HomeCost DeferralM12898Evidence
Topic/Matter Intersection

Topic:"Cost Deferral" in M12898

Matter: Nova Scotia Power Inc. - Distribution Routines CI Various- D055 – Planned Replacement of Deteriorated Equipment (ATO) - $11,359,8222025 ACE Plan – Routine Capital - Authorization to Overspend (ATO):Distribution Routines – Non-Confidential • D055 – Planned Replacement of Deteriorated Equipment: ATO amount $11,359,822
3 passages 2 documents

Cost Deferral across all matters →

N-2NSPI (CA) RIR 1 to 12 - Redacted 1 passage
NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. p. 16
NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 (d) NS Power ensures that D055 costs are minimized through its asset management approach 2 which evaluates both condition and criticality to determine the risk of different asset groups 3 and provides priorities for the...

AI summary NS Power outlines its approach to minimizing D055 costs through asset management, competitive procurement, and efficient scheduling practices. The company uses engineered standards, historical data, and field supervision to ensure cost-effective solutions and efficient execution of work orders.

103164Submissions - CA 2 passages
(b) Cost Minimization p. p. 3
(b) Cost Minimization In M12319, the CA expressed concerns "as to whether NS Power has maintained effective cost minimization practices" for capital distribution routines.[6](#page-3-2) The Consumer Advocate's submission provided several e...

AI summary The Consumer Advocate raised concerns about NS Power's cost minimization practices in capital distribution routines, citing a lack of data on cost-effectiveness comparisons between NS Power and contractors. NS Power responded by highlighting its efforts to increase field resources and reduce overtime costs through recruitment, but the CA argues that insufficient data makes it unclear whether the reduction in overtime costs represents actual cost savings.

(d) Conclusion p. pp. 6-7
(d) Conclusion For all of the foregoing reasons, the CA submits that NS Power has not provided substantial evidence to justify its spending on distribution routines, and specifically: - NS Power is unable to provide evidence as to which co...

AI summary The Consumer Advocate (CA) argues that NS Power has not provided sufficient evidence to justify its spending on distribution routines, citing missing contractor details, inadequate cost-effectiveness explanations, and significant cost increases. The CA recommends a reduction in cost recovery and suggests revising NS Power's reporting practices.

Disclaimer: These summaries were generated by AI from the filings they describe. We take care to make them accurate, but errors are possible - and they aren't advice. Only the filings themselves are the record: if you're relying on something here, confirm it against the source documents or the Nova Scotia Energy Board's own record. Full disclaimer →