986 1,105
Rental of Equipment 14 8,938 6,631 2,164 19 59 66
Transportation Expense 14 238,006 176,554 57,624 513 1,562 1,752
Insurance ‐ General Liability 14 242,524 179,906 58,718 523 1,592 1,785
Insurance ‐ Workman's Compensation 16 116,207 87,813 26,785 237 799 573
Advertising 14 227,683 168,897 55,125 491 1,494 1,676
Reg Commission Exp (Amortization)14 401,670 297,962 97,250 866 2,636 2,956
Bad Debt Write‐of 16 988,608 747,054 227,870 2,013 6,794 4,877
Miscellaneous Expense 14 (221,568)(164,361)(53,645)(478)(1,454) (1,631)
TOTAL A&G EXPENSE 8,550,758 6,344,366 2,069,122 18,423 56,150 62,697
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE EXPENSE 22,483,195$       16,343,335$       5,821,821$          52,659$               125,224$             140,156$             
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE EXPENSE 10,524,398$       7,807,078$          2,548,097$          22,690$               69,074$               77,459$               
(excluding G&A, purchased water, power, and chemicals)
DIRECT LABOR EXPENSE 7,613,366$          5,753,133$          1,754,849$          15,506$               52,318$               37,560$               
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 10 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
Structures and Improvements ‐ Source of Supply 2 194,554 126,999 67,041 514 0 0
Structures and Improvements ‐ Water Treatment 2 379,025 247,417 130,607 1,001 0 0
Structures and Improvements ‐ Trans. & Distrib.6 95,597 63,947 25,729 296 1,118 4,507
Structures and Improvements ‐ General Plant 14 174,705 129,597 42,298 377 1,147 1,286
Collecting & Impounding Reservoirs ‐ Source of Supply 1 749 482 265 3 0 0
Lake, River & Other Intakes 2 24,347 15,893 8,390 64 0 0
Wells & Springs 2 141,814 92,572 48,867 375 0 0
Infiltration Galleries & Tunnels 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Supply Mains 2 39,352 25,688 13,560 104 0 0
Power Generation Equipment 3 153,188 97,876 51,670 396 645 2,601
Power Electric/Diesel Pumping Equipment ‐ Source of Supply 2 760,618 496,510 262,099 2,009 0 0
Power Pumping Equipment ‐ Water Treatment 2 217,301 141,848 74,879 574 0 0
Power Pumping Equipment ‐ Trans. & Distrib. 3 470,931 300,889 158,844 1,218 1,984 7,996
Water Treatment Equipment 2 973,163 635,253 335,340 2,570 0 0
Distribution Reservoirs & Standpipes 5 364,275 259,703 80,952 1,312 4,435 17,872
Trans. Mains & Accessories 3 1,146,606 732,595 386,747 2,965 4,831 19,468
Distrib. Mains & Accessories 6 1,480,072 990,046 398,349 4,588 17,315 69,775
Services 9 1,667,829 1,369,605 295,006 3,218 0 0
Meters and Meter Installations 8 1,020,091 666,492 350,250 3,349 0 0
Hydrants 7 273,666 0 0 0 54,410 219,256
Office Furniture and Equipment 14 83,330 61,815 20,175 180 547 613
Computer Equipment 12 90,241 79,151 8,819 91 2,180 0
Transportation Equipment 14 140,248 104,037 33,956 302 920 1,032
Stores Equipment 14 10,297 7,639 2,493 22 68 76
Tools, Shop and Garage Equipment 14 108,875 80,765 26,360 235 715 801
Laboratory Equipment 2 5,747 3,751 1,980 15 0 0
Power Operated Equipment 14 77,063 57,166 18,658 166 506 567
Communications Equipment 14 320,581 237,810 77,617 691 2,104 2,359
Miscellaneous Equipment 14 21,107 15,658 5,110 46 139 155
Other Tangible Property 14 211,717 157,053 51,259 456 1,390 1,558
TOTAL DEPRECIATION EXPENSES 10,647,090 7,198,254 2,977,321 27,137 94,454 349,923
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 11 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
Amortization of Utility Plant Acquisition 17 282,585 188,117 77,110 737 3,286 13,335
TOTAL AMORTIZATION 282,585 188,117 77,110 737 3,286 13,335
TAXES OTHER THAN INCOME
Real Estate 18 2,145,032 1,429,591 584,948 5,587 24,781 100,125
Payroll Taxes 16 898,783 679,177 207,166 1,831 6,176 4,434
TOTAL TAXES, OTHER THAN INCOME 3,043,815 2,108,768 792,114 7,418 30,957 104,559
INCOME TAXES 18 5,567,006 3,710,221 1,518,117 14,500 64,314 259,854
UTILITY INCOME AVAILABLE FOR RETURN 18 21,801,395 14,529,890 5,945,219 56,784 251,867 1,017,636
TOTAL COST OF SERVICE 63,825,086$       44,078,584$       17,131,702$       159,235$             570,103$             1,885,463$          
LESS: OTHER WATER RESOURCES
Miscellaneous Service Revenue 19 35,620 24,600 9,561 89 318 1,052
TOTAL OTHER WATER REVENUES 35,620 24,600 9,561 89 318 1,052
TOTAL COST OF SERVICE RELATED TO SALES OF WATER 63,789,466$       44,053,985$       17,122,141$       159,146$             569,785$             1,884,410$          
Reallocation of Public Fire 20 1,231,208 647,015 6,187 0 0
TOTAL 63,789,466$       45,285,193$       17,769,156 165,333 569,785 1,884,410
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 12 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
RATE BASE
Organization 17 104,530 69,586 28,523 273 1,216 4,933
Franchise Rights 17 30,079 20,023 8,208 78 350 1,419
Land & Land Rights ‐ Source of Supply 2 2,930,331 1,912,836 1,009,755 7,739 0 0
Water Rights ‐ Source of Supply 2 8,666,083 5,656,972 2,986,223 22,888 0 0
Land & Land Rights ‐ Water Treatment 2 889,034 580,336 306,350 2,348 0 0
Land & Land Rights ‐ Trans. & Distrib.6 972,360 650,428 261,702 3,014 11,376 45,840
Land & Land Rights ‐ General Plant 14 213,383 158,289 51,663 460 1,400 1,570
Structures and Improvements ‐ Source of Supply 2 6,701,625 4,374,630 2,309,295 17,700 0 0
Structures and Improvements ‐ Water Treatment 2 9,365,985 6,113,848 3,227,400 24,737 0 0
Structures and Improvements ‐ Trans. & Distrib.6 2,588,550 1,731,526 696,686 8,024 30,283 122,032
Structures and Improvements ‐ General Plant 14 4,705,847 3,490,833 1,139,348 10,146 30,885 34,635
Collecting & Impounding Reservoirs ‐ Source of Supply 1 42,358 27,242 14,972 143 0 0
Lake, River & Other Intakes 2 916,500 598,265 315,814 2,421 0 0
Wells & Springs 2 4,767,393 3,112,018 1,642,783 12,591 0 0
Infiltration Galleries & Tunnels 2 (13,853)(9,043)(4,773)(37)0 0
Supply Mains 2 2,108,262 1,376,214 726,480 5,568 0 0
Power Generation Equipment 3 1,690,822 1,080,308 570,309 4,373 7,124 28,709
Power Electric/Diesel Pumping Equipment ‐ Source of Supply 2 6,267,772 4,091,423 2,159,795 16,554 0 0
Power Pumping Equipment ‐ Water Treatment 2 2,588,051 1,689,406 891,810 6,835 0 0
Power Pumping Equipment ‐ Trans. & Distrib. 3 6,705,307 4,284,185 2,261,679 17,341 28,253 113,850
Water Treatment Equipment 2 13,826,487 9,025,537 4,764,433 36,518 0 0
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 13 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
Distribution Reservoirs & Standpipes 5 16,648,471 11,869,214 3,699,772 59,966 202,701 816,818
Trans. Mains & Accessories 3 82,112,104 52,463,431 27,696,152 212,357 345,980 1,394,184
Distrib. Mains & Accessories 6 105,992,642 70,900,292 28,526,993 328,541 1,240,005 4,996,811
Services 9 69,649,980 57,195,875 12,319,712 134,394 0 0
Meters and Meter Installations 8 17,150,501 11,205,542 5,888,649 56,311 0 0
Hydrants 7 13,289,464 0 0 0 2,642,213 10,647,251
Office Furniture and Equipment 14 727,021 539,310 176,022 1,567 4,772 5,351
Computer Equipment 12 (4,458,247) (3,910,359)(435,690)(4,495)(107,704)0
Transportation Equipment 14 1,312,956 973,961 317,884 2,831 8,617 9,663
Stores Equipment 14 203,117 150,673 49,177 438 1,333 1,495
Tools, Shop and Garage Equipment 14 1,336,961 991,768 323,696 2,882 8,775 9,840
Laboratory Equipment 2 20,722 13,527 7,141 55 0 0
Power Operated Equipment 14 625,068 463,680 151,337 1,348 4,102 4,600
Communications Equipment 14 3,927,823 2,913,689 950,978 8,468 25,779 28,909
Miscellaneous Equipment 14 243,187 180,398 58,879 524 1,596 1,790
Other Tangible Property 14 2,744,882 2,036,175 664,573 5,918 18,015 20,202
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT IN SERVICE 387,593,558 258,022,038 105,763,728 1,010,820 4,507,071 18,289,902
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 14 of 38
Exhibit 14‐2
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Factor Cost o Public Fire Protection
Account Re  Service   Residential   Commercial   Authority   Private   Public 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT IN SERVICE 387,458,950$     257,932,429$     105,726,997$     1,010,469$          4,505,506$          18,283,550$       
(less Ref 17 items)
OTHER RATE BASE ITEMS
Utility Plant Acquisition Adjustment 17 10,771,089 7,170,342 2,939,137 28,090 125,250 508,270
Customer Advances for Construction 17 (3,797,814) (2,528,215) (1,036,320)(9,904)(44,162) (179,213)
Contributions in Aid of Construction‐Net 17 (112,913,720) (75,166,956) (30,811,080)(294,472) (1,313,000) (5,328,213)
Deferred Charges Included in Rate Base 17 4,933,851 3,284,477 1,346,314 12,867 57,373 232,820
Working Capital Allowance 15 3,552,571 2,582,411 919,906 8,321 19,787 22,146
Deferred Income Taxes 17 (5,307,577) (3,533,268) (1,448,293)(13,842)(61,718) (250,456)
TOTAL OTHER RATE BASE ELEMENTS (102,761,600) (68,191,208) (28,090,336)(268,940) (1,216,471) (4,994,645)
TOTAL ORIGINAL COST MEASURE OF VALUE 284,831,959$     189,830,830$     77,673,392$       741,880$             3,290,600$          13,295,257$       
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 15 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES
SOURCE OF SUPPLY EXPENSES
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 2 68,558 34,399 34,159 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 2 23,939 12,011 11,928 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 27,060 13,577 13,483 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Labor 2 57,703 28,953 28,751 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Expenses 2 7,452 3,739 3,713 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Fringe Benefits 2 21,873 10,975 10,898 0 0 0 0 0
Purchased Water 1 316,694 316,694 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous 2 1,119 561 558 0 0 0 0 0
Rents 2 3,385 1,699 1,687 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL SOURCE OF SUPPLY EXPENSE ‐ OPERATION 527,783 422,608 105,175 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Engineering ‐ Labor 2 10,609 5,323 5,286 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Engineering ‐ Other 2 49,301 24,737 24,564 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 3,181 1,596 1,585 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Engineering ‐ Rivers and Intake 2 2,559 1,284 1,275 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Wells and Springs ‐ Chemicals 1 6,094 6,094 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Wells and Springs 2 1,129 566 562 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL SOURCE OF SUPPLY EXPENSE ‐ MAINTENANCE 72,873 39,600 33,273 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL SOURCE OF SUPPLY EXPENSES 600,656$            462,208$            138,448$            ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 16 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
PUMPING EXPENSES
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 3 132,841 65,331 64,695 0 0 0 0 2,815
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 3 72,647 35,728 35,380 0 0 0 0 1,540
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 40,173 19,757 19,565 0 0 0 0 851
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Labor 3 1,291 635 629 0 0 0 0 27
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Other 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Power Costs 1 2,036,784 2,036,784 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Amort Power Costs 1 534,778 534,778 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fuel or Power Purchase for Pumping ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pumping Expense ‐ Labor 3 1,223,332 601,633 595,774 0 0 0 0 25,926
Pumping Expense ‐ Other 3 177,759 87,422 86,570 0 0 0 0 3,767
Pumping Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 487,000 239,506 237,173 0 0 0 0 10,321
Miscellaneous Expenditures 3 60,830 29,916 29,625 0 0 0 0 1,289
TOTAL PUMPING EXPENSE ‐ OPERATION 4,767,435 3,651,488 1,069,410 0 0 0 0 46,536
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 3 2,206 1,085 1,074 0 0 0 0 47
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 3 306 151 149 0 0 0 0 6
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 583 287 284 0 0 0 0 12
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Labor 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Other 3 215,808 106,134 105,101 0 0 0 0 4,574
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Power Production Equipment ‐ Labor 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Power Production Equipment ‐ Other 3 65,176 32,053 31,741 0 0 0 0 1,381
Maintenance of Power Production Equipment ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Pumping Equipment ‐ Labor 3 3,631 1,786 1,769 0 0 0 0 77
Maintenance of Pumping Equipment ‐ Other 3 6,893 3,390 3,357 0 0 0 0 146
Maintenance of Pumping Equipment ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 1,669 821 813 0 0 0 0 35
TOTAL PUMPING EXPENSES ‐ MAINTENANCE 296,273 145,706 144,288 0 0 0 0 6,279
TOTAL PUMPING EXPENSES 5,063,708$         3,797,195$         1,213,698$         ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 52,815$              
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 17 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
WATER TREATMENT
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 2 789,279 396,020 393,259 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 2 34,541 17,331 17,210 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 28,048 14,073 13,975 0 0 0 0 0
Chemicals 1 519,783 519,783 0 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Labor and Expenses ‐ Labor 2 73,295 36,776 36,519 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Labor and Expenses ‐ Other 2 156,821 78,685 78,136 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Labor and Expenses ‐ Lab Testing 2 159,423 79,990 79,433 0 0 0 0 0
Operation Labor and Expenses ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 311,750 156,420 155,330 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Expenses ‐ Labor 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Expenses ‐ Other 2 30,285 15,196 15,090 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Expenses ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Amortization Miscellaneous 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL WATER TREATMENT EXPENSE ‐ OPERATION 2,103,225 1,314,273 788,952 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Labor 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Other 2 61,281 30,748 30,533 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Lab Testing 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Water Treatment Equipment ‐ Labor 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Water Treatment Equipment ‐ Other 2 53,146 26,666 26,480 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Water Treatment Equipment ‐ Fringe Benefits 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL WATER TREATMENT EXPENSE ‐ MAINTENANCE 114,427 57,414 57,013 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL WATER TREATMENT EXPENSE 2,217,652$         1,371,687$         845,965$            ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 18 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION EXPENSES
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Labor 10 47,635 44,220 1,491 1,615 62 0 0 247
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Other 10 4,334 4,023 136 147 6 0 0 22
Operation Supervision and Engineering ‐ Fringe Benefits 10 13,319 12,364 417 452 17 0 0 69
Storage Facility Expense 5 10,059 2,409 0 7,034 0 0 0 616
Trans. Mains Expense ‐ Labor 3 2,016 991 982 0 0 0 0 43
Trans. Mains Expense ‐ Other 3 18,421 9,059 8,971 0 0 0 0 390
Trans. Mains Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 713 350 347 0 0 0 0 15
Distrib. Mains Expense ‐ Labor 6 2,602 904 553 992 0 0 0 153
Distrib. Mains Expense ‐ Other 6 23,778 8,260 5,055 9,064 0 0 0 1,399
Distrib. Mains Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 6 920 320 196 351 0 0 0 54
Meter Expense ‐ Labor 8 426 0 0 0 426 0 0 0
Meter Expense ‐ Other 8 50 0 0 0 50 0 0 0
Meter Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 8 193 0 0 0 193 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Expense ‐ Labor 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Expense ‐ Purchased Power 1 455,256 455,256 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous Expense ‐ Other 10 64,904 60,251 2,032 2,200 84 0 0 337
Miscellaneous Expense ‐ Fringe Benefits 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL T&D EXPENSE ‐ OPERATION 644,626 598,409 20,179 21,854 838 0 0 3,346
Maintenance Supervision and Engineering 11 49,435 1,120 209 2,651 0 44,737 0 719
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Labor 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Other 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Structures and Improvements ‐ Fringe Benefits 11 15,020 340 64 805 0 13,593 0 218
Maintenance of Distribution Reservoirs and Standpipes 5 197,877 47,388 0 138,372 0 0 0 12,118
Maintenance of Trans. Mains ‐ Labor 3 260 128 126 0 0 0 0 6
Maintenance of Trans. Mains ‐ Other 3 14,765 7,262 7,191 0 0 0 0 313
Maintenance of Trans. Mains ‐ Fringe Benefits 3 95 47 46 0 0 0 0 2
Maintenance of Distrib. Mains ‐ Labor 6 335 116 71 128 0 0 0 20
Maintenance of Distrib. Mains ‐ Other 6 19,060 6,621 4,052 7,265 0 0 0 1,122
Maintenance of Distrib. Mains ‐ Fringe Benefits 6 122 43 26 47 0 0 0 7
Maintenance of Services ‐ Labor 9 1,545,679 0 0 0 0 1,545,679 0 0
Maintenance of Services ‐ Other 9 307,427 0 0 0 0 307,427 0 0
Maintenance of Services ‐ Fringe Benefits 9 607,892 0 0 0 0 607,892 0 0
Maintenance of Meters ‐ Labor 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Meters ‐ Other 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Meters ‐ Fringe Benefits 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Hydrants ‐ Labor 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maintenance of Hydrants ‐ Other 7 25,960 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,960
Maintenance of Hydrants ‐ Fringe Benefits 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Miscellaneous 11 2,468 56 10 132 0 2,233 0 36
TOTAL T&D EXPENSE ‐ MAINTENANCE 2,786,397 63,120 11,796 149,400 0 2,521,562 0 40,520
TOTAL T&D EXPENSE 3,431,023$         661,528$            31,975$              171,253$            838$ 2,521,562$         ‐$ 43,866$              
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 19 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS
Supervision ‐ Labor 12 76,463 0 0 0 0 0 74,616 1,847
Supervision ‐ Other 12 10,649 0 0 0 0 0 10,392 257
Supervision ‐ Fringe Benefits 12 29,341 0 0 0 0 0 28,632 709
Meter Reading ‐ Labor 13 338,593 0 0 0 0 0 338,593 0
Meter Reading ‐ Other 13 86,715 0 0 0 0 0 86,715 0
Meter Reading ‐ Fringe Benefits 13 130,559 0 0 0 0 0 130,559 0
Customer Records and Collection ‐ Labor 12 1,329,401 0 0 0 0 0 1,297,285 32,116
Customer Records and Collection ‐ Other 12 770,888 0 0 0 0 0 752,265 18,623
Customer Records and Collection ‐ Fringe Benefits 12 516,452 0 0 0 0 0 503,975 12,477
Transportation Costs ‐ Other 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Uncollectible Accounts 12 (683,545)0 0 0 0 0 (667,032)(16,513)
Miscellaneous Other 12 13,881 0 0 0 0 0 13,545 335
TOTAL CUSTOMER ACCOUNTING EXPENSES 2,619,397 0 0 0 0 0 2,569,546 49,852
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 20 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
ADMINISTRATIVE AND GENERAL EXPENSES
A&G Labor 14 1,907,210 522,738 404,132 31,034 152 456,952 465,648 26,554
Fringe Benefits Transferred 16 (3,704,510) (847,153) (763,575)(16,431)(311) (974,440) (1,058,866)(43,733)
Employee Pension Cost 16 623,218 142,519 128,458 2,764 52 163,932 178,136 7,357
Post Retirement Health Care Accrue 16 (523,756) (119,773) (107,957)(2,323)(44) (137,770) (149,706)(6,183)
Employee Group Health & Life 16 2,103,710 481,080 433,618 9,331 177 553,363 601,307 24,835
Employee 401k 16 456,431 104,377 94,080 2,024 38 120,060 130,462 5,388
Other Employee Benefits 16 14,634 3,347 3,016 65 1 3,849 4,183 173
Other Awards 16 22,785 5,210 4,696 101 2 5,993 6,513 269
Materials and Supply ‐ A&G and Customer Cares 14 932,132 255,483 197,516 15,168 74 223,331 227,581 12,978
Management Fees ‐ Other 14 4,566,635 1,251,646 967,656 74,308 364 1,094,129 1,114,950 63,582
Contract Services 14 150,202 41,168 31,827 2,444 12 35,987 36,672 2,091
Rental of Equipment 14 8,938 2,450 1,894 145 1 2,142 2,182 124
Transportation Expense 14 238,006 65,234 50,433 3,873 19 57,024 58,109 3,314
Insurance ‐ General Liability 14 242,524 66,472 51,390 3,946 19 58,107 59,213 3,377
Insurance ‐ Workman's Compensation 16 116,207 26,574 23,953 515 10 30,567 33,216 1,372
Advertising 14 227,683 62,404 48,245 3,705 18 54,551 55,589 3,170
Reg Commission Exp (Amortization)14 401,670 110,092 85,113 6,536 32 96,237 98,068 5,592
Bad Debt Write‐of 16 988,608 226,076 203,772 4,385 83 260,045 282,576 11,671
Miscellaneous Expense 14 (221,568)(60,728)(46,950)(3,605)(18)(53,086)(54,096)(3,085)
TOTAL A&G EXPENSE 8,550,758 2,339,215 1,811,316 137,986 682 2,050,976 2,091,736 118,847
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE EXPENSE 22,483,195$       8,631,833$         4,041,403$         309,240$            1,520$                 4,572,538$         4,661,282$         265,380$            
TOTAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE EXPENSE 10,524,398$       2,884,579$         2,230,087$         171,253$            838$ 2,521,562$         2,569,546$         146,533$            
(excluding G&A, purchased water, power, and chemicals)
DIRECT LABOR EXPENSE 7,613,366$         1,741,036$         1,569,270$         33,769$              640$ 2,002,632$         2,176,142$         89,878$              
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 21 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
Structures and Improvements ‐ Source of Supply 2 194,554 97,617 96,937 0 0 0 0 0
Structures and Improvements ‐ Water Treatment 2 379,025 190,175 188,850 0 0 0 0 0
Structures and Improvements ‐ Trans. & Distrib. 6 95,597 33,210 20,323 36,439 0 0 0 5,625
Structures and Improvements ‐ General Plant 14 174,705 47,884 37,019 2,843 14 41,858 42,654 2,432
Collecting & Impounding Reservoirs ‐ Source of Supply 1 749 749 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lake, River & Other Intakes 2 24,347 12,216 12,131 0 0 0 0 0
Wells & Springs 2 141,814 71,155 70,659 0 0 0 0 0
Infiltration Galleries & Tunnels 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Supply Mains 2 39,352 19,745 19,607 0 0 0 0 0
Power Generation Equipment 3 153,188 75,338 74,604 0 0 0 0 3,246
Power Electric/Diesel Pumping Equipment ‐ Source of Supply 2 760,618 381,639 378,979 0 0 0 0 0
Power Pumping Equipment ‐ Water Treatment 2 217,301 109,030 108,270 0 0 0 0 0
Power Pumping Equipment ‐ Trans. & Distrib. 3 470,931 231,603 229,348 0 0 0 0 9,980
Water Treatment Equipment 2 973,163 488,283 484,880 0 0 0 0 0
Distribution Reservoirs & Standpipes 5 364,275 87,237 0 254,731 0 0 0 22,307
Trans. Mains & Accessories 3 1,146,606 563,899 558,408 0 0 0 0 24,299
Distrib. Mains & Accessories 6 1,480,072 514,165 314,650 564,167 0 0 0 87,090
Services 9 1,667,829 0 0 0 0 1,667,829 0 0
Meters and Meter Installations 8 1,020,091 0 0 0 1,020,091 0 0 0
Hydrants 7 273,666 0 0 0 0 0 0 273,666
Office Furniture and Equipment 14 83,330 22,839 17,657 1,356 7 19,965 20,345 1,160
Computer Equipment 12 90,241 0 0 0 0 0 88,061 2,180
Transportation Equipment 14 140,248 38,440 29,718 2,282 11 33,602 34,242 1,953
Stores Equipment 14 10,297 2,822 2,182 168 1 2,467 2,514 143
Tools, Shop and Garage Equipment 14 108,875 29,841 23,070 1,772 9 26,086 26,582 1,516
Laboratory Equipment 2 5,747 2,883 2,863 0 0 0 0 0
Power Operated Equipment 14 77,063 21,122 16,329 1,254 6 18,464 18,815 1,073
Communications Equipment 14 320,581 87,867 67,930 5,217 26 76,809 78,270 4,463
Miscellaneous Equipment 14 21,107 5,785 4,473 343 2 5,057 5,153 294
Other Tangible Property 14 211,717 58,028 44,862 3,445 17 50,726 51,691 2,948
TOTAL DEPRECIATION EXPENSES 10,647,090 3,193,574 2,803,749 874,016 1,020,182 1,942,863 368,328 444,378
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 22 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Amortization of Utility Plant Acquisition 17 282,585 87,969 73,065 39,137 12,509 53,601 (317) 16,621
TOTAL AMORTIZATION 282,585 87,969 73,065 39,137 12,509 53,601 (317) 16,621
TAXES OTHER THAN INCOME
Real Estate 18 2,145,032 669,692 552,510 293,744 93,772 407,235 3,172 124,906
Payroll Taxes 16 898,783 205,535 185,258 3,987 76 236,417 256,901 10,610
TOTAL TAXES, OTHER THAN INCOME 3,043,815 875,227 737,768 297,731 93,848 643,653 260,073 135,516
INCOME TAXES 18 5,567,006 1,738,052 1,433,931 762,354 243,368 1,056,899 8,233 324,169
UTILITY INCOME AVAILABLE FOR RETURN 18 21,801,395 6,806,524 5,615,532 2,985,517 953,071 4,139,006 32,243 1,269,502
TOTAL COST OF SERVICE 63,825,086$       21,333,178$       14,705,449$       5,267,994$         2,324,498$         12,408,559$       5,329,842$         2,455,565$         
LESS: OTHER WATER RESOURCES
Miscellaneous Service Revenue 19 35,620 11,906 8,207 2,940 1,297 6,925 2,975 1,370
TOTAL OTHER WATER REVENUES 35,620 11,906 8,207 2,940 1,297 6,925 2,975 1,370
TOTAL COST OF SERVICE RELATED TO SALES OF WATER 63,789,466$       21,321,273$       14,697,242$       5,265,054$         2,323,201$         12,401,634$       5,326,868$         2,454,195$         
Reallocation of Public Fire 20 ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 1,884,410$         ‐$ ‐$ (1,884,410)$        
TOTAL 63,789,466$       21,321,273$       14,697,242$       5,265,054$         4,207,611$         12,401,634$       5,326,868$         569,785$            
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 23 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
RATE BASE
Organization 17 104,530 32,540 27,027 14,477 4,627 19,827 (117) 6,148
Franchise Rights 17 30,079 9,363 7,777 4,166 1,331 5,705 (34) 1,769
Land & Land Rights ‐ Source of Supply 2 2,930,331 1,470,290 1,460,041 0 0 0 0 0
Water Rights ‐ Source of Supply 2 8,666,083 4,348,197 4,317,886 0 0 0 0 0
Land & Land Rights ‐ Water Treatment 2 889,034 446,072 442,962 0 0 0 0 0
Land & Land Rights ‐ Trans. & Distrib.6 972,360 337,790 206,715 370,639 0 0 0 57,216
Land & Land Rights ‐ General Plant 14 213,383 58,485 45,215 3,472 17 51,125 52,098 2,971
Structures and Improvements ‐ Source of Supply 2 6,701,625 3,362,533 3,339,093 0 0 0 0 0
Structures and Improvements ‐ Water Treatment 2 9,365,985 4,699,372 4,666,613 0 0 0 0 0
Structures and Improvements ‐ Trans. & Distrib.6 2,588,550 899,242 550,302 986,691 0 0 0 152,315
Structures and Improvements ‐ General Plant 14 4,705,847 1,289,802 997,154 76,574 375 1,127,483 1,148,939 65,520
Collecting & Impounding Reservoirs ‐ Source of Supply 1 42,358 42,358 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lake, River & Other Intakes 2 916,500 459,853 456,647 0 0 0 0 0
Wells & Springs 2 4,767,393 2,392,034 2,375,359 0 0 0 0 0
Infiltration Galleries & Tunnels 2 (13,853)(6,951)(6,902)0 0 0 0 0
Supply Mains 2 2,108,262 1,057,818 1,050,444 0 0 0 0 0
Power Generation Equipment 3 1,690,822 831,543 823,446 0 0 0 0 35,833
Power Electric/Diesel Pumping Equipment ‐ Source of Supply 2 6,267,772 3,144,848 3,122,925 0 0 0 0 0
Power Pumping Equipment ‐ Water Treatment 2 2,588,051 1,298,552 1,289,499 0 0 0 0 0
Power Pumping Equipment ‐ Trans. & Distrib. 3 6,705,307 3,297,658 3,265,546 0 0 0 0 142,102
Water Treatment Equipment 2 13,826,487 6,937,424 6,889,063 0 0 0 0 0
Distribution Reservoirs & Standpipes 5 16,648,471 3,986,978 0 11,641,974 0 0 0 1,019,519
Trans. Mains & Accessories 3 82,112,104 40,382,591 39,989,350 0 0 0 0 1,740,164
Distrib. Mains & Accessories 6 105,992,642 36,821,012 22,533,067 40,401,747 0 0 0 6,236,816
Services 9 69,649,980 0 0 0 0 69,649,980 0 0
Meters and Meter Installations 8 17,150,501 0 0 0 17,150,501 0 0 0
Hydrants 7 13,289,464 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,289,464
Office Furniture and Equipment 14 727,021 199,266 154,054 11,830 58 174,189 177,503 10,122
Computer Equipment 12 (4,458,247)0 0 0 0 0 (4,350,543) (107,704)
Transportation Equipment 14 1,312,956 359,862 278,211 21,364 105 314,574 320,560 18,280
Stores Equipment 14 203,117 55,671 43,040 3,305 16 48,665 49,591 2,828
Tools, Shop and Garage Equipment 14 1,336,961 366,441 283,298 21,755 107 320,325 326,421 18,615
Laboratory Equipment 2 20,722 10,397 10,325 0 0 0 0 0
Power Operated Equipment 14 625,068 171,322 132,450 10,171 50 149,761 152,611 8,703
Communications Equipment 14 3,927,823 1,076,557 832,293 63,914 313 941,075 958,983 54,688
Miscellaneous Equipment 14 243,187 66,654 51,531 3,957 19 58,266 59,374 3,386
Other Tangible Property 14 2,744,882 752,331 581,632 44,665 219 657,652 670,167 38,217
TOTAL UTILITY PLANT IN SERVICE 387,593,558 120,657,904 100,216,062 53,680,701 17,157,738 73,518,627 (434,447) 22,796,973
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 24 of 38
Exhibit 14‐3
COST OF SERVICE FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2023
ALLOCATED TO COST FUNCTIONS
Factor Cost o Billing & Fire
Account Re  Service   Base   Max Day   Max Hour   Meters   Services   Meters   Services 
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
OTHER RATE BASE ITEMS
Utility Plant Acquisition Adjustment 17 10,771,089 3,353,041 2,784,969 1,491,768 476,808 2,043,057 (12,073) 633,520
Customer Advances for Construction 17 (3,797,814) (1,182,260) (981,962) (525,987) (168,119) (720,368) 4,257 (223,375)
Contributions in Aid of Construction‐Net 17 (112,913,720) (35,150,050) (29,194,934) (15,638,257) (4,998,391) (21,417,440) 126,563 (6,641,212)
Deferred Charges Included in Rate Base 17 4,933,851 1,535,908 1,275,695 683,326 218,408 935,851 (5,530)290,193
Working Capital Allowance 15 3,552,571 1,363,917 638,582 48,863 240 722,507 736,529 41,933
Deferred Income Taxes 17 (5,307,577) (1,652,249) (1,372,325) (735,086) (234,952) (1,006,740)5,949 (312,174)
TOTAL OTHER RATE BASE ELEMENTS (102,761,600) (31,731,693) (26,849,974) (14,675,374) (4,706,006) (19,443,132)855,695 (6,211,116)
TOTAL ORIGINAL COST MEASURE OF VALUE 284,831,959$     88,926,211$       73,366,087$       39,005,328$       12,451,732$       54,075,495$       421,248$            16,585,857$       
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 25 of 38
Exhibit 14‐4
BASIS FOR ALLOCATING DEMAND RELATED COSTS OF FIRE SERVICE
TO PRIVATE AND PUBLIC FIRE PROTECTION CUSTOMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Description
 Relative Flow 
Capacity Factor 
Equivalent 
Hydrant 
Ratio
 Number of 
Hydrants or Fire 
Connections 
 Equivalent 
Hydrant   Allocation Factor 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)
PRIVATE FIRE PROTECTION
Fire Lines
3"18.0 0.26             903 235
4"38.3 0.56             688 385
6"111.3 1.62             584 946
8"237.2 3.44             186 640
10"426.6 6.19             11 68
12"689.0 10.00           6 60
Private Hydrants 68.9 1.00             160 160
Total Private Fire Protection 2,538 2,494 0.1988
PUBLIC FIRE PROTECTION
Public Hydrants 68.9 1.00             10,050 10,050
Total Public Fire Protection 10,050 10,050 0.8012
TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION 12,588 12,544 1.0000
*Demand Factors based on nominal size of connection raised to the 2.63 power.
Source: AWWA M1 Manual, Chapter IV.8.
Equivalent Fire Hydrants = Equivalent Hydrant Ratio x Number of Hydrants or Connections
VWID's standard hydrant has a 5" front barrel with two 2.5" side barrels.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 26 of 38
Exhibit 14‐5A
CALCULATION OF BI‐MONTHLY CUSTOMER COST FOR 5/8‐INCH METER
Cost per Cost per
Cost per 5/8‐inch 5/8‐inch
Cost o Total 5/8‐inch Meter Meter
Cost Function  Service   Units   Meter   Monthly   Bi‐Monthly 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)
Meters 2,323,201 201,378 5/8" Meter Equiv.11.54 0.96 1.92
Services 12,401,634 123,059 3/4" Service Equiv.100.78                 8.40 16.80 
Billing and Collections 5,326,868 102,518 Customers 51.96 4.33 8.66
Subtotal Customer Costs 20,051,702$       13.69$                 27.38$                 
Unrecovered Public Fire 1,884,410 201,378 5/8"‐inch Equiv.9.36 0.78 1.56
Total Customer Costs and Public Fire 21,936,113$       14.47$                 28.94$                 
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 27 of 38
Exhibit 14‐5B
CALCULATION OF VOLUME UNIT CHARGE
Cost of Total Tier Cost per Tier Cost per
Cost Function  Service   Units   Ratio   CCF   Ratio   CCF 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)
Base 21,333,178
Max Day 14,705,449
Max Hour 5,267,994
Total Volume Costs 41,306,621$       18,803,987 Volume 2.1967$               2.1967$               
Winter Volume 6,723,221 1.00 1.9050$               1.00 1.6816$               
Summer Volume ‐ Tier 1 562,325 1.00 1.9050$               1.00 1.6816$               
Summer Volume ‐ Tier 2 11,518,441 1.25 2.3812$               1.50 2.5225$               
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 28 of 38
Exhibit 14‐5C
CALCULATION OF BI‐MONTHLY CUSTOMER COST FOR FIRE SERVICE
Cost per Cost per
Cost per Equiv.Equiv.
Cost of Total Equiv.Hydrants Hydrants
Cost Function  Service   Units   Hydrants   Monthly   Bi‐Monthly 
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)
Private Fire Service 569,785 2,494 Equiv. Hydrants 228.46                19.04 38.08 
Total Private Costs 569,785$            19.04$ 38.08$                
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 29 of 38
VEOLIA WATER IDAHO, INC. CASE VEO-W-22-02 FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF MICRON
Preparer/Sponsoring Witness: Cooper
REQUEST NO. 17:
Regarding transmission mains:
a. Please identify all sizes (in diameter) of transmission mains installed on the Company’s
transmission system.
b. For each main size identified in part a., above, please provide the total length of main
installed on the Company's transmission system.
c. Please describe the Company’s meter installation protocols in terms of specifying the size of
a main that is needed to connect a specific meter size to its transmission system.
RESPONSE NO. 17:
a/b. The size in diameter and total length of transmission mains are in Table 1 below.
Table 1 12” 14” 16” 18” 20” 24” 30” 36” Total Length (miles) 336.22 1.82 55.16 0.98 5.41 19.47 3.85 0.38 423.28
c. The size of transmission mains that are used to service various meter sizes are determined
by the Company using engineering analysis.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 30 of 38
VEOLIA WATER IDAHO, INC. CASE VEO-W-22-02 FIRST PRODUCTION REQUEST OF MICRON
Preparer/Sponsoring Witness: Cooper
REQUEST NO. 18:
Regarding distribution mains:
a. Please identify all sizes (in diameter) of distribution mains installed on the Company’s
distribution system.
b. For each main size identified in part a., above, please provide the total length of main
installed on the Company's distribution system.
c. Please describe the Company’s meter installation protocols in terms of specifying the size of
a main that is needed to connect a specific meter size to its distribution system.
RESPONSE NO. 18:
a/b. The size in diameter and total length of distribution mains are in Table 2 below.
Table 2 ≤1.5” 2-2.5”3” 4” 6” 8” 10” Total Length (miles) 0.99 28.20 1.12 42.11 296.12 649.75 10.80 1029.10
c. The size of distribution mains that are used to service various meter sizes are determined
by the Company using engineering analysis.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 31 of 38
VEOLIA WATER IDAHO, INC. CASE VEO-W-22-02 MICRON’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS TO VEOLIA WATER IDAHO INC
Preparer/Sponsoring Witness: Bui
REQUEST NO. 7:
Please identify any water customers that meet the following load characteristics: served
on meter size 8 inches and larger, have ratios of extra capacity volumes relative to base volumes
that are lower than the system average, and are served directly from a transmission main of 8
inches or larger.
RESPONSE NO. 7:
For the test period under consideration, VWID reports two (2) 8-inch meters. One meter
is associated with a 24-inch diameter main and the other is associated with a 12-inch diameter
line. Customer confidentiality does not allow the provision of customer information.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 32 of 38
MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.’S
FIRST PRDUCTION REQUEST
TO VEOLIA -6-DECEMBER 9, 2022
a. water treatment plant,
b. purchased water delivery to Veolia; and
c. water delivered via the transmission mains to the distribution mains.
Please acknowledge that the Company’s advanced metering devices are tracking this hourly
volume data for test year, and/or for resource planning purposes.
REQUEST NO. 6: Please refer to Bui, Appendix B at page 8. Paragraph 1.1 states that
the current tariff includes an Industrial classification; however, no active customers are in this
class. Please provide VWID’s definition of an Industrial customer, along with documentation
supporting the response.
REQUEST NO. 7: Please identify any water customers that meet the following load
characteristics: served on meter size 8 inches and larger, have ratios of extra capacity volumes
relative to base volumes that are lower than the system average, and are served directly from a
transmission main of 8 inches or larger.
REQUEST NO. 8: Please refer to Bui, Appendix B at page 11. Paragraph 2.2 states that
the period of 6/1/2021 – 8/31/2021 would define the analytical window and would contain the MD
and MH values for the system and customer classes. Please confirm that there were no water usage
restrictions in place during this time. If not confirmed, please identify the dates in which
restrictions on water usage were in place.
REQUEST NO. 9: Please provide VWID’s definition of a Residential customer. Please
include documentation supporting the response.
REQUEST NO. 10: Please provide VWID’s definition of a Commercial customer. Please
include documentation supporting the response.
REQUEST NO. 11: Please provide VWID’s definition of a Public Authority Customer.
Please include documentation supporting the response.
REQUEST NO. 12: Please provide VWID’s definition of Private Fire Customer. Please
include documentation supporting the response.
REQUEST NO. 13: Please refer to Bui, Appendix B at 15, Section 3.3.1. In electronic
spreadsheet format with all formulas and links intact, please provide the workpapers that were
used to develop an average hourly usage profile for each customer class, as described in Section
3.3.1.
REQUEST NO. 14: Please refer to Bui, Appendix B at Table 4-1 and Table 4-3.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 33 of 38
VEOLIA WATER IDAHO, INC. CASE VEO-W-22-02 FIFTH PRODUCTION REQUEST OF THE COMMISSION STAFF
Preparer/Sponsoring Witness: Bui
REQUEST NO. 154:
The Load Study, page 7, states a key objective is to "establish a basis for
selecting maximum day and maximum hour ratios for each appropriate customer
classification and the total system." Please provide the specific information in the Load
Study and the analysis that was performed to justify that the Company's currently
defined customers are the appropriate customer classifications.
RESPONSE NO. 154:
The Company currently has established customer classes of Residential,
Commercial, and Industrial, Public Authority, and Fire Protection. Such a classification
system is consistent with typical water utility practice and norms and as suggested by
AWWA Manual M1 Principles of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges. Based on the
existing definition of industrial customers per the Company’s rate schedule, it is
understood that no customers currently meet this definition.
The scope of the Load Study examined the available data for customers in the
Company’s billing system. Obtaining additional information on customer characteristics
(e.g., the size of a residential lot) was beyond the scope of the study. Thus, the analysis
conducted was limited to readily available customer billing information.
VWID’s current classification of customers is appropriate and reflects industry
norms. It represents a suitable balance between a fair segmentation of customers based
on broad similarities in customer characteristics and administratively complex
additional data capture and maintenance requirements.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 34 of 38
VEOLIA WATER IDAHO, INC. CASE VEO-W-22-02 MICRON’S SECOND SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS TO VEOLIA WATER IDAHO INC
Preparer/Sponsoring Witness: Thompson/Cary
REQUEST NO. 42:
Please refer to the Company’s response to Micron Request No. 6.
a.Please identify the number of customers that take service from VWID that satisfy
the definition of an industrial customer, as stated on Company Tariff Sheet No.
36, paragraph 52 II.
b. Please confirm that in the Company’s class cost of service study supported by
witness Ms. Bui, all customers that satisfy the definition of industrial are included
in the Commercial class. If the response is anything other than an unqualified
confirmation, please provide a detailed explanation supporting the response.
c. Please confirm that Micron Technology, Inc. (“Micron”) satisfies the definition of
an industrial customer, as provided on Company Tariff Sheet No. 36. If the
response is anything other than an unqualified confirmation, please provide a
detailed explanation supporting the response.
d.For each customer that satisfies VWID’s definition of an industrial customer,
please provide the following information. Please note that customers do not need
to be identified, but can simply be numbered as customer 1, customer 2, etc.:
i.Please identify the size(s) and number of meters of each size serving each
customer.
ii. Please identify the size(s) of mains serving each industrial customer.
iii.For each industrial customer served by a main that is less than or equal to
10 inches in diameter, please provide the length of distribution main
serving that customer.
e.For each customer that satisfies VWID’s definition of an industrial customer,
please state whether or not that customer has an AMI meter.
f.Please provide the coincident peaking factors (maximum day and maximum hour)
that would apply to the group of customers that satisfy VWID’s definition of
industrial customer.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 35 of 38
g.Please provide the non-coincident peaking factors (maximum day and maximum
hour) that would apply to the group of customers that satisfy VWID’s definition
of industrial customer.
h. To the extent that VWID has one or more customers that satisfy the Company’s
definition of an industrial customer, please provide a detailed explanation as to
why the class cost of service study does not recognize an industrial class. Please
provide all materials supporting the response.
i.To the extent that VWID has one or more customers that satisfy the Company’s
definition of industrial customer, in electronic spreadsheet format with all
formulas intact, please provide a class cost of service study that includes these
customers in a separate industrial class.
j. Please explain why VWID has not classified any of its customers as industrial, in
accordance with the definition shown on the Company’s Tariff Sheet No. 36.
RESPONSE NO. 42:
a.N/A
b.N/A
c.Please see Sheet No. 36, Paragraph 52 I and II whereby a commercial customer and an industrial
customer are defined respectively, as follows:
i.Commercial customer shall designate:
1. A building containing two or more apartments or family units, which are
rented or leased to tenants.
2. A building occupied by a retail or service business which does not
manufacture any item or items on the premises
3. Any building containing any combination of 'A' and 'B' above.
4. A hotel, motel, tourist court, trailer court or mobile home park which
rents or leases rooms or spaces to tenants.
ii.Industrial customer shall designate any building or combination of buildings in
the same compound whose primary use is for the manufacture, fabrication,
and/or assembly of any product.
To be designated as an Industrial customer, the use of water must be primarily
for the manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any product. No customer
has designated any building or combination of buildings in the same compound
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 36 of 38
whose primary use is for the manufacture, fabrication, and/or assembly of any
product. Currently, it is the Company's understanding Micron's water use from
VWID is primarily for office space as well as fire protection and therefore does
not fit the definition of an industrial customer but does fit the definition of a
commercial customer under Paragraph 52 I 'B'.
d.
i. i N/A
ii.N/A
iii.N/A
e.N/A
f.N/A
g.N/A
h.N/A
i.N/A
j.See the response to Item C. above.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 37 of 38
VEOLIA WATER IDAHO, INC. CASE VEO-W-22-02 MICRON’S SECOND SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS TO VEOLIA WATER IDAHO INC
Preparer/Sponsoring Witness: Cary
REQUEST NO. 44:
Is Micron one of the top ten largest customers of VWID in terms of annual water
consumption?
RESPONSE NO. 44:
Yes.
Exhibit No. 419 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 38 of 38
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF VEOLIA WATER IDAHO INC. FOR AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS RATES AND CHARGES FOR WATER SERVICE IN THE STATE OF IDAHO
))))
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
EXHIBIT NO. 420 TO ACCOMPANY THE
DIRECT TESTIMONY OF JESSICA A. YORK
Sheet No. 36 Replacing all Previous Sheets
SUEZ WATER IDAHO INC.
Issued by SUEZ WATER IDAHO INC. Issued Per IPUC Order No. 35030 Marshall Thompson, Vice President Effective – May 1, 2021 8248 West Victory Road, Boise, Idaho
RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE RENDERING OF SERVICE (cont’d)
51.Residential customer shall designate a building under one roof, which isowned, leased or rented by one party and occupied as a residence.
52.Commercial, Industrial and Municipal customers shall be designated by thefollowing:
I.Commercial customer shall designate:
A.A building containing two or more apartments or family units, whichare rented or leased to tenants.
B.A building occupied by a retail or service business which does notmanufacture any item or items on the premises.
C.Any building containing any combination of `A' and `B' above.
D.A hotel, motel, tourist court, trailer court or mobile home park whichrents or leases rooms or spaces to tenants.
II.Industrial customer shall designate any building or combination of buildingsin the same compound whose primary use is for the manufacture,fabrication, and/or assembly of any product.
III.Municipal customer shall designate a publicly owned building such as aschool, city hall, courthouse, fire house, hospital, or other public institution.
53.The purpose of the foregoing rules and regulations and definitions is topreserve, to the maximum extent possible, the obligation of the Company to furnish service. The rules and regulations and definitions contained herein shall be construed and applied in accordance with the spirit and intent of Title 61 of the Idaho Code .
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Approved Effective
Dec. 28, 2021 Jan.1, 2022
Per O.N. 35247
Jan Noriyuki Secretary
Exhibit No. 420 Case No. VEO-W-22-02 York, Micron Technology, Inc. Page 1 of 1