20240702Decision Memo.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO: COMMISSIONER ANDERSON
COMMISSIONER HAMMOND
COMMISSIONER LODGE
COMMISSION SECRETARY
COMMISSION STAFF
LEGAL
FROM: ADAM TRIPLETT
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
DATE: JULY 2, 2024
SUBJECT: INVESTIGATION INTO DRY CREEK WATER COMPANY, LLC,
OWNER OF A WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM; CASE
NO. DRY-W-24-01.
Dry Creek Water Company, LLC ("Company"), is an Idaho limited liability company
that owns a water distribution system located north-west of Boise. The Company provides water
to the Dry Creek Ranch community, and as of December 2023, serves 381 connections. When
fully built out, the system is projected to serve significantly more connections. The Company is
not currently regulated by the Idaho Public Utilities Commission ("Commission") and does not
possess a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity ("CPCN").
On May 24, 2024, the Commission issued a Notice of Investigation, opening this case to
formally investigate whether the Company should be regulated as a public utility under the Idaho
Code. Order No. 36195. Order No. 36195 directed Commission Staff("Staff') to investigate the
status of the Company and then file written comments recommending any further actions. Order
No. 36195 established a deadline of June 12, 2024, for public comments and a deadline of June
26, 2024, for the Company to file reply comments.
On June 12, 2024, Staff filed written comments containing several recommendations.
First, Staff recommended the Commission issue the Company a CPCN. Staff also recommended
that the Commission direct the Company to work with Staff to submit tariffs, a full legal
description and map of the Company's service area, a copy of a notice to be provided to
customers regarding regulation. Finally, Staff further recommended that the Commission direct
Staff to open a case to evaluate whether the Company's rates are fair,just, and reasonable.
DECISION MEMORANDUM 1

On June 25, 2024, the Company filed the expedited petition to amend the reply comment
deadline currently up for decision.' Specifically, the Company seeks a 28-day extension of the
reply comment deadline. In support of this request, the Company alleges that it had retained
counsel two days before reply comments were due to be filed and additional time was necessary
for that counsel to review and respond to Staff s comments. The Company further asserts that
extending the reply comment deadline would provide additional time for the parties to explore
alternative avenues to resolve this matter.
On June 26, 2024, the Company filed reply comments, arguing that it is not operating
within the Commission's jurisdiction and regulation by the Commission is otherwise
unnecessary. The Company further indicated that the reply comments should be considered
preliminary and, if the Commission grants the petition to amend the reply comment deadline, the
Company reserved the right to supplement its reply comments.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Commission treat the Company's petition as a motion requesting
expeditious consideration. Staff does not oppose the Company's request for an additional 28
days to file reply comments, thereby establishing a new reply comment deadline of July 24,
2024.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission wish to treat the Company's petition as a motion seeking
expeditious consideration and grant the Company's request to amend Order No. 36195 to
provide an additional 28 days to file reply comments, establishing a new reply comment deadline
of July 24, 2024?
Adam Triplett
Deputy Attorney General
I:\Legal\WATER\DRY-W-24-01\memos\DRY W2401_dec2_at.doc
I The Company's petition asks the Commission to grant procedural relief and would be better treated as a motion
under the Commission's Rules for Procedure and current circumstances. The Company's petition did not
specifically cite Commission Rule of Procedure 256.03, which governs the procedure on motions before the
Commission, including expedited consideration. The Company requested expeditious consideration of its petition
and notified Staff—the only other party to the case—it planned to do so.Additionally,more than two business days
will have passed by July 2, 2024,when the Commission is schedule to hold its next decision meeting—the earliest
the Commission would hear the Company's request. Because the Company's petition meets the requirements for
expeditious consideration (party notice and duration before consideration) of a motion under Rule 256, Staff
recommends the Commission treat the Company's petition as a motion and consider the Company's request in
expedited fashion.
DECISION MEMORANDUM 2