20150202final_order_no_33219.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
February 2,2015
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )
OF ACME WATER WORKS,INC.FOR A )CASE NO.AWW-W-13-O1
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC )
CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY )ORDER NO.33219
_____________________________________________________________________________________
)
On June 1,2013,Acme Water Works,Inc.(“Acme”or “Company”)filed an
Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity authorizing the Company to
operate as a water utility in the State of Idaho.Additionally,Acme requests authority to finance
new construction through new hookup fees.
Thereafter,Commission Staff (“Staff’)engaged in a prolonged discussion and
discovery process with the Company in order to obtain additional information and business
records.
On April 3,2014,the Commission issued a Notice of Application and Modified
Procedure with a 42-day comment period.See Order No.33011.The Commission Staff was the
only party to submit written comments regarding Acme’s Application.
On June 12,2014,the Company notified the Commission that it was in the process of
forming a non-profit corporation or water system cooperative.To date,the Company has failed
to provide the requested documentation regarding the reformation of its business structure.
ACME’S APPLICATION
Acme Water requests that the Commission issue a Certificate of Public Convenience
and Necessity (CPCN)to provide domestic water service.Acme Water currently serves a portion
of the Schweitzer Village subdivision,located in Bonner County,Idaho.Joel Wahlin is the
owner of Acme Water.
Acme included a copy of the Company’s registration as a corporation with the Idaho
Secretary of State.Acme’s Application states that the Company’s water system consists of two
wells,a 200,000-gallon storage reservoir,distribution mains and fire hydrants.Acme provides
water service to a small 260 equivalent residential units (ERU)on 107 lots located in the area of
Schweitzer Mountain Ski Resort,in Township 58N,Range 2W,Section 29,Bonner County,
Idaho.Acme has 20 residential customers and 6 unserved “standby accounts.”
ORDER NO.33219 1
Acme currently charges 23 residential customers for water service and has 6 unserved
residential customers with standby service.The Company s proposed rates include monthly
recurring charges of $48/month (includes up to 12,000 gallons),and two levels of usage fees;
$0.005/gallon for 12,001-30,000 gallons and $0.006/gallon for over 30,000 gallons.A standby
fee of $24/month has also been proposed for property owners who have paid a water system
hookup fee but are not currently receiving water.The Company’s proposed rates are measured
by Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs).
The proposed recurring charges are the same rates as those currently being charged
by the Company.A variety of non-recurring charges are also proposed.The Company currently
collects a $7,000 hookup fee and proposes to increase this amount to $9,430 (See Attachment
No.19 of the Application).
Also included in the Application were attachments:a site plan developed by James A.
Sewell and Associates L.L.C.,Consulting Engineers;Sanitary Survey conducted by the
Panhandle Health District in November 2011;Application for Water Permit;estimated cost for
utility construction and statement of anticipated annual maintenance costs;Income Tax
Statements (2010-2011);Company Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws;Company rules and
regulations;main extension rules;tariff rate schedules;sample invoice;and notices.
Acme’s Service Area
Acme’s Application includes a plat of Schweitzer Village,the Company’s requested
service area,in Bonner County,Idaho.Acme’s service area is located near the Schweitzer
Mountain Ski area.There are currently three other water systems that serve the ski area and
adjacent developments:(1)Schweitzer Basin Water Company;(2)Resort Water Co.;and (3)
Spires Water Co.Consolidation with these other water systems was assessed by James Sewell
and Associates in 2008.Application Atch.No.13.This assessment resulted in the
determination that the most feasible way to provide safe drinking water for lot owners would be
through the creation of a separate water system due to topographical conditions and water
storage issues.
Acme’s System Description
The Acme Water system consists of two wells,a 200,000-gallon storage reservoir,
distribution mains and fire hydrants.A single pump is installed in Well No.1 with a 7.5 HP
ORDER NO.33219 2
pump with a rated pumping capacity of 30 gallons per minute (gpm).Application Atch.No.8).
There is no pump in Well No.2.
The distribution system is supplied from the storage reservoir and consists of
interconnected 4-inch and an 8-inch pipe in an unlooped configuration.The lot service line
diameters are based on the number of ERUs allowed for each lot:1-4 ERUs has a 1-inch
diameter;5-12 ERUs has a 1.5-inch diameter;and 13-24 ERUs has a 2-inch diameter.Shutoff
valves are located at each water service connection.No meters have been installed.
The water service delivery main (4-inch and 8-inch diameter,from storage tank to
customers)is located part way into the Phase 2 of the resort development,along with the water
storage delivery main (8-inch diameter,from Well No.1 to storage tank).
Phase I of the development is generally complete and is designed to serve 136 ERUs
on 46 lots.Acme currently provides water service to 23 residential customers.The residential
customers are located on 3 lots with 16 condo units,4 condo units,and 3 condo units,
respectively.The Company informed Staff that the total number of residential customers
increased from 20 to 23 since last spring.If both Phase 1 and Phase 2 development phases are
completed,and including additional capacity from Well No.2,Acme may eventually provide
water service to 260 ERUs on 107 lots.
Water Production and C’onsuinption Data
Monthly water production and consumption data are not available even though a flow
meter appears to be available for Well No.1.Application Atch.No.8,photo labeled “Flow
meter and flow to water line.”Acme has not obtained a water right for Well No.1 according to
the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR).
Staff recommended that flow meter data be collected on a monthly basis starting
immediately so that this information is available for rate design analysis in the future.Staff
believes it is prudent for the Company to acquire adequate water rights by applying for new
rights/permits and acquiring existing water rights from private parties.
Staff obtained monthly power charges from May 2012 through July 2013.This
expense is variable and dependent upon the amount of water customers’demand from the
system.Staff’s analysis of the Company’s power expenses revealed that water consumption
appears to vary throughout the year with the maximum usage occurring during the winter months
of December and January,and the minimum usage in September.
ORDER NO.33219 3
Since customer consumption is not metered,Staff was not able to calculate the total
amount of water consumed by residential customers.Staff believes that none of the existing
residential customers are expected to maintain a green lawn or landscaping.
System and Financial Operations
All operations,other than management decisions and accounts payable,are performed
by Water Systems Management.The Company currently contracts all water master duties
including water testing,billing and collections with Water Systems Management.Water
Systems Management has the proper certifications and experience in running small water
systems.
Currently,the Company has implemented no cash controls.All checks are written by
Mr.Wahlin and all deposits are made by Water Services Management.No bank reconciliations
or budgets are evident.
All property used by the Company is currently under the name of the owner,Joel
Wahlin.Mr.Wahlin stated that the original intent was to turn all the property over to the
Company before this date;however,there were several liens placed on the property of the
development,including the water system,before that transfer took place.The land development
owned by Mr.Wahlin is under severe financial duress and is not currently financially viable.All
unsold lots owned by the original developer have been sold at auction and only the water system
remains.The liens placed on the water system vastly exceed the value of the water system.Due
to this fact the owner currently has limited access to the credit markets.
REVENUE REQUIREMENT
Acme did not include a revenue requirement calculation in its Application.Staff
recommended an annual revenue requirement of $8,067 based on its recommended rate base of
$0,thereby obviating a return on the Company’s rate base.The Company’s recommended
revenue requirement would thereby be limited to the total of the approved expenses outlined
below:$8,067.
According to the Company’s tax filings,the Company’s capital structure consists
solely of loans from the owners.The specific terms of these loans are unknown and Staff
recommended these be considered owners’equity.This makes the capital structure of the
Company completely owners’equity.
ORDER NO.33219 4
Test Year
Acme did not propose a test year.Staff created an annual report for 2013 to establish
the test year revenues and expenses,as well as plant-in-service and rate base for the test year.
Staff hopes that this will serve as a model for Acme to file its 2014 annual report.
The Company operates on a cash basis for accounting.The Company currently runs
all expenses and deposits through a single account,and uses the check register for that account to
prepare its financial statements.
Rate Base (Plant-in-Service)
Acme is a small developer-installed water company.In accordance with IDAPA
31.36.01.103,all current plant-in-service meets the definition of contributions in aid of
construction (CIAC).CIAC is a reduction to rate base.Based on tax return information,the
original water company investment was $291,173.Normal CIAC accounting treatment is to post
all plant on page 5 of the annual report and then depreciate it normally on page 6.CIAC would
be posted on page 8 equal to the total amount of the plant-in-service.CIAC would then be
amortized at the same rate as the plant-in-service.
All of the current plant is contributed.Mr.Wahlin has very little accounting
knowledge and has not maintained adequate plant records.
As stated above,Staff recommended a rate base of $0.Staff recommended that
instead of the normal CIAC treatment,the Company be allowed to reflect the plant-in-service
offset by the CIAC at a net beginning rate base balance of zero.Depreciation of plant and
amortization of CIAC would not be reflected.This would have the same net impact by
eliminating all rate base from the revenue requirement.
Revenue
Accounts receivables were audited and the only records of late payments were the
current month’s billings.There is a section on each bill stating the amount overdue.There are
no other accounts payable aging reports available.Most accounts are current with the majority
of the non-current accounts being inactive charges.Deposits from customers were not recorded
on the check register provided by Mr.Wahlin.
Total collections for sales of water are $10,044,and there were additional deposits for
connection fees totaling $29,400.
ORDER NO.33219 5
Expenses
All expenses are paid by Acme’s owner.Mr.Wahlin,while all billings and deposits
are performed by Water Service Management,Inc.There are no budgets or other typical
controls.A Staff audit revealed that many of the expenses from the Company’s account were for
personal expenses of the owner.The Company paid $29,146,or 81%of expenses were paid for
or on behalf of Joel Wahlin’s personal expenses.Revenues from water customers are intended to
pay water company expenditures.Staff reflects these personal expenses below as Salaries for
Officers and Directors.
The next highest expense category (14%of total expenses)is for Professional
Contract Services which are payments to Water Service Management and the CPA for tax
preparation.The third highest (5%of total expenses)is for purchased power expenses.
Net Operating Income
The 2013 net operating income based on the Company records would be $3,470.
Staff made the following adjustments to the Company’s revenue requirement:
Adjustment 1 —Salaries for Officers
Mr.Wahlin provides management functions as well as accounts payable work.
Detailed records of the time spent on these duties were not available.Considering the number of
checks written for Company purposes,Staff estimates two hours to perform the accounts payable
work.Using the Idaho Occupational Employment &Wage Data Release for 2012,Staff
estimates a wage of $15 per hour for the accounts payable work or a total of $30 a month.
Staff estimated management functions would take about three hours a month.Using
the same report,Staff estimates a wage of $25 per hour for the management work or $75 a
month.Both of these duties would be a total of $105 per month.Staff recommended the salary
of the officers be set at $1,260 per year.Compared to the $29,146 in personal expenses reflected
as salary,this is a reduction of $27,886 to revenue requirement.See Staff Comments,
Attachment B,Column L.
Adjustment 2 —Power Costs
The Company purchases its power from Northern Lights Inc.,a municipal power
provider.The 2013 test year did not appear to be an unusual year for water demand and
associated power costs based on a comparison to the other annual power costs from years 2010
through 2013.Staff evaluated annual power costs and found that the three-year average for
ORDER NO.33219 6
2011,2012,and 2013 was $1,580.The 2013 power cost was $1,653.Staff recommended the
three-year average of $1,580 be used as an annualized power cost.This results in a decrease of
$73 to 2013 power expense.See Staff Comments.Attachment B,Column 2.
Adjustment 3 —Water Testing Expense
The Acme water system serves 23 ERUs and is classified as a transient,non-
community public drinking water system.DEQ requires different testing cycles for various
regulated water contaminants for this type of system.It is thus necessary to normalize water
testing costs over several years.The water system is required to collect one coliform sample per
quarter,one nitrate sample per year,and one nitrite sample once every nine years.See
Application,Attachment No.8.
The Company’s proposed annual water testing expenses for the coliform and nitrate
samples are $100/year.Staff modified this amount because the actual test year expense should
have been annualized to include the additional nitrite sample.Staff developed a complete list of
required tests using a nine-year water testing cycle.Staff recommended increasing the test year
water testing cost by $1.67 for the $15 nitrite test required once every nine years (S15/9=$1.67).
Staff calculated the annualized water testing cost to be $101.67.
This results in an increase of $2.00 to Water Testing Expense.See Staff Comments,
Attachment B,Column 3.
Adjustment 4 —PUC Fees
When the Company becomes regulated it will be assessed an annual PUC regulatory
fee.Acme’s PUC fee is a flat rate of $50.Staff recommended the regulatory fee be added to the
expenses of the Company.See Staff Comments,Attachment B,Column 4.
Capital System Improvements
Acme does not propose any capital system improvements.However,the Panhandle
Health District strongly recommended that Well No.2 be physically connected for system
redundancy.See Application Atch.No.8.Further,the storage system is not yet automated,
thereby requiring the well pump in Well No.1 to be manually turned on to fill the tank.The
proper controls are necessary for the well pump to automatically fill the storage tank during high
use periods.This is especially important should an emergency situation occur,such as during a
fire flow event.Staff does not recommend that these improvements occur as a condition of the
ORDER NO.33219 7
CPCN.Once capital system improvements are installed and operational,the Company can apply
to the Commission for rate recovery on the items.
Commission Findings:The Commission finds that in the absence of a Company-
proposed test year,Staff’s proposed 2013 test year is fair,just and reasonable.The Commission
finds that a revenue requirement of $8,067,the sum total of Company expenses minus any
adjustments plus $0 in rate base,is also fair,just and reasonable.
The Commission approves the expense adjustments proposed by Staff and
unrebutted by the Company.The Commission finds that the proposed adjustments listed above
use reliable methods and sources in the establishment of reasonable amounts for officer salaries,
power costs,water testing expenses,and PUC annual regulatory fees.
RATE DESIGN
The Company is proposing a rate design which is based on a two-tier increasing block
rate with a minimum charge (base charge)and volume allowance on a monthly basis.Staff
opposes the Company’s proposal for two reasons.The Company has no individual customer
meters that would allow calculating actual monthly consumption.In response to Staff
Production Request No.3,the Company indicated that out of the 19 individual condo units
Equivalent Residential Use,no customer meters are physically connected to the water system.
Additionally,the Company does not plan to install any customer meters.
Because no meters are expected to be installed for the system,a block rate design is
not appropriate.Staff recommended using a flat rate design.It is very simple to administer and
easily understood by the customers.
Staff recommended the Company continue billing the customers on a monthly basis
because the current customers are already accustomed to this billing practice.Monthly billing
would help the Company maintain stable cash flow,and the customers will benefit by having
payments spread evenly during the year compared to annually or quarterly.
The Company is expecting to serve mostly single family residential,multi-family
residential (apartments and/or condominiums)and commercial units.It is proposing to use ERUs
for defining customers.Staff does not oppose the use of ERUs in this instance.
Presently,no commercial units are being served by the Company.Customers are not
expected to maintain a lawn during the summer season because most customers are winter users.
Staff believes that the domestic usage for a household in a single family dwelling would be about
ORDER NO.33219 8
the same as the usage compared to same household living in an apartment or condominium.It is
therefore appropriate to use one ERU for a water customer living in one unit of multi-family
dwellings.For example,for rate design purposes,a ten-unit condominium would be equivalent
to ten ERUs.
Staff calculated the rates per ERU based on the Staff-recommended annual revenue
requirement of $8,067 and using a total 23 ERUs.The flat monthly rate per ERU is $29.23.
Staff recommended a monthly rate rounded to $29.25.Monthly rates would thereby decrease
$18.75,or 39.1%,from the Company’s current monthly rate of $48 per ERU per month.
“Standby”or “Availability”Charges
The Company proposes to charge a recurring monthly “standby”or “availability”
charge to be paid by property owners who have paid a connection fee but have not yet connected
to the water system.
Staff recognizes that the Commission has rejected proposals to charge inactive
customers during previous cases.In Staff’s view,there’s no justification for an Availability
Charge in this case.Given the Commission’s clear position in this matter,Staff does not support
the use of a Company-proposed “standby”or “availability”charge in designing the tariff for
Acme Water.
Other Issues —Sanitary Survey Results
A significant deficiency pertaining to a broken electrical conduit alongside the well
casing was identified during the 2011 sanitary survey by the Panhandle Health Department.The
Company addressed this issue on June 29,2012.However,other deficiencies and additional
requirements were identified and have not been addressed.The Company has indicated it may
address future repair and maintenance items when funding becomes available.
Deficiencies identified in the 2011 sanitary survey are (1)that a smooth-nosed sample
tap on the well discharge line must be installed to facilitate drawing sanitary source water
samples;and (2)a reservoir screen must be replaced with a #24 mesh non-corrodible screen.
Additional requirements include:(1)the installation of controls for the well pumps to provide
automatic filling of the reservoir,(2)the sealing of the air relief and main line pressure reducing
valve vaults to avoid accumulation of water and debris,and (3)confirmation that an Operation
and Maintenance Manual has been completed for the water system.Staff recommended the
ORDER NO.33219 9
Company address these deficiencies and additional recommendations,and other future
maintenance and repair items in the future.
commission Findings:The Commission finds that the implementation of a flat rate
design with a monthly charge of $29.25 per ERU is a reasonable rate design for a small water
system of Acme’s configuration and customer profile.The Commission finds that a monthly
“availability”charge for customers who have not connected to Acme’s system is not reasonable
and is disallowed.The Commission has consistently ruled that the concept of an availability
charge is not appropriate in designing rates and has heretofore disallowed the establishment of an
“availability charge”for small water systems similar to Acme.See Order No.30718 at 19 (Case
No.TTS-W-08-01).
The Commission orders Acme to fully address any system sanitary deficiencies
identified by DEQ/Panhandle Health Department.Acme shall comply fully with any mandates
put forth by DEQ/Panhandle Health Department and install a communications device for its
storage tank within 90 days of the service date of this Order.
NON-RECURRING CHARGES
The Company has submitted a copy of its proposed rate schedules and Rules and
Regulations Governing the Rendering of Service.Schedule No.2 —Miscellaneous Fees and
Charges includes non-recurring charges for new connections,licensed operator inspections,bulk
water usage,owner transfers,service terminations,and service reconnections.
Connection Fee
The Company currently charges hookup fees of $7,000 and proposes to increase this
fee to $9,430.The Company intends to finance new utility construction through new hookup
fees.Acme clarified that the proposed hookup fee of $9,430 is based on the owner’s calculations
to recover a portion of the approximately $1.5 million investment.The Company further
explained that due to the faltering economy and unforeseen circumstances beyond the owner’s
control,water system development costs cannot be recovered through the sale of the lots.All
lots have been repossessed and hookup fees are the only identifiable means of recovering costs
incurred to assure availability of drinking water to lots in the development.
Staff believes that collecting hookup fees from new customers to pay off the loans
used to build the water system will be in violation of the Small Water Company Policies and
Presumptions Rule No.103 —Presumption of Contributed Capital.Staff opposes the Company’s
ORDER NO.33219 10
proposal to collect hookup fees from new customers in Phase I development beyond the basic
cost of connecting from the customer’s service line to the Company’s existing curb stop (shutoff
valve).The investment made by the Company to develop the water system is considered
contributed capital and therefore not included in the rate base.Staff recommended the Company
work with DEQ to pursue all available methods of financing the remaining system.
Staff recommended a hookup fee of $150.Staff believes that future water system
development cost for Phase 2 will be shouldered by the new subdivision developer.The water
system for Phase 1 of Acme Water has been fully constructed and includes service lines
connecting the main line to the lot corners.Shutoff valves are located for each water service
connection.Assuming two hours of time required to locate the curb stop,work with the
customer’s contractor and inspect the new water service connection,it would cost the Company
about $150 in labor.
Bulk Water Sales
The Company proposes to charge a bulk water usage fee of $0.01/gallon (i.e.,$10.00
per 1,000 gallons)and an associated service charge for bulk water sales.However,no bulk
water sales are anticipated at this time.
Staff does not agree with the Company-proposed usage fee due to concerns about
excessive usage fees when compared to the Company’s proposed monthly flat rate for unmetered
water service.Further,Staff recognizes the need to protect the system while providing water for
construction purposes.Therefore,Staff recommended if bulk water is requested in the future
that the Company make the necessary installation that includes backflow prevention and a meter
for a one time set up fee of $40 and a metered rate of $1 per 1,000 gallons of water used.
Inspection Fee
The Company proposes to charge a flat fee of $200 per inspection if the customer
requires an inspection by a licensed operator.No cost justification was provided by the
Company and no other water company has previously been allowed to charge a customer for
those visits.Staff recommended the Company’s rate schedule not include any general site visit
or inspection charges.
Owner Transfer Fee
The Company proposes to charge an “ownership transfer fee of $100.Staff
recognizes that there is a small administrative cost to open and/or close an account when the
ORDERNO.33219 11
party responsible for paying the bills changes.Since it is unclear what the Company’s intent is
in proposing this charge,and no cost justification was provided by the Company,Staff
recommended the Company’s rate schedule not include an owner transfer charge.
Service Termination Fee
The Company proposes to charge a service termination fee of $50.No cost
justification was provided by the Company.The Commission has opposed such a charge with
the lone exception of multiple disconnections and reconnections performed for irrigation
customers during irrigation season.Customer-requested (voluntary)disconnections are usually
related to moves or maintenance of the customer’s facilities and are considered part of the
normal business responsibilities of the Company.liwoluntary disconnection of service results
from either non-payment of bills or repairs to the Company’s facilities.Involuntary
disconnections are also part of the Company’s operational expenses.Staff recommended the
Commission not approve the service termination charge.
Reconnection Fee
The Company proposes to charge a service reconnection charge of $100.Staff agrees
that a reconnection charge is appropriate when applied to reconnections performed following an
involuntary disconnection of service for non-payment when requested during normal business
hours.The Company has not provided any cost justification.Staff believes that the amount
requested by the Company is unreasonable and inconsistent with charges authorized by the
Commission for other regulated utilities.Staff recommended a $20 reconnection charge for
reconnections following an involuntary disconnection of service for non-payment to be applied
when the customer requests reconnection during normal business hours.Staff defines normal
business hours as 8:00 a.m.and 5:00 p.m.,Monday through Friday,excluding legal holidays.
Staff also proposes a $40 reconnection charge for reconnections following an
involuntary disconnection of service for non-payment to be applied when the reconnection is
requested outside of normal business hours.This $40 charge is within the range of charges
previously approved by the Commission for other regulated utilities under similar circumstances,
when the Company must dispatch personnel outside of business hours.
Insufficient Funds Fee
The Company has not requested a charge that would be applied when a customer
check or bank draft is returned by the bank or an electronic payment is drawn on an account with
ORDER NO.33219 12
insufficient funds.Staff recognizes such a charge is appropriate to discourage customers from
making payments that are not honored by their financial institution and allows partial recovery of
the costs incurred in the collections process.Staff recommended a $20 insufficient funds charge.
Late Payment Fee
Late payment charges encourage a timely payment and allow the Company an
opportunity to recoup a portion of the cost of collection of unpaid bills.The Company requests a
late payment charge of 10%on any payments that are not received within 30 days of the due
date.The Company also proposes an interest rate of 1.5%per month on past due amounts.
Under the current billing practice of allowing 30 days prior to considering a bill late,the next
month’s billing statement could be issued before the previous month’s bill payment is due.
Staff supports adoption of a late payment charge to encourage prompt payment of
bills but does not support the Company’s proposal.Staff recommended the Company be allowed
to charge 1%per month on any past due balance owing at the time of the next billing.Staff also
recommended the due date of bills be set at 20 days after the billing date so that the Company
has sufficient time to process payments before issuing new bills.
Commission Findings:The Commission has considered Acme’s request for the
implementation and/or increase in certain non-recurring charges for customers.The Commission
finds Acme’s proposed “hookup fee”for new customers to be excessive and inconsistent with
the Commission’s past practices and rules and procedures.Moreover,Acme did not present a
cost justification for such a large hookup fee other than its stated intent to recuperate its past
investment that cannot be included for recovery as part of the Company’s existing rate base.
Therefore,we find the $150 hookup fee for new customers proposed by Staff to be fair,just and
reasonable and we approve the same.The Commission also approves a $20 reconnection fee
during normal business hours and $40 reconnection fee outside of normal business hours.
Next,the Commission authorizes a bulk water usage fee of $1.00 per 1,000 gallons
water usage.Additionally,the Commission directs Acme to install backflow prevention and a
meter for bulk water users in exchange for a one-time set up fee of $40.
The Commission denies the Company’s request to implement a customer standby fee,
inspection fee,owner transfer fee,and service termination fee.The Commission notes that
Acme failed to present a cost justification or any evidence in support of these fees.
ORDER NO.33219 13
The Commission approves the establishment of a $20 insufficient funds charge.
Idaho law allows the Company to recover interest in commercial transactions wherein the drawer
of a check has insufficient funds to pay for a commercial transaction.See Idaho Code §28-22-
105.Pursuant to this fact,the Commission has previously permitted this type of fee to be
included in utility tariffs.
The Commission finds that a late payment fee of 1%on any past due balance is fair,
just and reasonable.The Commission orders Acme to establish a due date on its customer bills
at 20 days after the billing date in order to allow the Company sufficient time to process current
payments before beginning a new billing cycle.
Finally,the Commission authorizes non-recurring charges to be included in the
Company’s tariff under Miscellaneous Fees and Charges.
BILLING STATEMENT &CUSTOMER NOTIFICATION
The Company included a copy of its billing statement in its Application to the
Commission.The statement does not meet the requirements of Rule 201 of Utility Customer
Relations Rules (UCRR),IDAPA 31.21.01.201.Staff will work with the Company to revise the
document to ensure it meets the requirements of the UCRR.Staff is also willing to assist the
Company with the development of its disconnection policy and the applicable notices as well as
other required documents as described in the UCRR,including its Annual Rules Summary and
its Explanation of Rates as required by Rule 700 of the IPUC Rules of Procedure,IDAPA
31.01.01.700.Staff recommended the Company work directly with Staff to revise its bill
statements and customer information and notices to comply with Commission rules and
regulations.
Commission Findings:The Commission directs the Company to work cooperatively
with Staff in the development and issuance of a new monthly billing invoice/statement and
applicable notices in accordance with the Commission’s rules and regulations.
COMPANY TARIFF AND CUSTOMER NOTICE
The Company included a copy of its proposed tariff,including its proposed rate
schedules and the General Rules and Regulations.Staff reviewed the documents and is willing
to work with the Company to ensure these documents meet Commission requirements.Staff
recommended the Company work directly with Staff to revise its tariff to meet Commission rules
and regulations.
ORDER NO.33219 14
Acme included a copy of a billing statement with a note to its customers regarding its
Application to the Commission for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.The
Company did not include a copy of a press release with its Application.The Commission issued
a press release on April 14,2014,regarding the Company’s Application.
Commission Findings:Acme shall work cooperatively with Staff to submit revised
tariffs conforming to the details of operation authorized by the Commission in this Order.Based
upon our thorough review of the record in this case,including Acme’s Application and
comments and Staff comments,the Commission approves Acme’s Application for a CPCN
authorizing the Company to operate as a water utility in the State of Idaho.The Commission
orders the Company to operate its water system in accordance with the Commission’s findings
more fully described above.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Idaho Public Utilities Commission has jurisdiction over Acme,a water utility,
and the issues presented in Case No.AWW-W-13-0l pursuant to Idaho Code,Title 61,and the
Commission’s Rules of Procedure,IDAPA 31.01.01.000,et seq.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Application of Acme Water Works,Inc.for a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity authorizing the Company to operate as a water
utility in the State of Idaho is approved.The Company is authorized to collect a total revenue
requirement of $8,067 from its customers,with expenses,rate base,rate of return,capital
structure,rate design and fees as approved and described more fully in this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the fees,rates and charges for water service
approved herein shall become effective upon the service date of this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Acme shall repair any system sanitary deficiencies
identified by DEQ/Panhandle Health Department and comply fully with any mandates put forth
by the same.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Acme shall install a communications device for its
storage tank within 90 days of the service date of this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Company shall work in a cooperative manner
with Staff to revise its existing billing statement and rate schedules in order that they comply
ORDER NO.33219 15
with the General Rules and Regulations for Small Water Utilities,the Uniform Main Extension
Rules,and the Commission’s rules and procedures.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Company revise its tariff so that it is in a
format consistent with the Model Tariff.Acme shall submit tariffs in compliance with the rates
and charges set forth and approved by this Order no later than 14 days from the service date of
this Order.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER.Any person interested in this Order may petition for
reconsideration within twenty-one (21)days of the service date of this Order.Within seven (7)
days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration,any other person may cross-petition for
reconsideration.See Idaho Code 6 1-626.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise,Idaho this 3O
day of January 2015.
PAUL KJELLANDER,RESIDENT
MACK A.REDFORD,COMMISSIONER
ôLL
MARSHA H.SMITH,COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
an D.Jewej
commission Secretary
O:AWW-W-1 3-Olnp2
ORDER NO.33219 16