The Public Utility Commission has another large water utility in its dockets, Texas Water Utilities, LP, which is seeking reimbursement from customers for about $81 million it has spent in system improvements.
In one of its latest filings, Texas Water Utilities, L.P. (TWU) has formally responded to critiques from both the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) Staff and the Office of Public Utility Counsel (OPUC) regarding its application for System Improvement Charges (SIC) under Docket No. 58682.
Filed on November 6, 2025, TWU’s six-page rebuttal challenges the assertion that its application is administratively incomplete and urges the Commission to reject OPUC’s request for additional time to file comments.
Background and Dispute
TWU submitted its SIC application on October 1, 2025, seeking cost recovery for infrastructure upgrades under Texas Water Code §13.183(c) and 16 TAC §24.76. On October 31, Commission Staff recommended that the application be deemed incomplete, citing a lack of detailed descriptions for projects under $50,000. OPUC echoed this concern and added several others, including insufficient documentation of asset classification, cost eligibility, and potential overlap with prior rate cases.
TWU’s response argues that it has met all regulatory requirements. It points to its inclusion of 2,196 individual assets, with expanded descriptions for the 110 largest projects (each over $50,000), and structured data for the remaining 2,086 projects. This data includes asset numbers, installation dates, original costs, and testimony from Kristina McGee explaining customer benefits. TWU contends that this format has been accepted in previous SIC filings and should be deemed sufficient again.
Key Arguments from TWU
- Regulatory Compliance: TWU insists it has complied with 16 TAC §24.76(d)(1) by providing adequate descriptions and benefit analyses for all projects, regardless of cost.
- Efficiency and Precedent: The utility emphasizes administrative efficiency and notes that its approach has been accepted in prior dockets (54201 and 55585).
- Merits vs. Completeness: TWU argues that OPUC’s concerns—such as asset classification and cost eligibility—relate to the merits of the application, not its administrative completeness. It cites precedent stating that substantive evaluation should not delay procedural determinations.
- Opposition to Extension: TWU strongly opposes OPUC’s request for more time, noting that the statutory deadline for comments was October 31, 2025. It warns that any delay would unfairly prejudice the utility by postponing the 120-day review timeline triggered by a completeness finding.
Requested Relief
TWU asks the Administrative Law Judge to:
- Declare the application administratively complete.
- Deny OPUC’s extension request.
- If deemed incomplete, allow TWU to supplement and require Commission Staff to respond within seven days.
This filing underscores TWU’s position that its SIC application is both procedurally sound and substantively justified. It also signals growing tension between utilities and oversight bodies over the interpretation of administrative rules and the pace of regulatory review.
For ratepayers and advocates tracking infrastructure spending and rate adjustments, this docket offers a revealing look into how utilities defend their filings—and how procedural disputes can shape the timeline and transparency of cost recovery efforts interchange.puc.texas.gov.
