Justin Brown
Analyst · UBS. Your line is open
Thanks, Greg. As highlighted on Slide 13, I will be discussing several key regulatory initiatives, including an update on rate case activity and planning; the progress we’ve made on several tax reform proceedings, where we’ve been working collaboratively with the regulators to ensure timely rate changes for our customers; and an update on the progress of our infrastructure tracker programs; and several expansion projects. Turning to Slide 14 and starting with our Nevada rate case. It has been approximately six years since we filed the Nevada rate case. As part of our filing, the request includes a $32.5 million upward adjustment to rates, which is net of any downward adjustment associated with lower tax rates following tax reform. The rate adjustment proposal is premised upon a proposed increase to rate base of $309 million and a proposed return on common equity capital of 10.3% relative to an equity ratio of 49.3%. Of the $309 million of increased rate base growth, approximately $187 million is associated with previously approved GIR projects. The proposed increase also reflects a slight increase in depreciation rates approximately $3.8 million. In Nevada, we’re required to file an updated depreciation study, and that study concluded that there was a need to slightly increase depreciation rates at this time. So our impact to – our overall impact to operating income in this case is approximately $29 million after factoring in the changes to depreciation expense. In addition to these traditional components of our rate case, we’re also requesting to continue our fully decoupled rate design, reset our infrastructure trucker programs, and we’ve also requested a track pension expense. Due to the volatile nature of pension expense, we’ve requested approval of a tracking mechanism to ensure the amount of pension expense built into rates is recovered – is recovering in our actual pension expense each year. We are currently working our way through the data request process and we’ll still – and we’ll start receiving intervener testimony in late September, with hearings beginning in late October. You may recall that in Nevada, rates become effective within 210 days following the rate case filing. As such, we anticipate having a final decision in time for rates to become effective by January 1, 2019. Turning to Slide 15, in California. Our traditional five-year rate case cycle was extended by two years, which means, we are now targeting a September 2019 filing date. In the meantime, we’ll continue to make annual adjustments to margin through 2020 as part of our annual 2.75% attrition filing. In fact, for 2018, we will authorize increased revenue by $2.7 million beginning January of this year. Lastly, with respect to Arizona, our most recent rate case resulted in new rates becoming effective in April 2017. As the effect of these new rates were realized over a 12-month period, we continue to see benefits from Arizona rate relief through the first quarter of 2018 to the tune of $16 million impact operating income. But with the conclusion of this 12-month period, we also now turn our focus to the next Arizona rate case, which we’re currently anticipating filing next May due to a previously agreed upon stay-out provision. We’re also currently evaluating the need for and what options might exist for filing a rate case prior to May, and this is due primarily to the recent tax reform decision, which leads us to the next slide in Slide 16. Most of this year has been spent working closely with our regulators to ensure a fair and balanced approach to adjusting rates to reflect saving from tax reform. As I mentioned in Arizona, we recently received approval in Arizona on a plan to adjust rates to refund approximately $20 million to customers during 2018. We are currently evaluating the need for a rate case and we’re also working with the ACC staff on what options might be available to modify the timing of our next rate case. In Nevada, the Commission held a workshop earlier this year seeking comments from utilities on their plans for reflecting tax reform changes in rates. We collaboratively worked with our stakeholders in Nevada and committed to adjusting rates as part of our rate case filing, which we did. As such, we anticipate no additional adjustments to rates in 2018 to reflect tax reform changes. With respect to California, we have a decision from the commission directing us to use a tax memorandum account to track rate making impacts for attrition years 2019 through 2020 that was approved as part of our proposal to extend our rate case cycle. As a result, we do not anticipate any additional regulatory filings prior to our currently planned rate case in September of 2019. Consistent with the Commission’s previous decision, we are planning to track benefits from tax reform for attrition years 2019 and 2020, and would anticipate including those amounts as an offset to our requested rate relief as part of our next California rate case. And lastly, with respect to Paiute Pipeline, FERC recently issued a decision approving its notice of proposed rulemaking directing pipeline to follow Form 501-G to calculate the impact of tax reform on its current cost of services and to explain how the pipeline plans to adjust rates to reflect tax reform or explain why no change is necessary. Paiutecurrently anticipates making a filing with FERC in compliance with this decision before year-end. Turning to Slide 17 and an update on our various CapEx tracker programs. In Arizona, where we have two such programs, we recently received a draft decision from the ACC staff on our pending request to increase the COYL surcharge revenue based upon cumulative capital expenditures of $30.9 million, $18.8 million of which was invested in 2017. The staff proposed to approve our filing, but has also made a slight adjustment to the revenue requirement to reflect lower taxes following tax reform. As such, the staff is proposing an incremental increase of $1.7 million in surcharge revenue for a total of $3.5 million. Turning to Slide 18. In addition to our COYL program, we were granted approval in our last rate case to start a Vintage Steel Pipe replacement program, so we can start chipping away at replacing approximately 6,000 miles of Vintage Steel Pipe we have in Arizona. Similar to our COYL filing, the staff issued a proposed decision approving our VSP filing and also making a slight adjustment to the surcharge revenue to reflect tax reform. As such, that proposed decision recommend surcharge revenue of $2.4 million based upon capital expenditures of $27 million. We are currently targeting approximately $100 million of replacement work for completion during calendar year 2018, as we start – continue to ramp up this new program in Arizona. Turning to Nevada in Slide 19. We made our annual tracker filing in June proposing new projects for accelerated replacement. Unlike prior years, the focus on a single year project, this year we have proposed a three-year plan totaling approximately $228 million, or on average $76 million per year. We expect the decision on this filing by October. As part of our Nevada tracker program, we’re currently recovering surcharge revenue of $8.7 million that was approved late last year. The decision authorized the increase in surcharge revenues from $4.5 million to $8.7 million, or an incremental increase of $4.2 million for 2018. As I mentioned previously, as part of our rate case filing, we proposed to adjust the GIR rate by approximately $6.6 million as part of the rate case dockets, in lieu of making a separate filing in October like we would have traditionally. If approved, this incremental GIR surcharge revenue would become effective in January 2019, the same time as new rates would become effective from our rate case. Turning to Slide 20 and an update on our expansion project initiatives. Our $80 million LNG facility in Southern Arizona is currently over 65% completed and remains on track and in line with our expectations for completion in the second-half of 2019. In Nevada, we received approval for $28 million expansion as part of our first ever SB 151 filing authorizing us to extend our facility to Mesquite, Nevada, which is currently an unserved area in Southern Nevada. We’ve begun the planning and design stages of the project and we are currently targeting service to our first Mesquite customers in the first quarter of 2019. And lastly, we’ve received approval from FERC to proceed with our 2018 Paiute Pipeline expansion project. The project has been bid and is currently under construction. The project is anticipated to cost approximately $22 million and should be completed before year-end. And with that, I’ll turn it back to John.