Topic:"Cost Effectiveness" in M12558

- is overloaded or feeders that are constrained, critical facilities, customers with or required to have backup power, and/or Industrial customers. - Determine if and how NS Power is accounting for backup power in their estimates of reliab...

AI summary The text outlines the scope of a regulatory proceeding focused on assessing NS Power's reliability plan, including cost-effectiveness, affordability, and the application of the Project Delivery Model (PDM). It also requests guidance on incorporating Value of Lost Load (VoLL) and evaluating impacts on different customer classes.

- As a result, sub-program investment totals for 2025–2029 represent a planning-level allocation of - program-level investment based on the 2025 ACE Plan portfolio, and do not represent a forecast - of specific work or project scope in the...

AI summary The text discusses the allocation of sub-program investments for 2025–2029 based on the 2025 ACE Plan, noting that these are planning-level estimates rather than forecasts of specific projects. Investment levels in Figure 1 are based on high-level cost-effectiveness estimates rather than detailed project-level costs.

1 Request IR-34: 9 criteria and a comprehensive list of critical facilities in the province are not available to NS 10 Power. During storm response, NS Power coordinates with the provincial Department of 11 Emergency Management to identify...

AI summary The text discusses NS Power's response to requests regarding critical infrastructure identification during storm response, the absence of backup power consideration in risk ratings, and the lack of specific plans to address reliability disparities for certain populations, including the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia. NS Power refers to Synapse reports for further details on reliability and asset management strategies.

(b) Cost-effectiveness was evaluated primarily at the program and asset-class level through NS Power's capital governance and asset management processes, supported by program-level reliability forecasting and comparative assessment of alte...

AI summary NS Power evaluated cost-effectiveness at the program and asset-class level, considering capital expenditures and reliability benefits such as reduced outage duration and frequency. Feeder-level data was used to prioritize investments, but not for standalone cost-benefit analyses at the feeder level.

t-effective approaches to address the identified reliability needs by comparing alternative investment options and selecting those expected to deliver the required reliability improvement efficiently. (d) NS Power did not evaluate the cost...

AI summary The text discusses NS Power's approach to addressing reliability needs by comparing alternative investment options and selecting those expected to deliver the required reliability improvements efficiently. However, it notes that NS Power did not evaluate the cost-effectiveness of each potential solution using standalone, solution-specific cost-benefit analyses.

1 approaches capable of delivering the required reliability improvement, rather than relying 2 on detailed modeling of every potential solution. 3 4 (e) NS Power did not evaluate cost-effectiveness using separate models for specific custom...

AI summary The text discusses NS Power's approach to reliability improvements, highlighting the lack of separate cost-effectiveness models for specific customer classes and the use of feeder risk profiling. It also includes a request for detailed data and explanations related to SAIDI improvements and a response indicating that reliability improvements were forecast at the program level using estimated factors per unit of investment.

CI C0071528 – FLISR Implementation (NSEB M12417) NSPI Responses to NSEB Information Requests 1 federal funding for the FLISR project, offsetting the overall capital costs, in order to 2 achieve cost effectiveness of the project overall. 3...

AI summary The document discusses federal funding for the FLISR project aimed at offsetting capital costs and achieving cost effectiveness. It also references NSEB IR-2 (d) for more information on alternatives.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL Duration (hrs) Count of Premise ID % Restored Customer Hours Avoided Count of Customer Interruptions Saved 30 2020 Annual Report (M09578) • 1 2021 Annual Report (M09984) 2 3 Smart Grid Nova Scotia Project: 4 • Application...

AI summary The text discusses the timeline for filing results of jurisdiction-specific studies on the Value of Lost Load (VoLL) and whether NS Power plans to incorporate VoLL dollar benefits into its cost-effectiveness evaluation. NS Power intends to submit these results as part of its 2027 ACE Plan submission.

Cost-Effectiveness

AI summary The section titled 'Cost-Effectiveness' introduces the topic of evaluating the efficiency and economic viability of energy programs and initiatives. It sets the stage for discussions on how to measure and ensure cost-effective outcomes in the regulatory proceeding.

Request IR-37: - Please discuss how NS Power considered cost-effectiveness in its Reliability Plan. - a. What metric(s) did NS Power use to evaluate cost-effectiveness? - b. How did NS Power evaluate cost-effectiveness? What costs did NS P...

AI summary The document requests NS Power to discuss how it considered cost-effectiveness in its Reliability Plan, including the metrics used, the evaluation process, the costs and benefits considered, and whether evaluations were conducted at the feeder level or for specific customer types.

Request IR-61: - Is NS Power planning to incorporate dollar benefits associated with VoLL into its cost- - effectiveness evaluation, based on the jurisdiction-specific studies that are currently in process? - a. If so, when and how? - b. I...

AI summary The document poses a question to NS Power regarding whether it plans to include the value of lost load (VoLL) in its cost-effectiveness evaluations, based on ongoing jurisdiction-specific studies, and if so, when and how, or if not, the reasons for not doing so.

Request IR-62: - What other benefits should be considered in a cost-effectiveness evaluation of Reliability Plan - investments?

AI summary The document poses a question regarding what additional benefits should be considered in a cost-effectiveness evaluation of Reliability Plan investments, highlighting the need for a comprehensive assessment of such initiatives.

Request IR-81: - NS Power states in response to IR-37, "Once reliability investments were prioritized at a feeder, - NS Power considered cost-effective approaches to address the identified reliability needs by - comparing alternative inves...

AI summary The document asks NS Power to clarify how it evaluates the cost-effectiveness of reliability investments at the feeder level and whether it uses quantitative or qualitative methods to assess alternatives for improving reliability, with a request for a historical example and supporting documentation.