Aquarion Water Co. of Connecticut v. Public Utilities Regulatory Authority

Summary

The court upheld PURA’s exclusion of postapplication plant additions and employee incentive compensation because substantial evidence supported PURA’s prudence findings and its distinction between the evidence for different categories of investments. The court held that PURA improperly used hindsight when evaluating deferred water conservation expenses and remanded for reconsideration under the standard applicable when the expenses were incurred. The court also rejected Aquarion’s confiscatory-taking claim, concluding that the approved return on equity was not effectively reduced by cost disallowances and that Aquarion failed to show the rate order was unjust and unreasonable.