Topic:"Cost Recovery" in M03669

5. 2012 DSM PLAN SAVINGS AND INVESTMENT The savings and associated investment to meet the 2012 annual and cumulative IRP targets are presented in Figure 5.1. For 2012, ENSC forecasts annual energy and demand savings of 233.6 GWh and 44.0 M...

AI summary The 2012 DSM Plan forecasts energy savings of 233.6 GWh and demand savings of 44.0 MW annually, exceeding IRP targets while keeping investment at $43.7 million—below the IRP's $61 million program cost. Cumulative savings also surpass IRP goals. ENSC plans to refine programs in 2011-2012 with stakeholder input.

2 COLUMN Α В С D E F G Н 4 Program Cos st Recovery by Benefits 5 6 System Benefits 25.0% $10,936,664 Combined Class and 7 8 Participant Benefits Total 75.0% 100.0% $32,809,993 $43,746,657 9 Total 100.070 ψ 4 3,740,037 ] - Functionalization...

AI summary The table outlines the recovery of program costs and benefits, including system benefits and participant benefits, with percentages and dollar amounts allocated across different rate classes and energy-related factors. The data covers generation, transmission, and distribution costs, as well as energy-related costs, showing a breakdown by residential, industrial, and other categories.

C. Parking and Tolls - When employees/Directors use a vehicle on Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation's business travel, the employee/Director will be reimbursed the actual costs of parking the vehicle. Fines for overtime parking or other vi...

AI summary The text outlines reimbursement policies for parking and tolls incurred by employees and Directors of Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation during business travel, specifying that only actual costs are reimbursable and that fines are not covered.

Table of Contents Table of Contents i Recommendations for Increasing the Effectiveness of Demand Side Management among Low-income renters in Nova Scotia38 Efficiency Nova Scotia DSM Plan38 Short Term Low-income-renter DSM Program Strategie...

AI summary The document outlines recommendations to improve demand-side management (DSM) programs for low-income renters in Nova Scotia. It suggests modifying existing programs to provide no-cost or subsidized options, increasing funding, and implementing new initiatives such as the DSM Captain and Energy Leader Programs.

s of energy production. In the low-income-renter context, work on this barrier will have limited impact due to the low-income-renter's limited economic power and marketplace participation constraints. Under the present regime, the most sig...

AI summary The text discusses market function barriers in the context of low-income renters, highlighting how the current DSM Program's cost recovery rider disproportionately affects them. It notes that low-income renters face challenges due to limited economic power and inefficient rental housing infrastructure, suggesting that investing DSM funds into rental housing should be a priority in the 2012 DSM Plan.

, New Houses and Low Income Programs is the most significant barrier to the low-income-renter. The DSM cost recovery rider is also a concern, as discussed in the market barriers section of this paper. & lt;sup>110 National Housing Act, R.S...

AI summary The text discusses policy barriers affecting low-income renters, particularly in relation to new housing and existing programs. It mentions concerns around the DSM cost recovery rider, referencing legislative and regulatory frameworks.

3. Ensure that the cost recovery rider charges paid by low-income-renters and their landlords are invested in low-income-renter DSM programming Initial approaches to qualification can also be used to estimate the Low-income-renter DSM Prog...

AI summary The text discusses ensuring that cost recovery rider charges from low-income renters and their landlords are invested in low-income-renter DSM programming. It outlines initial approaches to estimate the funding stream and refine the budget as the program develops.

1. Identify low-income-renters and manage cost recovery rider contributions to support low-income-renter DSM programming The work required to identify low-income-renters, and ensure that the DSM Program funding contributions of low-income-...

AI summary The text discusses the need to identify low-income renters and manage cost recovery rider contributions to support low-income-renter DSM programming. It suggests continuing from the 2012 DSM Plan and proposes exemptions or rebates for low-income Nova Scotians, similar to California's approach.

Telephone conversation with Colleen, OPA, November 8, 2010. 1 Request IR-14: 6 currently considering or has implemented with respect to ensuring that in the event 7 of a multi-fuels mandate, costs associated with each fuel will be segregat...

AI summary The conversation discusses ENSC's approach to segregating and allocating costs for multi-fuels programs and its plans for submitting strategies to the UARB for approval. ENSC is developing a fund-accounting system and engaging a consultant to establish a cost allocation framework.

Inconsistency in Treatment of Demand and Supply Options As noted above, supply investments are not subjected to TRC or Societal costeffectiveness screening. For example, when a regulator approves a utility purchased power contract from a c...

AI summary The text discusses the inconsistency in how demand and supply options are treated in regulatory decisions. Supply investments are not subjected to TRC or societal cost-effectiveness screening, unlike energy efficiency programs. This creates an uneven regulatory standard where only the cost to the utility system is considered, not the broader societal or investment costs.

1 c) The following figure provides the 2010 Demand Side Management Cost Recovery Rider 2 for each rate class. "NA" indicates no charge. 2010 Demand Side Management Cost Customer Class Recovery Rider (cents per kWh) Domestic Service 0.193 D...

AI summary The text provides the 2010 Demand Side Management Cost Recovery Rider 2 rates for various customer classes. It also includes a request and response regarding analyses of the 2012 DSM programs' rate and bill impacts, noting that no specific analyses were conducted beyond preliminary information in ENSC's Evidence.

Q. What is the basis for the preliminary allocation? - A. In the 2012 Plan, Appendix B, the Corporation set forth a preliminary cost allocation. TABLE - 2: Preliminary Allocation of 75% of DSM Program Costs associated with benefits realize...

AI summary The preliminary allocation of 75% of DSM program costs is based on Appendix B of the 2012 Plan, which assigns $4.512 million (75% of a $5.004 million budget) to residential ratepayers. This allocation is detailed in a referenced table.

Q. Is the Company's allocation of the remaining multi-sector costs consistent with the - allocation of the other remaining program costs? - A. No. The remaining other program costs are allocated by the relative expenditures on programs - p...

AI summary The answer states the Company's allocation of multi-sector costs is inconsistent with other program costs, recommending revisions to Enabling Strategies' allocation based on ENSC's proposed efforts and tracking by rate class. It suggests using the 2012 DSM Plan's energy savings distribution as a surrogate for cost apportionment across rate classes.

29 Notes: System Benefits Combined Class and Participant Benefits Total Program Cost Recovery by Benefits 25.0% 75.0% 100.0% $10,936,664 $32,809,993 $43,746,657 Functionalization of System Benefit DSM Classification of System Benefit Costs...

AI summary The document presents a table detailing system benefits, combined class and participant benefits, and total program cost recovery by benefits. It includes figures such as 25.0%, 75.0%, and 100.0%, along with corresponding dollar amounts and classifications related to demand and energy-related costs.

- [1] What initiatives should be taken to encourage electricity consumers in Nova Scotia to conserve and efficiently use electrical energy? How should such initiatives be paid for? Who should pay for them? How should the savings be measure...

AI summary The document discusses the importance of demand side management (DSM) in Nova Scotia, emphasizing its role in reducing electricity consumption, delaying infrastructure costs, and supporting environmental goals. It raises questions about funding, who should pay, and how savings should be measured.

upward pressure on rates is a concern. To the degree, however, that DSM spending has the impact of actually lowering customer bills, rate impacts caused by DSM spending need to be carefully analyzed. In the submission of the Consumer Advoc...

AI summary The text discusses concerns about DSM spending's impact on rates, emphasizing the need for careful analysis. The Consumer Advocate advocates a cautious approach to DSM spending to ensure ratepayer confidence, while Avon supports the 2012 DSM Plan's budget and non-customer-funded savings. The Plan is noted for meeting IRP targets despite cautious spending.

4.3 Cost Allocation [76] Avon recommended the Board reduce the costs directly assigned to the large industrial class from $1.473 Million to $1.01 Million. In its Closing Submission Avon stated: The 2012 program costs that have been assigne...

AI summary Avon recommended reducing costs assigned to large industrial customers, citing a lack of evidence supporting their participation in energy efficiency programs. The CA argued that cost allocation for enabling strategies should be revised, as current methods are inequitable and fail to reflect the cross-class impact of benefits, with residential ratepayers disproportionately bearing the cost.

5.5 Integrated Multi-Fuels Mandate [117] ENSC noted that the Province is in the process of changing its mandate and future responsibilities: With the expectation that ENSC will obtain a multi-fuels mandate in time for integration with 2012...

AI summary The document discusses ENSC's transition to an integrated multi-fuels mandate, aiming to streamline processes and reduce costs while avoiding cross-subsidization. Concerns are raised about shared services, cost allocation, and the need for a robust method to separate costs per fuel. ENSC plans to submit its reorganization plan for the Board's approval in the fall of 2011.

[128] The Dunsky report noted that: The move to a performance-based model would provide ENSC with increased flexibility to adjust and adapt its plans as needed, as situations arise and as feedback comes in. Furthermore, an oversight model...

AI summary The Dunsky report supports moving to a performance-based model (PBM) for DSM programs, citing increased flexibility and reduced regulatory burden. ENSC seeks Board approval to consult stakeholders on this approach. The Province and EAC also support the PBM discussion, emphasizing benefits for low-income rate-payers and program outreach. Board Counsel questioned the need for Board approval before consultation.

9.0 SUMMARY OF BOARD FINDINGS [153] The Board accepts the 2010 DSM Plan evaluation and verification, with the qualification made in the SVS for a 10% reduction for the Efficient Products-Direct Install program. [154] The Board understands...

AI summary The Board accepts the 2010 DSM Plan evaluation with modifications, approves the 2012 investment in DSM programs, and directs ENSC to address data systems, cost allocations, and stakeholder engagement. The Board also requires ENSC to complete a free ridership study and develop policy for tracking costs across mandates.

Undertaking U-2 Provide the calculations supporting the rate impact of the 2012 DSM plan on Ell customers, assuming the plan is at the 158.5 Gwh level as proposed by Multeese. Response U-2: The calculation is as follows: From Table 1 of Ap...

AI summary The response calculates the rate impact of the 2012 DSM plan on ELI customers, showing a net cost of -$0.5 million after adjusting for fuel savings. It uses data from Appendix B (revised April 14) and Exhibit E-12, scaling program costs and applying a 20% allocation for ELI customers based on NSPI sales.

fuel supplies and lack of competition. - 10. In this submission EAC will address the following issue areas using the testimony and evidence presented before the Board in this proceeding: - a. 2012 DSM Budget and Proposed Energy Savings fro...

AI summary EAC addresses the 2012 DSM budget's reduced energy savings due to ELI's unforeseen savings, the budget's reasonableness, and the absence of a process for determining energy savings targets. The discussion highlights regulatory discretion and the need for established processes in IRP energy savings targets.

Cost Recovery for Participation - 1. It is submitted that the EAC acted responsibly and prudently as an intervener in these hearings. The interventions have been novel and brought a different perspective to the proceedings. As such, it is...

AI summary The Ecology Action Centre (EAC) requests cost recovery for its participation in hearings related to the 2012 DSM plan, arguing its intervention was responsible and constructive. The Board's precedent allows non-profit interveners to recover reasonable costs, emphasizing prudence and contribution to proceedings. The EAC cites this precedent to justify its application for reimbursement.

1 A multi-year framework will also provide necessary flexibility for ENSC to respond to 2 significant program adjustments that may be required to respond to external changes in government policy or funding that may occur.26 3 4 As such, th...

AI summary ENSC is seeking approval from the Board to engage in consultation to assess options for a future multi-year regulatory model. This model would ensure cost-recovery rates for DSM expenditures and provide greater flexibility and performance in delivering DSM programming.

t a couple of medium industrial customers had migrated to the large industrial class, ENSC is not projecting any increase in the number of customers in the large industrial class in 2012. 22 The 2012 programs are essentially a continuation...

AI summary ENSC projects no increase in large industrial customers in 2012, despite allocating $1.473M in rate recoveries to 30-35 customers. Program costs rose 192% from 2010 to 2012, with ENSC attributing the increase to expanded programs and customer participation expectations, though no evidentiary basis was provided.

ADDITIONAL POINTS It became apparent during the hearing that ENSC has assumed responsibility for efficiency programs beyond electricity. One can reasonably expect there will be overlap in service delivery and administrative overheads in re...

AI summary The text highlights ENSC's expanded role in multi-fuel efficiency programs, raising concerns about overlapping costs and administrative burdens. The Avon Group recommends a public report on shared service allocations and criticizes NSPI's lack of detailed rate impact analysis in the ACE Plan filing. Rate impacts and cost recovery mechanisms are emphasized as critical issues requiring transparency and stakeholder input.

Re: Electricity Demand Side Management Planfor 2012; NSUARB-ENSC-R-10 These are the closing submissions of the Consumer Advocate. Although the initial issues list contained a number of elements, the application process has significantly na...

AI summary The Consumer Advocate's closing submissions focus on four key issues: adopting the 2012 DSM budget, fair cost allocation for Enabling Strategies, preventing cross-subsidization for non-electricity DSM activities, and ensuring low-income reporting. These points address budget justification, cost equity, and program accessibility.

May 20, 2011 1 1. INTRODUCTION 2 3 In this proceeding, UARB approval is requested for the proposed Electricity Demand 4 Side Management Plan for 2012 (the 2012 DSM Plan). 5 6 ENSC, as DSM Administrator, filed its Closing Submission in this...

AI summary The document outlines the submission of a reply to the Closing Submissions in a proceeding requesting UARB approval for the 2012 DSM Plan. The Consumer Advocate requests a revision to the cost allocation methodology for Enabling Strategies, suggesting a more equitable method based on shared benefits across rate classes. ENSC acknowledges the argument but does not explicitly commit to revising the methodology.

11 Program Budget for Large Industrial Class 12 13 The Avon Group has urged the Board to revisit the issue of proposed program costs for 14 the Large Industrial (LI) class in 2012, and is seeking a reduction in the program costs 15 directl...

AI summary The Avon Group is requesting a reduction in the 2012 DSM Plan program costs for the Large Industrial class from $1.473M to $1.01M. ENSC disagrees, stating that program expenditures and the 'true-up' mechanism are reliable and subject to continuous improvement. ENSC argues that projections must account for market conditions and customer participation, and that the 'true-up' process ensures adjustments based on actual spending.

emand-side management programs with a view to restraining electricity demand and use; and - (b) may engage in energy efficiency and conservation programs other than electricity demand-side management. - 31 (1) Subject to the approval of th...

AI summary The ENSC Act outlines the Corporation's authority to manage demand-side management (DSM) programs, requiring Review Board approval for annual assessments and program submissions. The Board must ensure cost allocation between DSM and other energy efficiency programs is just and reasonable, with oversight of the Corporation's compliance.

4.3 Cost Allocation [76] Avon recommended the Board reduce the costs directly assigned to the large industrial class from $1.473 Million to $1.01 Million. In its Closing Submission Avon stated: The 2012 program costs that have been assigne...

AI summary Avon recommended reducing costs assigned to large industrial customers from $1.473 million to $1.01 million, citing a lack of evidence for program participation. The Consumer Advocate argued that allocating enabling strategy costs by customer class is inequitable, as residential ratepayers bear most of the costs despite limited access to DSM spending.

5.5 Integrated Multi-Fuels Mandate [117] ENSC noted that the Province is in the process of changing its mandate and future responsibilities: With the expectation that ENSC will obtain a multi-fuels mandate in time for integration with 2012...

AI summary ENSC is transitioning to an integrated multi-fuels mandate, aiming to streamline processes and reduce costs. Concerns were raised about cross-subsidization and the need for clear cost allocation. The CA urged ENSC to develop a plan to prevent electricity ratepayers from subsidizing non-electricity users. Avon recommended a public report on shared service cost allocations.

September 30, 2011 Nancy McNeil Regulatory Affairs Officer/Clerk Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board 1601 Lower Water Street, 3 rd Floor P.O. Box 1692, Unit "M" Halifax, NS B3J 3S3 Re: DSM Cost Recovery Rider (E-ENSC-R-10) Dear Ms. McNeil...

AI summary Nova Scotia Power Inc. proposes the ENS DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) and Balance Adjustment (DCRR BA) for 2012, based on the Board's 2009 DSM Order and updated load determinants from the 2012 load forecast. The rider aims to recover DSM program costs across rate classes.

sup> The load shape class determinants from the 2012 FAM load forecasts have been applied by NSPI in its update to revenue requirement (section 11.1) filed in its reply evidence on September 13, 2011. - 2011 2 • The major difference betwee...

AI summary The document discusses NSPI's update to its revenue requirement, incorporating load shape class determinants from 2012 FAM forecasts and the shutdown of New Page Port Hawkesbury. It details DSM program costs approved by the UARB, allocation methods, and the use of DCRR and DCRR BA components to address discrepancies in DSM program cost recovery.

n details are presented in Appendix B. - 7. The individual DSM Cost Recovery Rider charges, both DCRR and DCRR BA, by class are presented for approval in Schedule A of the 2012 DSM Cost Recovery Rider 4 The GRLF load sales as used for the...

AI summary The document discusses the DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) and its balance adjustment (DCRR BA), including how charges are calculated and presented for approval. It refers to the 2012 DSM Cost Recovery Rider, the 2009 DSM Settlement Agreement, and the allocation of expenditures among rate classes. The approach will be reviewed after three years, with Nova Scotia Power anticipating a review of the cost allocation methodology beyond 2012.

(5) All residential rate classes will use the same unit fixed cost estimate. Line # TABLE 2 Allocation of 75% of DSM Program Costs associated with benefits realized by participating classes. 7 Total Expenditure by Rate class System Benefit...

AI summary The document outlines the allocation of 75% of DSM program costs across different residential and industrial rate classes, indicating that all residential rate classes will use the same unit fixed cost estimate. The table details the distribution of expenditures and benefits realized by each rate class.

(5) All residential rate classes will use the same unit fixed cost estimate. COLUMN A B C D E F G H I K L FORMULA Σ col A to J K x 75% Program costs incurred on participating rate classes. Efficient Existing Prescriptive New Business DI Sm...

AI summary The document outlines the allocation of program costs across different residential and non-residential rate classes, using a uniform unit fixed cost estimate for all residential classes and allocating 75% of program costs directly to participating rate classes.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF INDEPENDENT DSM ADMINISTRATOR It shall be the responsibility of the independent Demand Side Management Administrator (Administrator) to apply to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) to seek approval of all de...

AI summary The independent DSM Administrator must seek UARB approval for DSM programs and their costs, and apply annually for DSM Cost Recovery Rider amounts. NSPI is required to monthly fund approved program costs based on UARB approvals.

DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT COST RECOVERY: The monthly amount computed under each of the rate schedules to which this DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) is applicable shall be increased or decreased by the DCRR at a class-specific rate per kilowatt...

AI summary The DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) adjusts monthly rates using the formula DCRR = PCR + BA, applying a class-specific rate per kilowatt hour of consumption. This mechanism directly ties cost recovery to consumption patterns across applicable rate schedules.

PCR = PROGRAM COST RECOVERY The PCR includes all estimated costs for each upcoming twelve month period for demand side management and energy efficiency programs that have been requested by the Administrator and approved by the Board ("appr...

AI summary The Program Cost Recovery (PCR) mechanism outlines cost recovery for approved demand-side management (DSM) and energy efficiency programs. It includes planning, implementation, and evaluation costs, with a specific cost allocation methodology for 2010–2012. The UARB may modify this approach post-2012. The Administrator is responsible for providing data to Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) for implementing the DSM Cost Recovery Rider.

BA = BALANCE ADJUSTMENT The BA will be calculated for each rate class separately on a calendar year basis and is used to reconcile the difference between the amount of revenues actually billed through the PCR and the revenues which should...

AI summary The Balance Adjustment (BA) reconciles PCR billed revenues with actual program costs annually per rate class. Changes to the DCRR take effect with bills after their effective date, ensuring alignment between charges and program expenses.

In addition to standard energy charges, the following Demand Side Management Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) charges shall apply for the period January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012. DSM Rider Code Applicable Tariff DCRR DCRR BA Deleted: 1 (cent...

AI summary The document outlines the Demand Side Management Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) charges applicable from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2012, specifying different rates for various service categories and including a balance adjustment (DCRR BA) for each category.

There are 3 kinds of cost benefits resulting from DSM: - 1. System Avoided future infrastructure and related costs, reduced fuel costs, and contribution to achieving environmental and emissions restrictions. All customers receive these ben...

AI summary The text outlines three types of cost benefits from Demand Side Management (DSM): system, class, and participation. It emphasizes that DSM costs should be recovered based on the level of benefit received by customer classes, with those receiving the most benefits bearing the greatest responsibility for cost contribution, even if they do not directly participate in programs.

Proposed Allocation of DSM Program Costs: System benefits will be allocated to all customer classes, except for the Mersey System Rate (i.e., Basic Block), in accordance with the COSS methodology reflecting allocation of generation rate ba...

AI summary System benefits from DSM programs will be allocated to all customer classes except Mersey System Rate (Basic Block) using COSS methodology. Remaining costs will be distributed proportionally among participating classes based on investments in each class.

Method: - Step 1 Allocate the system benefits to all customer classes, except to the Mersey System Rate (i.e., Basic Block), allocating s x DT, in accordance with the COSS methodology per the most recent rate case decision, where "DT" repr...

AI summary The method outlines a five-step process for allocating DSM program costs between customer classes, including assigning 25% as system benefits and 75% directly to classes. It references the COSS methodology and adjusts allocations based on Bowater Mersey's participation and demand levels. The approach aims to calculate annual cost recovery surcharges and adjust forecasts using actual participation data.

Conditions: - The allocation of costs based on "benefits" in this approach does not create a precedent for future cost allocation methodologies. - This approach applies to classes as a whole (not to individual customers). As a contract rat...

AI summary The conditions outline a cost allocation methodology based on 'benefits' without setting a precedent for future methods. The Mersey System Rate remains unaffected by DSM energy savings, and the approach applies to total approved DSM program costs, with a three-year review period starting in 2010.

Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation ("ENSC"), which was created by legislation that was proclaimed January 22, 2010, is subject to regulation by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board ("NSUARB" or "Board"). It filed its first Electricity...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) is regulated by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB). ENSC filed its first Electricity Efficiency and Conservation Plan, the 2012 DSM Plan, and the NSUARB issued a decision and order in 2011. With ENSC's expanded mandate, the Board directed ENSC to develop a cost allocation model and policy to track time and costs for electric and other fuel mandates.

3 COST ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY ENSC's cost allocation model relies on standard fully allocated costing concepts that are generally accepted by Canadian regulators for rate-setting purposes. In particular, ENSC's fully allocated costing meth...

AI summary ENSC's cost allocation model uses fully allocated costing concepts, dividing costs between taxpayer- and ratepayer-funded programs. It employs two tiers of customer classes, with direct allocation methods for specific accounts like the Small Business Energy Solutions (SBES) program. The Board's 2011 Order guides the first-tier allocation methodology.

4 CONCLUSION The methodology used to allocate ENSC's total "costs for electric and other fuel mandates" is consistent with the standard approach to the fully allocated costing models that are used for rate setting purposes by regulated ele...

AI summary The document outlines ENSC's cost-allocation methodology for electric and other fuel mandates, aligning with Canadian utility standards. Direct and joint program costs are allocated case-by-case, with administrative costs tied to staff resources. Costs are recovered via NSUARB-approved rate riders for electricity programs and government payments for other fuel programs.