STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

Similar documents
BEFORE THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

January Submitted to: State of Rhode lsland and Providence Plantations Public Utilities Commission. RIPUC Docket No.

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY DOCKET NO. R Direct Testimony of Jeffrey L.

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION v. PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION v. PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. PENNSYLVANIA POWER COMPANY Docket No. R Direct Testimony of Richard A.

NORTHERN UTILITIES, INC. DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DANIEL T. NAWAZELSKI LEAD-LAG STUDY EXHIBIT DTN-1. New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission

STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BEFORE HONORABLE IRENE JONES, ALJ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

January Submitted to: State of Rhode lsland and Providence Plantations Public Utilities Commission. RIPUC Docket No.

BEFORE THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC Docket No. RP Exhibit No. TPC-0079

BEFORE THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BEFORE THE HONORABLE WALTER J. BRASWELL ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY Docket No. R Direct Testimony of Richard A.

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

2 BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

STATE OF MICHIGAN BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BEFORE THE HONORABLE GAIL M. COOKSON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

BEFORE THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO DIRECT TESTIMONY OF TYSON D. PORTER REGULATORY ANALYST.

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

SECOND REVISED SOCALGAS DIRECT TESTIMONY OF KAREN C. CHAN (WORKING CASH) APRIL 6, 2018

Attachment 3 - PECO Statement No. 2 Direct Testimony and Exhibits of Alan B. Cohn

BEFORE THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS. DOUG LITTLE, Chairman BOB STUMP BOB BURNS TOM FORESE ANDY TOBIN

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WYOMING ) ) ) ) PREFILED REBUTTAL TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS OF JONI JOHNSON-POWE INDEX QUALIFICATIONS...

SOCALGAS DIRECT TESTIMONY OF GARRY G. YEE RATE BASE. November 2014

BEFORE THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BEFORE THE HONORABLE JACOB S. GERTSMAN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ) ) ) ) ) ) DIRECT TESTIMONY REGINA L. BUTLER DIRECTOR ELECTRIC UTILITIES SECTION

Before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission State of Minnesota. Docket No. E002/GR Exhibit (LRP-1) Decoupling

STATE OF ILLINOIS ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION : : : : ORDER

Before the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission of the State of South Dakota

STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BEFORE HONORABLE WALTER J. BRASWELL ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) PREPARED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF GARRY G. YEE ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

1

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation d/b/a National Grid

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. Public Service Company of Colorado ) Docket No.

BEFORE THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION

CHAPTER X DIRECT TESTIMONY OF MARJORIE SCHMIDT-PINES (RATES) ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY AND SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY

STATE OF CONNECTICUT PUBLIC UTILITIES REGULATORY AUTHORITY DOCKET NO

RR16 - Page 57 of

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY Docket No. PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY Docket No.

PREPARED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF JACK S. LEWIS ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

CHAPTER IV DIRECT TESTIMONY OF KAREN C. CHAN ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY AND SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY

SDG&E DIRECT TESTIMONY OF STEVEN P. DAIS (WORKING CASH) October 6, 2017 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STEPHEN P. ST. CYR & Assoc.

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY DOCKET NO. R Direct Testimony of Kevin M.

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION NORTHERN UTILITIES, INC. DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DAVID L. CHONG

National Grid. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation INVESTIGATION AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF PROPOSED ELECTRIC TARIFF CHANGES. Testimony and Exhibits of:

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION PENNSYLVANIA POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. R Direct Testimony of Kevin M.

EXETER ASSOCIATES, INC Little Patuxent Parkway Suite 300 Columbia, Maryland 21044

Superseding Sheet No. 96 REVISED SHEET NO. 96 Effective May 4, 2012 Effective June 1, 2013

REVISED PREPARED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF JACK S. LEWIS ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

Electri Safety, Revised. Related. Submitted. by: Submitted to:

Rocky Mountain Power Docket No Witness: Bruce N. Williams BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF UTAH ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER

CHAPTER 5 REVENUE REQUIREMENT PREPARED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF KAREN C. CHAN AND RAMON GONZALES ON BEHALF OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

KEEGAN WERLIN LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 265 FRANKLIN STREET BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS March 17, 2014

FILED JUL COURT CLERK'S OFFICE - OKC CORPORATION COMMISSION OF OKLAHOMA BEFORE THE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF OKLAHOMA

BEFORE THE WYOMING PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER. Rebuttal Testimony of Bruce N. Williams

STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BEFORE THE HONORABLE JACOB S. GERTSMAN

RR9 - Page 229 of 510

S T A T E OF M I C H I G A N BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION * * * *

BEFORE THE NEW MEXICO PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DIRECT TESTIMONY RICHARD R. SCHRUBBE. on behalf of

STATE OF INDIANA INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

ORIGINAL C~s~ ~o~z2~- ii_o~ g STATE OF NEW HAMPSH ~


BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION

S T A T E OF M I C H I G A N BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION * * * *

Superseding Sheet No. 89 REVISED SHEET NO. 89 Effective April 9, 2012 Effective June 1, 2013 RATE ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM PROVISION

STATE OF CONNECTICUT PUBLIC UTILITIES REGULATORY AUTHORITY DOCKET NO

Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. One Michigan Avenue, Suite 900 Lansing, Michigan TEL (517) FAX (517)

BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF UTAH ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER. Direct Testimony of Michael G. Wilding

RR16 - Page 1 of

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) UPDATED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF S. NASIM AHMED SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY

Before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. State of Minnesota

BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION v. PECO ENERGY COMPANY ELECTRIC DIVISION

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PREPARED TESTIMONY DON MALONE PUBLIC UTILITY AUDITOR ON BEHALF OF THE STAFF OF THE

S T A T E OF M I C H I G A N BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION * * * *

STATE OF CONNECTICUT PUBLIC UTILITIES REGULATORY AUTHORITY DOCKET NO

I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY. Agenda Date: 10/20/17 Agenda Item: 5D WATER

DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THE LOW INCOME PANEL

STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BEFORE THE HONORABLE GAIL M. COOKSON, ALJ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY EXCEPTIONS TO THE INITIAL DECISION ON BEHALF OF THE DIVISION OF RATE COUNSEL

PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION. METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY Docket No. R PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY Docket No.

Testimony Experience of Timothy S. Lyons

STATE OF ALASKA BEFORE THE REGULATORY COMMISSION OF ALASKA ) ) ) ) ) PREFILED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DANIEL M. DIECKGRAEFF

REPLY TESTIMONY OF JONATHAN WALLACH

RR1 - Page 181 of 518

RHODE ISLAND PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION DOCKET NO PROVIDENCE WATER DEPARTMENT PREFILED TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER P.N. WOODCOCK ON BEHALF OF

Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. One Michigan Avenue, Suite 900 Lansing, Michigan TEL (517) FAX (517)

P-5 STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION NORTHERN UTILITIES, INC. DIRECT TESTIMONY OF LAURENCE M. BROCK

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO * * * * * ) ) ) ) ) DIRECT TESTIMONY OF JEFFREY C.

STATE OF ALASKA. Kate Giard Paul F. Lisankie T.W. Patch Janis W. Wilson

Transcription:

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF SUEZ WATER NEW JERSEY INC. FOR APPROVAL OF AN INCREASE IN RATES FOR WATER/SEWER SERVICE AND OTHER TARIFF CHANGES BPU DOCKET NO. WR Direct Testimony of Exhibit PT-

Q. Please state your name and business address. A. My name is, and my business address is From Rd, Suite 00, Paramus, New Jersey 0. Q. By whom are you employed and in what capacity? A. I am employed by SUEZ Water Management and Services Inc. (SWM&S) s as a Regulatory Specialist. In this role, I am responsible for compiling, analyzing, and logically presenting supporting data for rate cases. 0 Q. Please summarize your educational background and other qualifications. A. I graduated from William Paterson University, Wayne, New Jersey in 00 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting. Q. Please describe your work experience. A. Prior to joining SUEZ Water rate department, I worked eleven years, since 00, in the SUEZ Water accounting department with a focus on fixed assets and corporate management and services (M&S) costs. 0 Q. Have you provided direct testimony in previous cases on behalf of SUEZ Water New Jersey? A. No, I have not provided direct testimony in previous cases on behalf of SUEZ Water New Jersey Inc.. Q. Have you provided direct testimony before any regulatory commission? A. Yes, before the Rhode Island Public Utility Commission.

0 Q. What is the purpose and nature of your testimony in this proceeding? A. The purpose of my testimony is to provide the Company s comparative income statements and balance sheets, to support the Company s calculation of normalized Depreciation Expense for the Adjusted and Post Test Years, and to support the computation of Rate Base for the Adjusted Test Year ending September 0, 0 and the Post Test Year ending March, 0 for SUEZ Water New Jersey (SWNJ), SUEZ Water Toms River (SWTR), SUEZ Water Matchaponix (SWMX), SUEZ Water Arlington Hills (SWAH), SUEZ Water West Milford (SWWM), and SUEZ Water Princeton Meadows (SWPM) collectively the Company. Q. Please list the Exhibits that you are sponsoring in this rate case. A. I am sponsoring the following exhibits: I. Exhibit P-, Schedule. Income Statements - 0, 0, 0 II. Exhibit P-, Schedule. Balance Sheets 0, 0, 0 III. Exhibit P-, Schedule. Income Statements Twelve months Ended September 0, 0 ( actuals, budget) IV. Exhibit P-, Schedule. Depreciation and Amortization Expense V. Exhibit P-, Schedule. Rate Base 0 Q. Please describe Exhibit P- Schedule. A. Exhibit P- Schedule reflects the Company s comparative income statements for the twelve months ending December, 0, 0 and 0.

Q. Please describe Exhibit P- Schedule. A. Exhibit P- Schedule reflects the Company s comparative balance sheet at December, 0, 0 and 0. Q. Please describe Exhibit P- Schedule. A. Exhibit P- Schedule reflects the twelve months ended September 0, 0 which is the test year in this rate case. This schedule includes months of actual amounts booked to revenues and expenses through March, 0 and budgeted amounts from April 0 through September 0. 0 Q. Please describe Exhibit P- Schedule. A. Exhibit P-, Schedule shows the Company s calculation of its actual test year depreciation expense and pro forma depreciation expense based on proposed depreciation rates as developed by Mr. Spanos. The Pro Forma Depreciation Expense is derived by multiplying the individual plant account components (shown on Exhibit P- Schedule -A) for the Post Test Year with SWNJ s proposed depreciation rates. 0 Q. Please list the Schedules you are presenting in support of UWNJ s Rate Base. A. In all, there are nine () schedules of Exhibit P- that I have prepared in support of SWNJ s rate base. They are as follows: I. Schedule -A: Plant in Service Summary II. Schedule -B: Accumulated Depreciation Summary

III. IV. SUEZ WATER NEW JERSEY INC. Schedule -C: Contributions in Aid of Construction and Customer Advances for Construction Summary Schedule -E: Materials and Supplies Summary V. Schedule -F: Prepaid Expenses Summary VI. VII. VIII. Schedule -G: Customer Deposits Schedule -H: Unamortized Debt Discount and Expense Schedule -K: Cash Working Capital Lead/ Lag Analysis 0 Q. What other rate base related items are sponsored by Company witnesses besides you? A. The Plant Additions and Retirements as shown in Schedule -A. are sponsored by witnesses Emad Sidhom and Michael Willis. In addition, the Accumulated Deferred Income Tax (Schedule -D) shown on line and the Calculation of CTA (Schedule -I) shown on line 0 of Exhibit P-, Schedule are both sponsored by witness James Cagle. 0 Q. Please describe Schedule -A. A. Schedule -A shows how the Company s Utility Plant in Service balance is derived. Column shows the Plant balance as of December, 0. Columns through shows plant additions and retirements both actual and forecasted. Columns through are added to column (Base Year Plant Balance) to arrive at the Adjusted Test Year Plant Balance (/0/0) in column. Using the same method, columns and shows projected plant additions and retirements. These figures are added to the Adjusted Test Year Balance (column ) to arrive at the Post Test Year (//0) Plant balance in column.

Q. Please explain the basis for the Additions and Retirements on Schedule - A? A. The capital additions for the Adjusted Test Year and Post Test Year were provided to me by Company witnesses Sidhom and Willis and are shown in columns and, and computed on Exhibit P-. They represent plant expenditures that will be placed in service by September, 0 and March, 0, respectively. In addition, Messer s Sidhom and Willis provided me with the retirements associated with these capital projects, and I have included these amounts in columns and. 0 0 Q. Please describe Schedule -B. A. Schedule -B shows the calculation of the Accumulated Depreciation balances for the Adjusted Test Year and Post Test Year. Line shows the Accumulated Depreciation balance as of December, 0 (Base Year). Lines and show the depreciation expense, retirements, cost of removal, and salvage actual activity from January through March 0. Line shows six months (April 0 through September 0) of Adjusted Test Year depreciation expense that is added to the Accumulated Depreciation balance. Finally, this balance is adjusted by both the Retirements included in the calculation of utility plant on Schedule -A and the cost of removal/salvage to arrive at the Adjusted Test Year balance as of September, 0. Forecasted Plant Retirements, Cost of Removal, and Salvage were provided by witnesses Sidhom and Willis. The same process was used in determining the Accumulated Depreciation balance as of March, 0 (Post Test Year) shown on line.

0 Q. Please describe Schedule -C. A. Schedule -C shows the calculation of the Contributions in Aid of Construction ( CIAC ) and Customer Advances for Construction ( CAC ) balance. Line shows the CIAC and CAC balance as of December, 0. Line and reflects the actual change in the account balance with January through March 0 activity, line shows the new contributions, and line shows the refunds expected by September 0, 0 to arrive at the Adjusted Test Year balance (Line ). The same method is used to calculate the CIAC and CAC for the Post Test Year (//0). Forecasted CIAC was provided by witnesses Sidhom and Willis - Exhibit P-. Q. Please describe Schedule -F. A. Schedule -F shows a summary of Materials & Supplies used for operating and maintenance purposes. Since it represents an on-going investment by the Company in providing water service to its customers, it is included in rate base. I used a thirteen () month average to calculate this amount since actual dollar amounts vary from month-to-month. 0 Q. Please describe Schedule -G. A. Schedule -G shows a summary of Prepaid Expenses (e.g. prepaid property taxes, franchise taxes and dues). As with the previous schedule above, these expenses represent an investment by the Company in providing water service to its customers. Thus, they are included in rate base. Again, as described in Schedule -F above, I used a thirteen () month average to calculate this amount since actual dollar amounts vary from month-to-month.

Q. Please describe Schedule -H. A. Schedule -H shows a summary of Customer Deposits. Customer Deposits represent funds supplied by the customer that are available for Company use. Hence, it is included as a deduction to Rate Base. Again, as described in Schedule -F & -G above, I used a thirteen () month average to calculate this amount since actual dollar amounts vary from month-to-month. 0 0 Q. How did the Company develop its cash working capital requirement shown on Schedule -J? A. In the United Water New Jersey s 0 rate case Docket WR000, the average of the revenue lag and expense lag days were developed from three leadlag studies performed for New Jersey in 00 under BPU Docket No. WR0000, in 00 under BPU Docket No. WR00, and in 0 under BPU Docket No. WR00. Since there have been no material changes that would warrant a change in the leads or lags from the 0 rate case, except for monthly billing which was adjusted in the 0 rate case, I applied the average lags to the pro forma level of expenses in the current rate case for companies SUEZ Water New Jersey, SUEZ Water Arlington Hills, SUEZ Water West Milford, and SUEZ Water Princeton Meadows. In the United Water Toms River s 0 rate case Docket WR000, the average of the revenue lag and expense lag days were developed from two detailed lead-lag studies performed for Toms River in 00 under BPU Docket No. WR000 and in 00 under BPU Docket No. WR00. Since there have been no material changes that would warrant a change in the leads or lags from the 0 rate case, except for monthly billing which was adjusted in the 0 rate

case, I applied the average lags to the pro forma level of expenses in the current rate case for companies SUEZ Water Toms River and SUEZ Water Matchaponix. I added these six amounts together to develop the total cash working capital requirement. Q. Does this conclude your direct testimony? A. Yes, it does.