Topic:"Budgets And Targets" in M12780

4 (d) Please refer to EfficiencyOne's (E1) response to SBA IR-05 part (f). 5 6 (e) Please refer to EfficiencyOne's (E1) response to SBA IR-05 part (f). DATE FILED: May 28, 2026 E1 (IG) IR-05 Page 3 of 3 Request IR-06: Reference: Exhibit E-...

AI summary The regulatory proceeding includes a request for EfficiencyOne (E1) to provide detailed information on Enabling Strategies investment, including quantitative analysis, historical data, reconciliation of new categories, and cost breakdowns for new strategies introduced between 2027-2031.

Project Scope and Background The UARB directed EfficiencyOne to present these recommendations as a result of the regulatory process for the proposed 2016-2018 Demand Side Management (DSM) Resource Plan. In its August 12, 2015 Decision, the...

AI summary The NSUARB directed EfficiencyOne to present recommendations as part of the regulatory process for the proposed 2016-2018 DSM Resource Plan. A budget of $102.15 million was set for the DSM Plan period following a budget adjustment in the Quantum Agreement, with initial energy and demand savings targets remaining unchanged.

Budget ($) Energy Savings Target (GWh) Demand Savings Target (MW) Initial Filing $121.5 million 405.9 62.5 Quantum Agreement $113.5 million 405.9 62.5 Final Order $102.15 million 405.9 62.5 Table 1: EfficiencyOne Targets and Budgets Betwee...

AI summary The text presents a table comparing budgets, energy savings targets, and demand savings targets for EfficiencyOne across different regulatory stages. It also mentions a regulatory hearing held after the Quantum Agreement to address issues identified by the UARB in its Final Issues List.

1 Request IR-53: 2 3 Appendix A - Preferred Plan pp. 1-112 (Attach. 1-5) 4 5 Exhibit E-1, Appendix A, Attachment 5 - Innovation Framework, page 6 of 14: Table 1: Projected 6 Direct Expenditures by Focus Area: 7 8 (a) How are the budget amo...

AI summary The response to Request IR-53 outlines how budget amounts for focus areas in the 2027–2031 DSM Plan were determined based on EfficiencyOne's (E1) expectations for implementing the plan and aligning with 2026 approved amounts. Specific innovation projects have not yet been individually approved, as project selection will occur after the Nova Scotia Energy Board's decision on the DSM Plan.

er measures or programs that pass cost-effectiveness with a smaller margin. Identify any safeguards against designing programs at the highest unit cost that still passes the cost-effectiveness test. (f) Explain what mechanisms in the propo...

AI summary The text requests explanations on safeguards against high-cost programs passing cost-effectiveness tests and mechanisms to reduce unit costs below forecasts while meeting savings targets.

3 Table 5. Preferred Plan Demand Response Program Budgets Budget ($000) 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Total Residential 2,168 2,040 2,035 2,030 2,026 10,299 Water Heaters 502 381 387 391 396 2,057 Thermostats 1,667 1,658 1,648 1,639 1,630 8,243...

AI summary The document presents tables outlining budget allocations, MW capacity, and budget per kW for demand response programs under the Preferred Plan from 2027 to 2031. These tables detail funding for residential, water heater, thermostat, BNI, curtailment, and loadshift programs.

25 Response IR-01: 26 27 (a) No. Carrying unspent early-year funding into later years does not, by itself, authorize E1 28 to exceed the Board-approved five-year budget. The recommendation is that the Board confirm 29 the thresholds operat...

AI summary The response clarifies that unspent funds from early years may be carried forward but not used to exceed the five-year budget cap. It outlines three MCA triggers and explains that consolidating low-income programs into a single entity would require Board approval for any spending over 20% of the approved budget.

- 3 "Enabling Strategies". - 4 Preamble: E1 has asserted that eliminating or materially reducing Enabling Strategies - 5 investment would weaken E1's ability to deliver DSM programs effectively and responsibly - 6 and provided three qualit...

AI summary The document raises questions about Enabling Strategies, including the impact of reducing investments, the need for quantitative analysis, updates to investment tables, reconciliation of market transformation activities, and detailed cost breakdowns for new strategies and 'Other Enabling Strategies' from 2012 to the present.

Request IR-4: Refer to Exhibit E-17, the Peach Report, page 11, 'Integrating Evaluation Frameworks' which discusses integrating a different evaluation framework into E1's DSM program with the Deep Retrofit and Load Research programs that a...

AI summary The document raises questions about integrating evaluation frameworks into E1's DSM program, cost implications of alternative approaches, prioritization of deep energy savings, AI model use, and budget comparisons. It seeks clarification on cost impacts, evaluation methodologies, and resource allocation decisions.

1 (a) Please confirm whether, under your recommended framework, if E1 2 underspends in 2027 and 2028 and then seeks to spend those unspent 3 funds in 2030 and 2031, the resulting total five-year expenditure would be 4 permitted to exceed t...

AI summary The text asks whether underspending in 2027 and 2028 followed by spending in 2030 and 2031 would allow E1 to exceed the five-year budget, and if a separate MCA filing would be required. It also asks about the scope of Mr. Love's recommended MCA process and whether a mid-plan MCA could increase low-income program spending above the 20% threshold with just an explanation.