Topic:"Capacity Market Participation" in M11108

2023 Load Forecast Report (NSUARB M11108) NSPI Responses to Small Business Advocate Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-10: 2 3 Please reference page 88, Lines 4-13. 4 5 (a) Please discuss historical annual peaks dating back...

AI summary NSPI responds to queries about historical load peaks and P90 scenarios in the 2023 Load Forecast Report. Historical peaks are compared to regression models in Attachment 10, while a 20% Planning Reserve Margin (PRM) is applied to account for uncertainties like P90 scenarios and supply disruptions, ensuring compliance with NPCC reliability standards.

uncertainty of nuclear and economic impact modeling. 2013 Georgia PSC Docket No. 36498, direct testimony on behalf of Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. Adequacy of consideration of energy efficiency in Georgia Power’s 2013 integrated res...

AI summary Testimony from Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) in 2013-2014 regulatory proceedings focused on energy efficiency adequacy in integrated resource plans, renewable energy alternatives, and capacity credit calculations for solar power. Testimonies were provided in Georgia and South Carolina PSC dockets.

a. Please provide the system losses and unbilled sales for each year of the last five years. 4 b. Please provide information about how system losses vary over a typical year. 5 c. Please identify and discuss the reasons for any significant...

AI summary The text outlines requests for data on system losses, unbilled sales, net system requirement, peak demand, and demand response. It seeks source data, calculations, and explanations for these topics, including DR resource modeling, ELCC derivation, and peak demand calibration.

particularly the commercial lighting efficiency and intensity. 39 40 NS Power’s reply submission did not agree with a few of the intervenors’ requests. NS 41 Power does not consider the line loss determination model as a tool for load plan...

AI summary NS Power disagrees with intervenors' requests regarding line loss models, ELCC factors for LIIR, and commercial electrification analysis. It argues ELCC adjustments are unnecessary for LIIR but considers them for EV load shapes, and denies conducting cost-benefit analyses on commercial electrification programs.