N-3NSPI (NSEB) RIR 1 to 10
6 passages
NSPI Responses to NSEB Information Requests 1 Request IR-1: 3 piece of work within the routine remain consistent with the asset management mechanism, 4 and were not based on what the impact to the D055 budget would be. 5 6 (b) NS Power bec...
AI summary NSPI explains that the work within the routine was consistent with asset management mechanisms and not based on D055 budget impacts. NS Power became aware of the need for an ATO in the fall of 2025 as financial information became more complete. The investment was necessary for equipment replacements to maintain system safety and reliability in 2025.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL Request IR-4: In its application, NS Power states: Bin Work is up by $10.2 million due to the advancement of higher-priority condition-driven work identified during the feeder inspection program, including projects in the...
AI summary NS Power explains that higher-priority condition-driven work was advanced in 2025 due to reliability and safety risks, requiring immediate replacement rather than deferring to 2025. This work was more expensive than originally budgeted, as it involved replacing significantly more infrastructure than planned.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL Request IR-7: - Please identify and summarize the data used to support the identification, selection, - prioritization, optimization, and pacing of project execution for the projects included in this - Matter (e.g., asset...
AI summary The response to Request IR-7 explains that planned replacements of distribution equipment in D055 are based on risk profiles of NS Power distribution feeders, using factors like condition and criticality. This includes reliability metrics, inspection results, and other indicators, which help prioritize and execute projects.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-30: 2 3 Please demonstrate the mathematical calculation showing how the various components of 4 the criticality score are used to derive the criticality score for a single feeder. For the same 5 feeder, please...
AI summary The document provides a mathematical formula for calculating the criticality score of a feeder based on factors such as usage, customers, performance standards, communications, and maintenance access. It also explains how the criticality score is combined with the feeder condition to determine the feeder risk rating.
Request IR-33: 2 3 4 5 1 Please describe how the ability to mitigate each asset is scored, the range of scores applied to the risk rating, what each score means, and how asset condition is weighted in the criticality score. 6 7 Response IR...
AI summary NS Power responds to Request IR-33 by stating that it does not understand the reference to 'ability to mitigate each asset' in the risk scoring mechanism. It explains that risk mitigation measures are determined after risk identification and are not a factor in the risk rating itself.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-34: 2 3 Please provide all documentation and data related to the derivation of the feeder reliability 4 risk score and how it was used to identify and prioritize investments. Please identify the 5 proceedings...
AI summary The response to Request IR-34 explains that feeder reliability risk scores are derived using feeder performance metrics and other factors, and that this approach is documented in the 2026 ACE Plan and the Property and Assets proceeding. Synapse IR-28 is cited for detailed performance results.
103400Reply Submission - NS Power
4 passages
ar cycle and, as feeders are re-inspected, previously identified deficiencies may be re-prioritized based on updated condition information while DATE FILED: September 1, 2026 Page 6 of 15
AI summary The text discusses the re-inspection of feeders and the potential re-prioritization of previously identified deficiencies based on updated condition information. It also includes a date filed and page number from the document.
3.3.1 Increased Investment under D055 NS Power disagrees that the causes of the D055 variance are unclear. The Application and IR responses explain that the variance was driven by increased volumes of condition-driven replacement work iden...
AI summary NS Power disagrees that the causes of the D055 variance are unclear, attributing it to increased condition-driven replacement work identified through feeder inspections and asset management programs. Expenditures increased due to higher-priority work in areas like Glace Bay, partially offset by reduced spending on individual D055 projects as resources were reprioritized.
of replacement work than in prior years, resulting in a higher average cost per work order. This reflected increased work volumes, not a change in the nature or complexity of the work. CA RIR-4(a). As noted in NSEB RIR-2(b), work-order cou...
AI summary The text discusses increased bin work costs and reprioritization of feeder inspection findings. It explains that higher costs are due to increased work volumes, not complexity, and that reprioritization is part of asset management, driven by updated condition assessments and new deficiencies identified in 2025.
3.4 Recommendations The CA submits that, in light of the overspend and its concerns regarding the information available to assess the expenditures incurred under D055 and NS Power's cost minimization practices, the Board may wish to consid...
AI summary The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (CA) recommends a reduction in cost recovery due to overspending and concerns about NS Power's cost minimization practices. NS Power opposes this, citing increased expenditures due to condition-driven replacement work and asserts that its spending was prudent and in line with asset management practices. NS Power also notes that routine-level spending is already reported through existing processes.