Topic:"Cost Recovery" in M04819

To aid in the preparation of the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, ENSC retained the advice and assistance of Navigant, Dunsky Energy Consulting (Dunsky) and Elenchus Research Associates Inc. (Elenchus). ENSC also received input and counsel from DSM sta...

AI summary ENSC worked with consultants and stakeholders to develop the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, drawing on prior experience and engaging in multiple consultation sessions. Topics discussed include cost allocation methodologies and multi-year DSM planning frameworks.

were held in person and by telephone to provide further briefings to stakeholders and their expert advisors who were unable to attend the November 3 session. The purpose of this stage of the consultation process was to survey the views of...

AI summary Stakeholder sessions were held to discuss the allocation of ENSC's costs, particularly regarding System Benefits and Participating Class Benefits. A 25/75 split was maintained for system and participating class benefits, and Enabling Strategies costs were recommended to be allocated using a System/Participant Benefit approach where feasible, or based on proportional allocation of other program costs otherwise.

DATE FILED: February 27, 2012 Page 32 of 45 1 include overhead costs based on a proportional mark-up to direct program costs. To 2 calculate the preliminary allocation of Enabling Strategies, all customer classes are 3 assumed to benefit i...

AI summary The document discusses changes in the allocation of Enabling Strategies costs within the DSM Plan, moving from customer count to a proportional mark-up based on direct program costs. It also outlines the process for the annual rate rider adjustment filing, including the transfer of responsibility from NSPI to ENSC for the DSM Cost Recovery Rider.

6.2 Leveraging Sources of Financing

AI summary Section 6.2 discusses leveraging financing sources for energy initiatives in Nova Scotia. Key entities include regulatory bodies, utility companies, and programs related to demand-side management and cost recovery. Acronyms such as DSM, ENSC, and NSPI are central to the discussion.

An avoided cost of $135/MWh was provided by NSPI in February 2012 and includes the combined cost of energy and a Lifetime benefits are expressed as the net present value of the avoided costs, including energy and capacity, over the life of...

AI summary The text discusses avoided costs and benefit/cost ratios related to energy efficiency programs. It mentions an avoided cost of $135/MWh provided by NSPI in 2012 and explains how lifetime benefits are calculated using net present value. It also defines TRC and PAC as benefit/cost ratios used to evaluate program effectiveness.

An avoided cost of $135/MWh was provided by NSPI in February 2012 and includes the combined cost of energy and capacity. & lt;sup>a Lifetime benefits are expressed as the net present value of the avoided costs, including energy and capacit...

AI summary The text discusses avoided costs of energy and capacity provided by NSPI in 2012 and the calculation of lifetime benefits using net present value. It also introduces TRC and PAC, which are benefit/cost ratios used to evaluate program measures, including participation by low-income households.

LATITUDE Even if Efficiency Nova Scotia has the clarity of purpose and built-in incentives to perform, does it have the ability to do so to maximum effect? ENSC operates in an extremely complex market environment, one that is in many respe...

AI summary The document argues that Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) requires sufficient latitude to compete effectively in complex markets where energy efficiency is discretionary. ENSC faces challenges competing with non-energy priorities and must balance resources, responsiveness, and commitment to influence consumer behavior. The text emphasizes the need for adequate incentives, adaptability, and long-term credibility for Demand Side Management (DSM) programs to maximize ratepayer funds.

#5. RATE RIDER ADJUSTMENTS FILING To facilitate an annual adjustment of the DSM rate rider, we recommend that ENSC file the annual rate rider adjustment following the current process that has been applied by NSPI to date. As is currently t...

AI summary Recommends ENSC follow NSPI's process for annual DSM rate rider adjustments, using previous year's balance adjustment and updated cost allocation tables with NSPI sales forecasts.

Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation Cost Allocation Report

AI summary The document is titled 'Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation Cost Allocation Report,' indicating a regulatory proceeding involving ENSC's methodology for allocating costs. Key entities include ENSC and the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB). The report likely addresses cost recovery mechanisms and regulatory oversight.

1 INTRODUCTION Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation ("ENSC") filed its first Electricity Efficiency and Conservation Plan, known officially as the Demand Side Management Plan for 2012 ("2012 DSM Plan") on February 28, 2011. The 2012 DSM Plan...

AI summary ENSC filed its 2012 DSM Plan, including cost allocation methods approved by the UARB. The Board directed ENSC to develop a cost allocation model and policy for tracking time and costs, leading to the 2013-2015 DSM Plan. Elenchus was retained to assist with cost allocation, stakeholder consultation, and rate impact analysis.

2 REVIEW OF ENSC'S COST ALLOCATION PROCESSES Elenchus reviewed the financial and regulatory requirements that have determined the approach taken to developing ENSC's cost allocation model. In conducting this review, Elenchus observed that...

AI summary Elenchus reviewed ENSC's cost allocation model, noting differences from typical utilities. ENSC's costs are split between taxpayer and ratepayer funded programs, requiring a single model. Only ratepayer costs are subject to regulatory scrutiny and allocated to customer rate classes via the rate rider. Financial statements require allocation by general ledger account, reviewed by auditors.

4 COST ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY: OVERVIEW ENSC's cost recovery methodology requires it to recover the actual costs incurred for its programs from the customers that benefit from those programs. This is accomplished through a two-stage alloca...

AI summary ENSC uses a two-stage cost allocation methodology to recover program costs from NSPI rate classes. Initial costs use simplified estimates, while audited financial data later refine allocations via the CAM. A true-up mechanism adjusts rates based on actual costs, ensuring accurate recovery from customer classes.

5.2 PRELIMINARY DSM RATE AND BILL IMPACTS Attachment 2 shows the potential impact on the annual DSM rate rider of the 2013-2015 DSM Plan by customer class. Since the 2012 DSM rate includes a true-up (balance adjustment) for 2010, the DSM r...

AI summary The document outlines preliminary DSM rate and bill impacts from the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, noting variability due to CAM allocation differences, expenditure reallocations, and future NSPI rate/load forecast changes. Attachments 2 and 3 detail rate rider impacts and bill effects by customer class, with caveats about preliminary budget estimates versus audited financial statements.

Bill Impacts by Rate Class Table Page Table 3.1 Residential (Domestic) Attachment 3-1 Table 3.2 Residential (Domestic, winter time-of-day) Attachment 3-2 Table 3.3 Residential (Domestic, non-winter time-of-day) Attachment 3-3 Table 3.4 Sma...

AI summary The document presents a table detailing the allocation of program costs associated with system benefits, including the distribution of costs between generation, transmission, and demand-related factors. It outlines the breakdown of program costs, with 25% allocated to system benefits and 75% to combined class and participant benefits.

& lt;sup>5 All residential rate classes use the same unit fixed cost estimate TABL E 2 (2013) Pre liminary Allo ocation of 7 5% of DSM Program Co osts associat ed with bei nefits realiz ed by partici pating class es COLUMN Α В С D E F G н...

AI summary The document provides a breakdown of the preliminary allocation of 75% of DSM program costs associated with benefits realized by participating rate classes, showing the distribution of costs across different categories such as home energy, prescriptive programs, and outreach.

E-ENSC-R-12 ne# т. ABLE 3 (2014) F Preliminary A llocation of I Program Costs among rate classes 1 2 COLUMN Α В С D E F G н 3 3020 _ • _ _ • • •• 4 FORMULA Table 2 Table 1 Table 2 5 Column K Column H Column L C + E 6 Total Expendit ure by...

AI summary The document presents a table detailing the allocation of program costs among different rate classes in 2014. It shows the distribution of expenditures across various categories, with percentages and dollar amounts provided for each rate class, including residential, small general, general demand, large general, industrial, and others.

Attachment 3-5 E-ENSC-R-12 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE I MPACT Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % Monthly Service Charge 1 Demand Rate 1 kVA 2,500 $11.70200 $29,255.00 2,500 $11.70200 $29,255.00 Energy Rate 1 1 kWh 1,125,000 $...

AI summary The document presents a comparison of electricity bills from 2012 to 2015, highlighting changes in charges and rates. The DSM Cost Recovery charge is a recurring theme, showing significant increases over time, with a 217.4% cumulative change by 2015. The overall bill increased by 4.3% between 2012 and 2015.

Attachment 3-8 E-ENSC-R-12 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE I MPACT Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % Monthly Service Charge 1 Demand Rate 1 kVA 2,500 $10.46900 $26,172.50 2,500 $10.46900 $26,172.50 Energy Rate 1 1 kWh 1,125,000 $...

AI summary The document presents a comparison of bills from 2012 to 2015, focusing on changes in charges, particularly the DSM Cost Recovery. The DSM Cost Recovery charge decreased in 2013 but increased in 2014 and 2015, impacting the total bill by small percentages. The changes are analyzed in terms of dollar amounts and percentage impacts.

Table 3.10: ELI 2P-RTP Bill Impacts 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE IMPACT Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % Monthly Service Charge 1 1 $20,700.00 $20,700.00 1 $20,700.00 $20,700.00 Demand Rate 1 kVA Energy Rate 1 1 kWh 1,500,000...

AI summary Table 3.10 presents the ELI 2P-RTP bill impacts across multiple years, highlighting changes in charges and impacts, particularly focusing on the DSM cost recovery, which had a significant negative impact in 2013. The table shows a decrease in total bill amounts over time, with the most notable change occurring in 2013 due to the removal of DSM cost recovery charges.

Conservativeness Bottom-up estimates tend to be quite conservative, notably because they don't capture all the small efficiency projects that we know have been occurring at NPPH. Top-down estimates tend to be close to reality because they...

AI summary Bottom-up estimates are more conservative as they miss small efficiency projects at NPPH, while top-down estimates use real data and are closer to reality. Estimates reflect avoided energy costs, not absolute savings.

KEY COMPONENTS

AI summary The document outlines key components of a regulatory proceeding in Nova Scotia, including acronyms related to energy management, utility regulation, and efficiency programs. It provides definitions for terms used in proceedings involving energy conservation, cost recovery, and utility oversight.

Detailed Analysis

AI summary The document outlines a regulatory proceeding involving Nova Scotia's energy sector, focusing on DSM programs, cost recovery mechanisms, and efficiency initiatives. Key entities include NSPI, ENSC, and UARB, with discussions on TRC, PAC, and IRP frameworks.

Reasons to Change

AI summary The document outlines reasons for changing energy programs and regulatory approaches in Nova Scotia, emphasizing updates to Demand Side Management (DSM) frameworks, cost recovery mechanisms, and efficiency initiatives. Key entities include Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC), Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI), and the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB). Topics involve regulatory review, program cost allocation, and energy efficiency measures.

PhotoVoltaics To help mitigate the high cost of electricity, 16 photovoltaic (PV) panels have been installed on each of Efficiency Nova Scotia Demonstration Homes. The panels have been placed as close to true south as possible to optimize...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia Demonstration Homes feature 16 PV panels each, optimized for solar gain. Panels generate electricity, reduce energy costs, and connect to the grid. Excess energy credits are issued by Nova Scotia Power, potentially eliminating monthly electricity costs for future homeowners.

To aid in the preparation of the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, ENSC retained the advice and assistance of Navigant, Dunsky Energy Consulting (Dunsky) and Elenchus Research Associates Inc. (Elenchus). ENSC also received input and counsel from DSM sta...

AI summary ENSC worked with consultants and stakeholders to develop the 2013-2015 DSM Plan, building on prior experience and engaging in multiple consultation sessions to refine the framework and cost allocation methodologies.

The Cost Allocation Report prepared by Elenchus, including attachments containing annual preliminary DSM program cost allocations and rate and billing impact analyses for 2013-2015, is provided in Appendix C. Elenchus has developed a cost...

AI summary The Cost Allocation Report by Elenchus outlines a two-part model for ENSC, using a methodology filed with the UARB in 2011. Part One is used for audited financial statements, while Part Two allocates program costs to NSPI customer classes for rate rider adjustments starting in 2013. The approach aligns with the 2009 Settlement Agreement, with one exception noted in Section 5.1.

DATE FILED: February 27, 2012 Page 30 of 45 were held in person and by telephone to provide further briefings to stakeholders and their expert advisors who were unable to attend the November 3 session. The purpose of this stage of the cons...

AI summary This document discusses the stakeholder consultations on the DSM Cost Allocation Approach, including the recommended allocation of costs based on system and participating class benefits. It outlines two key recommendations: maintaining a 25/75 split for system and participating class benefits, and using the System/Participant Benefit approach for Enabling Strategies costs.

Tables showing the preliminary allocation of DSM program costs to electricity customer rate classes are provided in Appendix C, Attachment 1. The DSM costs for 2013-2015 1 include overhead costs based on a proportional mark-up to direct pr...

AI summary The document discusses the preliminary allocation of DSM program costs to electricity customer rate classes, including changes in methodology from using customer count to proportional mark-up based on total direct costs. It also outlines the process for annual rate rider adjustments and mentions the transfer of responsibility from NSPI to ENSC.

6.2 Leveraging Sources of Financing

AI summary The section discusses leveraging financing sources for energy initiatives, referencing regulatory bodies and programs in Nova Scotia. Key entities include Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation and Nova Scotia Power Inc., with acronyms related to demand-side management and cost recovery mechanisms.

6.3 A Dual Baseline Approach for Savings Evaluations

AI summary The document proposes a dual baseline approach for evaluating energy savings in Nova Scotia's regulatory proceedings. Key entities include Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) and Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI), with acronyms related to demand-side management, cost recovery, and regulatory testing. The approach aims to improve savings evaluation methodologies under the Utility and Review Board's oversight.

ould occur whenever a replaced measure reaches the end of its EUL. Tracking these results as well as changes in common practices and standards would require a greater investment of time and resources. Application of dual baselines across t...

AI summary ENSC acknowledges the potential benefits of a dual baseline approach for program evaluation but argues that implementation may be impractical due to high costs and resource demands. They propose a measured approach, prioritizing feasibility analysis before widespread adoption, citing challenges in programs with frequent product changes or limited user interaction.

LATITUDE Even if Efficiency Nova Scotia has the clarity of purpose and built-in incentives to perform, does it have the ability to do so to maximum effect? ENSC operates in an extremely complex market environment, one that is in many respe...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENSC) faces challenges in competing for consumer attention in a complex market. Its success depends on three factors: resources, responsiveness, and commitment. The document argues that ENSC requires sufficient latitude to effectively influence energy efficiency decisions and maximize ratepayer fund utilization.

ASSESSMENT OF ENSC'S FRAMEWORK

AI summary The document outlines the assessment of Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation's (ENSC) framework by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB), involving stakeholders such as Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) and the Program Development Working Group (PDWG). Key considerations include DSM programs, cost recovery mechanisms, and compliance with regulatory tests like the Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) and Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC).

RECOMMENDATIONS

AI summary The document outlines recommendations from a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding, involving entities like NSPI, ENSC, and UARB. Key topics include DSM, energy efficiency programs, and cost recovery mechanisms. Acronyms such as DSM, ENSC, and DCRR are central to the discussion.

#3. EVALUATION ACTIVITIES In order to measure ENSC's performance toward its objectives, to facilitate allocation of DSM costs to rate classes, and to improve and inform program delivery through rapid and reliable feedback, we

AI summary Evaluation activities aim to measure ENSC's performance, allocate DSM costs to rate classes, and enhance program delivery through feedback. The focus is on ensuring effective DSM implementation and cost recovery mechanisms.

#5. RATE RIDER ADJUSTMENTS FILING To facilitate an annual adjustment of the DSM rate rider, we recommend that ENSC file the annual rate rider adjustment following the current process that has been applied by NSPI to date. As is currently t...

AI summary The text recommends that ENSC file annual DSM rate rider adjustments following NSPI's current process, using the previous year's balance adjustment and updated projected costs based on NSPI's revised sales forecasts by rate class.

Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation Cost Allocation Report

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) submitted a cost allocation report, detailing its programs and cost recovery mechanisms, likely in response to regulatory oversight by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB). Key programs include Demand Side Management (DSM) and Business Energy Rebates (BER), with references to regulatory tests like the Total Resource Cost Test (TRC).

1 INTRODUCTION Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation ("ENSC") filed its first Electricity Efficiency and Conservation Plan, known officially as the Demand Side Management Plan for 2012 ("2012 DSM Plan") on February 28, 2011. The 2012 DSM Plan...

AI summary ENSC filed its 2012 DSM Plan, with the UARB confirming the DSM cost allocation approach. The Board ordered ENSC to develop a cost tracking policy and review DSM allocation methods. ENSC retained Elenchus to create a cost allocation model, analyze rate impacts, and prepare preliminary tables for the 2013-2015 DSM Plan.

2 REVIEW OF ENSC'S COST ALLOCATION PROCESSES Elenchus reviewed the financial and regulatory requirements that have determined the approach taken to developing ENSC's cost allocation model. In conducting this review, Elenchus observed that...

AI summary Elenchus reviewed ENSC's cost allocation model, noting differences from typical utilities. ENSC splits program costs between taxpayer and ratepayer funding, requiring a single model despite only ratepayer costs being subject to regulatory scrutiny. Auditors review cost allocations for ENSC's financial statements.

4 COST ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY: OVERVIEW ENSC's cost recovery methodology requires it to recover the actual costs incurred for its programs from the customers that benefit from those programs. This is accomplished through a two-stage alloca...

AI summary ENSC's cost recovery methodology uses a two-stage allocation to recover EDSM program costs from NSPI rate classes. Initial costs are set via a rate rider and adjusted post-implementation using actual data. The CAM is applied after audited financials are available, while preliminary estimates rely on the 2013-2015 DSM Plan's simplified administrative cost model.

5 PRELIMINARY PROGRAM COST ALLOCATION FOR 2013 - 2015 This section contains the Preliminary Cost Allocation and the Preliminary Bill and Rate Impacts for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015.

AI summary This section outlines the preliminary cost allocation and associated bill and rate impacts for 2013–2015, detailing how program costs are distributed and their financial implications on utility rates during this period.

5.1 PRELIMINARY ALLOCATION OF DSM COSTS Tables showing the preliminary allocation of DSM program costs to rate classes are provided in the Attachment 1. To prepare these costs, Elenchus used the 2013-2015 DSM costs provided by ENSC, and in...

AI summary The preliminary allocation of Demand Side Management (DSM) program costs to rate classes is detailed in Attachment 1, using 2013-2015 DSM costs provided by ENSC for reference.

5.2 PRELIMINARY DSM RATE AND BILL IMPACTS Attachment 2 shows the potential impact on the annual DSM rate rider of the 2013-2015 DSM Plan by customer class. Since the 2012 DSM rate includes a true-up (balance adjustment) for 2010, the DSM r...

AI summary The document outlines preliminary impacts of the 2013-2015 DSM Plan on rates and bills, noting variations due to factors like the Cost Allocation Model (CAM), program cost reallocations, and NSPI forecast changes. Attachments 2 and 3 detail rate rider impacts and bill effects by customer class, with caveats about preliminary estimates.

6 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION Elenchus has developed a cost allocation model that consists of two parts: - Part One allocates all cost to programs so that the total costs of ratepayer-funded and taxpayer-funded can be determi...

AI summary Elenchus proposes a two-part cost allocation model (CAM) for ENSC, using UARB-approved methodology for Part One and a 2013 implementation of a revised DSM cost allocation approach for Part Two. Recommendations include allocating 25% of EDSM costs by system benefits and 75% by participating class benefits, with similar principles for Enabling Strategies costs.

Bill Impacts by Rate Class Table Page Table 3.1 Residential (Domestic) Attachment 3-1 Table 3.2 Residential (Domestic, winter time-of-day) Attachment 3-2 Table 3.3 Residential (Domestic, non-winter time-of-day) Attachment 3-3 Table 3.4 Sma...

AI summary The document presents tables detailing the impacts of a bill across various rate classes, including residential, industrial, and municipal. It also includes an allocation of program costs associated with system benefits, with 25% allocated to system benefits and 75% to participant benefits. A table further breaks down the functionalization of system benefit DSM costs, with generation accounting for 100% and demand-related factors accounting for 33.49%.

5 All residential rate classes use the same unit fixed cost estimate TABLE 2 (2013) Preliminary Allocation of 75% of DSM Program Costs associated with benefits realized by participating classes Gen. Repl. / Load Foll. -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ $ - -$...

AI summary The document discusses the allocation of 75% of DSM program costs across different residential rate classes, using a uniform unit fixed cost estimate for all classes. The table outlines preliminary cost allocations for various categories such as Generation Replacement, Wholesale Market Backup, and others.

E-ENSC-R-12 1 COLUMN A B C D E F G H Program Cost Recovery by Benefits System Benefits 25% $ 12,591,593 Combined Class and Participant Benefits 75% $ 37,774,780 Total 100% $ 50,366,374 Functionalization of system Benefit DSM Classification...

AI summary The document outlines the cost recovery for a demand-side management (DSM) program, allocating 25% of the total program cost to system benefits and 75% to combined class and participant benefits. It further details the distribution of demand-related and energy-related costs across different rate classes, with the residential class accounting for the largest share of both types of costs.

E-ENSC-R-12 Date Revised: April 18, 2012 1 15 23 32 Line # Table 3.5: General Demand Bill Impacts 2 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE IMPACT 3 Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % 4 Monthly Service Charge1 5 Demand Rate1 kW 100 $9.276...

AI summary The document presents a table detailing the impacts of changes in demand bill components from 2012 to 2015, including DSM cost recovery, energy rates, and taxes. It shows the evolution of charges and percentages over time, with a focus on the changes in DSM cost recovery and their cumulative impact.

Attachment 3-5 E-ENSC-R-12 1 15 23 24 32 Line # Table 3.6: Large General Bill Impacts 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE IMPACT Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % Monthly Service Charge1 Demand Rate1 kVA 2,500 $11.70200 $29,255.00 2,...

AI summary The document presents a table detailing the changes in large general bill impacts from 2012 to 2015, including metrics like demand rate, energy rates, and DSM cost recovery. It shows the evolution of charges and percentages over time, with specific attention to the DSM cost recovery and its impact on the total bill.

Attachment 3-6 E-ENSC-R-12 1 15 23 32 Line # Table 3.7: Small Industrial Bill Impacts 2 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE IMPACT 3 Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % 4 Monthly Service Charge1 5 Demand Rate1 kVA 8 $6.85400 $52.09 8 $...

AI summary This document presents a table showing the impacts of changes in small industrial electricity bills from 2012 to 2015, highlighting the effect of the DSM Cost Recovery charge and other components such as HST and Provincial Rebate on the total bill.

Attachment 3-8 E-ENSC-R-12 1 15 23 32 Line # Table 3.9: Large Industrial Bill Impacts 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE IMPACT Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % Monthly Service Charge1 Demand Rate1 kVA 2,500 $10.46900 $26,172.50 2,...

AI summary This document provides a table detailing the impacts on large industrial bills from 2012 to 2015, focusing on changes in charges related to the DSM Cost Recovery and other factors. It shows the evolution of charges, rates, and total bills over the years, including percentage changes and cumulative impacts.

Attachment 3-11 E-ENSC-R-12 1 15 23 32 Line # Table 3.12: Unmetered Bill Impacts 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE IMPACT Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % Monthly Service Charge1 Demand Rate1 kW 0.250 $9.33900 $2.33 0 $9.33900 $2....

AI summary This document presents a table showing the changes in unmetered bill impacts from 2012 to 2015, highlighting the impact of the DSM Cost Recovery on the total bill. The DSM Cost Recovery charge increased significantly from 2012 to 2013, resulting in an 813% increase, but decreased slightly in subsequent years.

1 Source: Nova Scotia Power Inc. Tariffs & Regulations Effective January 1, 2012 1 15 23 32 Line # Table 3.13: Bowater Mersey (AE only) Bill Impacts 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE IMPACT Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % Monthly...

AI summary The document provides a detailed breakdown of billing impacts for the Bowater Mersey (AE only) from 2012 to 2015, focusing on changes in charges and rates. The DSM Cost Recovery section shows a cumulative increase of 54.9% over the period, with the total bill increasing by 0.4%.

Attachment 3-13 E-ENSC-R-12 1 15 23 32 Line # Table 3.14: Gen. Repl. / Load Foll. Bill Impacts 2 2012 BILL 2013 BILL CHANGE IMPACT 3 Metric Volume Rate Charge Volume Rate Charge $ % 4 Monthly Service Charge1 5 Demand Rate1 6 Energy Rate 11...

AI summary The document presents a table showing the changes in electricity bills from 2012 to 2015, focusing on the impact of the DSM Cost Recovery charge on the total bill. The DSM Cost Recovery charge increased significantly over the years, leading to a cumulative increase in the total bill by 1.4%.

KEY COMPONENTS

AI summary The document outlines key components and acronyms related to a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding, including energy efficiency programs, utility regulations, and cost recovery mechanisms. It lists organizations, programs, and technical terms involved in energy management and utility oversight.

FORECAST RESULTS The following table presents the expected electricity-related costs, savings and benefits for the first three years of the Green Heating Systems initiative, as included in ENSC's 2013-2015 DSM Plan. The reported numbers in...

AI summary The document outlines forecasted electricity costs, savings, and benefits for the first three years of the Green Heating Systems initiative under ENSC's 2013-2015 DSM Plan. It includes participants from whole-house, simple rebate, and new HVAC-only channels, factoring in net-to-gross adjustments, interactive effects, and cost allocations to Enabling Strategies and non-DSM budgets.

2011 Socket Study

AI summary The 2011 Socket Study examines energy efficiency initiatives in Nova Scotia, focusing on Demand Side Management (DSM) programs, utility regulations, and cost recovery mechanisms. Key entities include Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC), Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI), and the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB). The study addresses program evaluation, cost allocation, and compliance with energy efficiency standards.

Detailed Analysis

AI summary The document heading indicates a regulatory proceeding analysis in Nova Scotia, focusing on energy programs and regulatory frameworks. Key entities include Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC), Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI), and the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB), with acronyms related to demand-side management, cost recovery, and energy efficiency programs.

Reasons to Change

AI summary The document outlines acronyms and entities involved in a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding, including organizations, programs, and technical terms related to energy efficiency, utility regulation, and cost recovery mechanisms. Key entities include Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation, Nova Scotia Power Inc., and various energy programs.

Rebates

AI summary The 'Rebates' section of the Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding document outlines discussions related to rebate programs and their administration. Key entities include Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) and Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI), with topics focusing on program cost recovery, utility rebates, and energy efficiency initiatives. No specific claims or cross-references are detailed in the provided text.

Results to Date

AI summary The 'Results to Date' section is under development, with a comprehensive list of acronyms and entities involved in Nova Scotia's regulatory proceedings. Key organizations, programs, and technical terms are defined, but substantive analysis or outcomes are not detailed in the provided text.

4b. If the entire province of Nova Scotia and its population were to disappear today, the effect on the global environment and energy concerns would be an insignificantly small percentage. We have a worldwide exploding population of over s...

AI summary The text argues that Nova Scotia's environmental and energy impact is negligible globally, criticizing overreactions to climate change and funding for ENSC. It claims Nova Scotia's population is insignificant compared to global totals and that conservation efforts should focus on practical savings rather than funding ENSC, described as a poorly spent make-work group.

Conclusions: - It is necessary that the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board act in the best interest of all Nova Scotians . - Cost of Efficiency Nova Scotia Corp does not justify the return. The funding for various energy programs is much...

AI summary The text criticizes Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) for not justifying its costs, advocating for stakeholder input, and questioning its non-profit status. It disputes ENSC's survey validity, highlights concerns about increased electricity bills, and references Ontario's Auditor General findings. Solar energy's feasibility in Nova Scotia is also challenged.

(10) Low Income Program The Low Income Program serves low-income homeowner households with two categories of energy efficiency measures. Scope 1 measures concern the building envelope. Scope 2 measures are everything else including the usu...

AI summary The Low Income Program (LI) provides energy efficiency measures for low-income homeowners in Nova Scotia, divided into Scope 1 (building envelope) and Scope 2 (other measures, including appliances and water heating). Funding combines electricity and provincial sources. Efficiency Nova Scotia manages the program, collaborating with multiple departments. Evaluation recommendations include verifying prescriptive measure installations and reviewing HOT2000 models for accuracy.

Gen. Repl. / Load Foll. 1P-RTP Wholesale Market Backup / Top-up 1 Date Filed: March 30, 2012 ENSC Avon IR-3 Page 8 of 8 2 \ Applies 2012 cost allocation forecast to estimated participation rates for 2012. This is a proxy based on available...

AI summary This document discusses the application of a 2012 cost allocation forecast to estimated participation rates for 2012, noting that these rates may not accurately reflect actual spending by customer rate class.

DSM Technical Tables Residential Table # Measure Name Peak Demand First Tear Energy I Otal Avoided Cost TRC rotarnet Resource Peak Demand Energy I Otal Avoided Cost TRC rotarnet Resource Peak Demand First fear Energy ι οται Avoided Cost TR...

AI summary The DSM Technical Tables present data on demand-side management measures, including savings, energy usage, costs, and benefits for various residential energy efficiency programs. The tables compare different years and metrics such as total avoided cost and TRC (Total Resource Cost) ratios.

20 1 The funding for the national market study on fenestration is shared with the Nova Scotia 19 enabling strategies will be able to be more accurately assigned reflecting a truer cost 20 of service? 21 22 e) Does ENSC agree that the DSM t...

AI summary The text discusses cost allocations for Enabling Strategies under the 2012 DSM Plan, including revisions to amounts allocated to the Large Industrial and Residential classes. It also references a true-up lag and a response confirming the shared funding for a national market study on fenestration.

Source: 2010 DSM Cost Recovery Rider Filed October 1, 2009 Source: 2012 DSM Cost Recovery Rider Filed October 21, 2011 19 3 Source: 2011 DSM Plan Preliminary Cost Allocation Tables Filed February 26, 2010 20 4 Source: Rate Code Allocation...

AI summary The document references multiple filings related to DSM cost recovery riders and preliminary cost allocation tables, indicating ongoing regulatory discussions on cost recovery mechanisms and program planning in Nova Scotia.

8 a) In the event there are no customers receiving service under the ELI rate, how will 9 the unrecovered DSM revenues be treated? 10 11 Response IR-27: 12 13 In the original filing, ENSC allocated program costs to ELI-2P-RTP as shown abov...

AI summary The response addresses how unrecovered DSM revenues will be treated if no customers are under the ELI rate. ENSC updated its cost allocation after being advised by NSPI that former ELI-2P-RTP customers will be under a new rate class exempt from the DSM rate rider, and costs are now allocated to other customer classes.

Date Revised: April 18, 2012 1 Request IR-7: 2 3 Reference: Figure 4.1 ENSC Evidence, p. 18 states that "an avoided cost of $135/MWh was 4 provided by NSPI in February 2012 and includes the combined cost of energy and 5 capacity." (Also no...

AI summary The document contains a request (IR-7) asking for details on the avoided cost of $135/MWh provided by NSPI, including its components, time frame, and reasoning for identical costs across 2013-2015. The response refers to Synapse reports for supporting calculations and explains that the cost is levelized over 2012-2032, with factors like load and fuel cost considered.

- 2 Repository. 1 Request IR-10: 12  Reduction of costs to reflect the fact that DSM is considered less risky than 13 building generation capacity. 14 15  Lower discount rates for Net Present Value estimates. 16 17  Inclusion of partici...

AI summary The text discusses requests for adjusting cost calculations related to demand-side management (DSM), including lower discount rates, inclusion of non-energy benefits, and attributing future energy savings to residential programs. It also requests revised tables using specific avoided costs.

24 1 The funding for the national market study on fenestration is shared with the Nova Scotia 19 enabling strategies will be able to be more accurately assigned reflecting a truer cost 20 of service? 21 22 e) Does ENSC agree that the DSM t...

AI summary The text discusses the funding for a national market study on fenestration shared with Nova Scotia and revisions to the preliminary cost allocation for Enabling Strategies under the DSM Plan. It outlines changes in allocation amounts for different customer classes and references supporting documents.

Source: 2010 DSM Cost Recovery Rider Filed October 1, 2009 Source: 2012 DSM Cost Recovery Rider Filed October 21, 2011 19 3 Source: 2011 DSM Plan Preliminary Cost Allocation Tables Filed February 26, 2010 20 4 Source: Rate Code Allocation...

AI summary The text references various filings related to DSM cost recovery riders and preliminary cost allocation tables, indicating ongoing regulatory processes related to cost recovery mechanisms in Nova Scotia.

Response IR-27: In the original filing, ENSC allocated program costs to ELI-2P-RTP as shown above. - ENSC has subsequently been advised by NSPI that the former ELI-2P-RTP customer will be - receiving the new Load Retention Rate in 2013 and...

AI summary ENSC adjusted its cost allocation for the ELI-2P-RTP customer class after being advised by NSPI that this class would be receiving the Load Retention Rate in 2013 and 2014, which is exempt from the DSM rate rider. ENSC's updated allocation excludes this class from 2015 costs, ensuring full recovery of costs through other customer classes.

Date Filed: March 30, 2012 ENSC CA IR-21 Page 1 of 1 1 Request IR-22: 2 3 Please provide as detailed and realistic as possible an example of the allocation of costs 4 between taxpayer and ratepayer components, based on the proposed budget...

AI summary The document requests detailed examples of cost allocation between taxpayer and ratepayer components based on the 2013 budget or anticipated program activity. It provides three examples, including direct program costs, administrative overhead, and general program administration.

3 4 ENSC's financial statement audit is a cost that is not "caused" by the number of staff or 5 space, but by the overall business activity. In accordance with the Cost Allocation 6 Methodology, this cost is allocated to ratepayer and taxp...

AI summary ENSC's financial statement audit cost is allocated to ratepayer and taxpayer programs based on their direct program costs. In 2011, ratepayer costs were $31.7 million and taxpayer costs were $5.3 million. For 2013, the $23,000 audit cost was allocated $19,700 to ratepayers and $3,300 to taxpayers.

Date Filed: March 30, 2012 ENSC CA IR-23 Page 1 of 1 1 Request IR-23: 2 3 Please provide all available information on the planned allocation of the costs of enabling 4 strategies. 5 6 Response IR-23: 7 8 Please refer to Avon IR-14. 1 Reque...

AI summary The document contains requests and responses related to the allocation of enabling strategies costs, attachments to Appendix C, and the updating of the 3 CP kW Demand allocator and MWh Energy Requirement. ENSC refers to previous responses and indicates it will collaborate with NSPI to ensure accurate cost allocator information.

Date Filed: March 30, 2012 ENSC CA IR-23 Page 1 of 1 1 Request IR-23: 2 3 Please provide all available information on the planned allocation of the costs of enabling 4 strategies. 5 6 Response IR-23: 7 8 Please refer to Avon IR-14. 1 Reque...

AI summary The document contains a series of requests and responses related to cost allocation, rate riders, and bill impact tables. It references prior filings (Avon IR-14, Avon IR-22) and outlines the need for updated information on cost-recovery mechanisms and energy requirements.

upgrades, in the Low Income program. 1 Request IR-2: 31 ENSC Measure Incentive = $1.02/unit 32 33 Net Present Value (NPV) of Energy Avoided Costs for Measure Life of 7 years = 34 $0.555/kWh 35 1 NPV of Demand Avoided Costs for Measure Life...

AI summary The document discusses the calculation of the Net Present Value (NPV) of energy and demand avoided costs for a low-income program upgrade, including technology and administrative costs, and the calculation of the Total Resource Cost (TRC). It also mentions the inclusion of confidential data in the analysis.

Figure 4.4 2015 Lifetime Benefits ($ million) a TRC Lifetime Costs ($ million) b TRC Lifetime Net Benefits ($ million) c Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) d RESIDENTIAL DSM PRO GRAMS Efficient Product Rebates e 10.9 7.0 3.9 1.6 Existing Resid...

AI summary Figure 4.4 presents a table summarizing the lifetime benefits, costs, and net benefits of various demand-side management (DSM) programs in Nova Scotia, including residential, business, and enabling strategies. The table highlights the Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) for each program category.

Figure 4.3 2014 Lifetime Benefits ($ millions) a TRC Lifetime Costs ($ millions) b TRC Lifetime Net Benefits ($ millions) c Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) d RESIDENTIAL DSM PROGR RAMS Efficient Product Rebates e 10.0 5.3 4.7 1.9 Existing R...

AI summary Figure 4.3 presents a summary of the lifetime benefits, costs, and net benefits of various demand-side management (DSM) programs in Nova Scotia, including residential and business initiatives. The table highlights the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test results for each program category.

Figure 4.4 2015 Lifetime Benefits ($ millions) a TRC Lifetime Costs ($ millions) b TRC Lifetime Net Benefits ($ millions) c Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) d RESIDENTIAL DSM PROG RAMS Efficient Product Rebates e 13.0 7.2 5.8 1.8 Existing Re...

AI summary Figure 4.4 presents a summary of the lifetime benefits and costs of various demand-side management (DSM) programs in Nova Scotia. The table highlights the TRC Lifetime Costs and Net Benefits for different residential and business programs, with the overall TRC Test result indicating a positive outcome of 1.7.

5 Scope of Changes Required to ENSC's Evidence Navigant is aware that, given the above stated error, the following IRs filed by ENSC with input from Navigant were incorrect. • Avon IR-3a DSM Technical Tables • Avon IR-3b/Synapse IR-9 Custo...

AI summary Navigant identified errors in multiple Information Requests (IRs) submitted by ENSC, including understated investment figures. Corrected versions of these IRs are being provided, along with revisions to evidence and Appendix A. Navigant will support ENSC in updating other evidence elements, particularly sector-specific investment changes affecting cost allocation.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-32: 2 3 Reference: ENSC (Synapse) IR-14b Confidential Attachment 2 4 5 Show how the avoided unit capacity costs and avoided unit energy costs were calculated. 6 7 Response IR-32: 8 9 Please refer to Avon IR-31...

AI summary A regulatory proceeding request (IR-32) asks for clarification on calculating avoided unit capacity and energy costs, referencing ENSC (Synapse) IR-14b. The response directs to Avon IR-31a for details. The document highlights procedural references and cost methodology inquiries.

he equation for TRC costs, which included at that time a "participant cost" (PCt) term, 3 and then "suggest[s] 1 D.06-06-063, mimeo ., p. 67. 2 D.92-12-050, 47 CPUC 2d, p. 73. 3 Standard Practice Manual: Economic Analysis of Demand-Side Ma...

AI summary The 2007 SPM Clarification Memo discusses the evolution of TRC cost equations, clarifying that the NTG ratio applies to participants' out-of-pocket costs and rebate incentives but excludes administrative costs. It contrasts rebate programs (removing revenue requirements for free riders) with direct install programs (including incentives in costs). Key references include the 1987 SPM and prior memos.

Source (Actuals): 2012 DSM Cost Recovery Rider filed Oct. 21, 2011 Budget/ 2011 Actual Existing Homes New Homes Efficient Products Low Income Prescriptive Rebates Custom (incl. New Construction) Small Business Direct Install Education & Ou...

AI summary The document presents a 2012 DSM Cost Recovery Rider with detailed budget and actual cost data across various program categories, including existing homes, new homes, efficient products, low-income initiatives, and education and outreach. It outlines expenditures for different entities and programs.

Technology cost (Cell Block: G40:AG500 in Cost-Benefits Res; G40:AG800 in Cost-Benefits C&I): The multiplication by Net to Gross that existed in the calculation was taken out. This is because the technology cost was already being applied t...

AI summary The calculation removed the Net to Gross (NTG) multiplication to avoid double application, as technology costs were already applied to net savings numbers. This adjustment ensures accurate cost-benefit analysis in the specified cell blocks.

The test changed from: (net avoided costs)/((net technology cost)+(net admin costs)+(incentives paid to free riders)) To: (net avoided costs)/((net technology cost)+(net admin costs)) All previous EERAM tools had used the later formula. Ho...

AI summary The formula for TRC calculation in EERAM tools was revised, removing incentives paid to free riders from the denominator. This change was reverted by ENSC to align with previous year's calculations, following a decision by the California PUC and CPUC to include these incentives in TRC costs. The adjustment ensures consistency with past methods, though the new approach was initially adopted by the California PUC.

Cost allocation methodology The Corporation follows a cost allocation methodology ("CAM") to reallocate expenses not directly related to a fund, see Note 17.

AI summary The Corporation uses a cost allocation methodology (CAM) to reallocate expenses not directly tied to a fund, as outlined in Note 17.

6. START-UP REVENUE In June 2010, the UARB approved an allocation of the Electricity Annual Assessment for 2010 to be transferred from NSPI to the Corporation for estimated start-up costs that would be incurred over the following 18 months.

AI summary In June 2010, the UARB approved transferring the Electricity Annual Assessment from NSPI to the Corporation to cover estimated start-up costs over 18 months. This allocation aimed to fund initial expenses related to the Corporation's operations during its early phase.

7. PROGRAM COSTS Program costs were part of the Plan approved by the UARB and included, but were not limited to, the direct costs of the programs including incentives paid to customers, costs of service delivery paid to implementation part...

AI summary Program costs under the UARB-approved Plan include direct costs (incentives, service delivery, salaries) and support costs (consulting, evaluation, DSM Database System licensing). 2011 costs were tracked differently due to CAM restructuring, with future consistency expected.

On August 4, 2009, the UARB approved a DSM Cost Recovery Rider mechanism for NSPI for 2010 and beyond that includes a DSM Balance Adjustment ("DSM BA"). The DSM BA is a true-up component that includes the ability for the Corporation, as Ad...

AI summary The UARB approved a DSM Cost Recovery Rider mechanism for NSPI in 2009, which includes a DSM Balance Adjustment for true-up purposes. This adjustment allows the Corporation to recover or refund cost differences between actual and approved costs, subject to UARB approval, with any recovery or refund occurring after January 2013.

16. RISK MANAGEMENT (Continued)

AI summary The document section continues the discussion on risk management within a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding, involving entities such as NSPI, UARB, and CRA. Key topics include cost allocation methodologies and tax considerations, though specific arguments or cited matters are not detailed in the provided text.

10 ARE THERE ASPECTS OF ENSC'S PROPOSAL ON WHICH YOU WISH TO

AI summary The document text is a heading from a regulatory proceeding in Nova Scotia, asking if there are aspects of ENSC's proposal requiring further comment. Key entities include ENSC, NSPI, and related programs like DSM and DCCR.

WERE THE AVOIDED COSTS CALCULATED BY NSPI USING THE SAME

AI summary The document raises a question about whether Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) used the same methodology to calculate avoided costs, likely in the context of regulatory proceedings involving demand-side management programs and cost recovery mechanisms.

These are summarized on page 13 (pdfpage 16) ofENSC's Direct Evidence 23 30). 1 to 5 IS PROPOSING TO OF COST RECOVERY 7 move to a IS 1 13 PLEASE DISCUSS THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE COST ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY. 15 16 cost nl.r nT"~_ is a tw...

AI summary The text discusses a proposal to change the cost recovery methodology, particularly focusing on the allocation of DSM costs to customers. It references a Board letter dated December 2011 and appears to be part of a regulatory proceeding involving Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC).

each 8 o 11 DO YOU SUPPORT 1 I 15 16 17 18 to accrue to 19 21 PROPOSING THAT IT FOR THE ENSC IS TAKE RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION OF THE DCRR. DO YOU SUPPORT THIS ANNUAL CHANGE? I IR-14 discusses allocation ofthese costs between Residentia...

AI summary The text discusses the allocation of costs between Residential and BNI customers, referencing IR-14 and additional details in IR-35 and IR-36. It touches on the determination of the Annual DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) and the responsibility of ENSC in this process.

1 I. Identification - 2 Q: Mr. Chernick, please state your name, occupation, and business address. - 3 A: I am Paul L. Chernick. I am the president of Resource Insight, Inc., 5 Water St, - 4 Arlington, Massachusetts. - 5 Q: Summarize your...

AI summary Paul L. Chernick, president of Resource Insight, Inc., provides his educational background and professional experience in utility regulation, including roles as a Massachusetts Attorney General utility analyst and consultant. He has expertise in utility rate design, cost recovery, load forecasting, and environmental externality valuation, with clients spanning energy and utility sectors.

10 Q: Have you testified previously regarding cost allocation issues? - 11 A: Yes. I have testified in at least two dozen proceedings on utility allocation of - 12 costs among rate classes, as listed in my resume.

AI summary The witness has testified in over two dozen proceedings regarding utility cost allocation among rate classes, as detailed in their resume.

9 The comparable figure in the 2012 GRA was 86% energy-related. Accord-10 ing to ENSC, it wished to exclude from the allocation "deferred costs and working 11 capital" (ENSC CA IR-34). Exhibit 5 of the GRA filing does not identify working...

AI summary The text discusses the allocation of deferred costs and working capital in the context of energy-related costs. It references ENSC's exclusion of these items and analyzes the impact on the energy-allocated portion of generation costs. Additionally, it addresses the complexity of allocating distribution costs based on different classes' usage and program participation.

5 Q: Is there an alternative approach to allocating the portion of costs in propor- 6 tion to system benefits, other than using the energy/demand allocation in 7 the COSS? 8 A: Yes. An alternative approach would be to allocate the system-b...

AI summary The text confirms an alternative approach to allocating costs based on anticipated benefits of the DSM portfolio rather than the COSS energy/demand allocation. It references public data from ENSC and NSPI, noting 87% of avoided costs stem from energy benefits. The analysis questions NSPI's assumption that new plant costs are entirely due to demand.

1 Q: What is your recommendation regarding the allocation of the 25% of costs

AI summary The text presents a question regarding the allocation of 25% of costs, though no specific recommendation or discussion is provided in the given text. Contextual acronyms (NSUARB, NSPI, ENSC) and potential regulatory themes are noted but not elaborated.

2 that are allocated on system benefits - 3 A: The system-benefits portion of costs should be allocated 83%–87% on energy, - 4 rather than the 66.51% used in the ENSC filing. While I believe that the avoided- - 5 cost methodology (implying...

AI summary The text argues that the system-benefits portion of costs should be allocated 83%–87% on energy instead of the 66.51% used by ENSC, advocating for the avoided-cost methodology. However, it acknowledges the Board might use the embedded-cost approach's 83% allocation.

9 Q: How has ENSC proposed to allocate the costs of what it calls "Enabling

AI summary The document asks how ENSC proposes to allocate costs related to 'Enabling' initiatives, though the specific allocation method is not detailed in the provided text. ENSC is involved in regulatory proceedings concerning cost allocation strategies.

18 Q: How were these costs allocated in the 2011 and 2012 DSM plans? - 19 A: The costs of these activities were previously allocated on customer number, 20 which is not appropriate. Customer number does not drive the cost of any of the 21...

AI summary The 2011 and 2012 DSM plans allocated costs based on customer number, which is criticized as inappropriate since customer count does not correlate with activity costs. The respondent recommends the NSUARB adopt ENSC's proposal for Enabling Strategies allocation.

SUMMARY OF PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 1986– Present President, Resource Insight, Inc. Consults and testifies in utility and insurance economics. Reviews utility supply-planning processes and outcomes: assesses prudence of prior power planning...

AI summary The individual has extensive experience in utility and insurance economics, including reviewing utility supply planning, rate design, conservation programs, and advising regulatory commissions. They have worked as President of Resource Insight, Inc., Research Associate at Analysis and Inference, Inc., and Utility Rate Analyst for the Massachusetts Attorney General, focusing on topics like demand forecasting, cost allocation, and energy conservation.

PRESENTATIONS - "Adding Transmission into New York City: Needs, Benefits, and Obstacles." Presentation to FERC and the New York ISO on behalf of the City of New York. October 2004. - "Plugging Into a Municipal Light Plant," With Peter Enri...

AI summary The document lists presentations on energy-related topics including DSM, utility planning, cost recovery, and transmission infrastructure. Presentations were delivered by various individuals and organizations between 1993 and 2004, focusing on regulatory, economic, and environmental aspects of energy management.

ADVISORY ASSIGNMENTS TO REGULATORY COMMISSIONS District of Columbia Public Service Commission, Docket No. 834, Phase II; Least-cost planning procedures and goals; August 1987 to March 1988. Connecticut Department of Public Utility Control,...

AI summary Two regulatory proceedings from the District of Columbia and Connecticut address least-cost planning procedures and rate design with cost allocations, spanning 1987 to 1989. The District of Columbia case (Docket 834) focuses on planning goals, while Connecticut's (Docket 87-07-01) examines rate design and cost allocation methods.

n MP system; historical, current, and projected. Review of MP planning prudence prior to and during excess; efforts to sell capacity. Cost of excess capacity. Recommendations for ratemaking treatment. 63. Massachusetts Division of Insuranc...

AI summary The document outlines regulatory proceedings involving rate-making, risk assessment, and insurance rate calculations. Cases include analysis of underwriting profit margins, cost recovery for conservation programs, and comparisons of risks from power contracts. Topics span Massachusetts insurance regulations, utility pricing, and impacts of the 1986 Tax Reform Act on profit calculations.

Q. How has ENSC complied with the Board's order regarding the 2012 DSM Plan? A. In response to the Board's Order, ENSC retained Elenchus Research Associates (Elenchus) to conduct an analysis of the projected rate and bill impacts of ENSC's...

AI summary ENSC complied with the Board's order by engaging Elenchus Research Associates to analyze rate and bill impacts of its 2013-2015 DSM Plan and develop a cost allocation model to distinguish taxpayer-funded and ratepayer-funded program costs.

ysis, Docket No. 99-328, February 1, 2000. Market Distortions Associated With Inconsistent Air Quality Regulations , prepared for the Project for a Sustainable FERC Energy Policy, November 18, 1999. Measures to Ensure Fair Competition and...

AI summary The document lists multiple reports addressing electricity market regulation, environmental policies, and competition. Topics include market distortions, fair competition, and environmental compliance. Reports were prepared for various regulatory bodies and organizations, including FERC, the Maine Public Utilities Commission, and the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. Key issues involve stranded costs, performance-based regulation, and ozone transport impacts.

Table 9 Measures with Negative Net Benefits Program Measure TRC Costs (000) TRC Net Benefit ($000) TRC Ratio Residential–existing houses Solar Hot Water Heater, replacing electric water heater (Table 2.1) $1,633 -$893 0.5 Residential–Low I...

AI summary Table 9 identifies measures with negative net benefits, including solar hot water heaters and retrofit envelope measures for low-income residential programs. The table highlights TRC costs, net benefits, and ratios. The question focuses on the impact of lower avoided costs on TRC benefit/cost ratios.

1 Allocation of DSM Costs 2 Allocation of Program Costs 3 Q DO YOU SUPPORT THE ALLOCATION OF PROGRAM COSTS USED BY ENSC? A Yes. 75% of these costs are directly assigned to the classes receiving the program4 dollars; the other 25% is alloca...

AI summary The document discusses the allocation of Demand Side Management (DSM) program costs by ENSC. 75% of costs are directly assigned to classes receiving the program, while 25% are allocated across all classes (excluding load retention customers) based on generation investment. This 75/25 split was agreed upon by all parties and deemed reasonable as it prevents any class from being disadvantaged by DSM. Elenchus Research Associates recommended continuing this method after stakeholder consultations.

11 Allocation of Enabling Strategies Costs method. We agree.10

AI summary The text references agreement on a method for allocating enabling strategies costs, though specific details are not provided in the excerpt. The context involves regulatory proceedings related to cost allocation mechanisms.

12 Q HOW HAS ENSC PROPOSED TO ALLOCATE THE COST OF ENABLING STRATEGIES? - A Heretofore, these costs have been allocated on the basis of the number of customers.13 - Elenchus has recommended that they be allocated in a fashion similar to pr...

AI summary ENSC has proposed allocating enabling strategy costs similarly to program costs, as recommended by Elenchus. The response agrees, advocating for true-up mechanisms and documentation of effectiveness. Previously, costs were allocated based on customer numbers.

Q. What does COHA say about supply? A. The installation of a heating system is a capital expense which should have a useful life of 20-25 years, therefore the availability of supply needs to be weighted heavily in such a decision. Again, D...

AI summary COHA-NS argues that heating systems' 20-25 year lifespan necessitates long-term supply stability. It critiques Dunsky's analysis for omitting Nova Scotia's finite natural gas reserves (10-year lifespan) and high transmission costs, which could make heating oil more viable despite higher prices. The response highlights gaps in supply cost analysis and resource longevity considerations.

2013-2015 DSM Plan (Appendix A) 1. The Parties agree with the proposed investments and Programs planned for 2013 and 2014 in the DSM Plan as filed, preserving all rights respecting future positions which may be taken respecting DSM plannin...

AI summary Parties agree with the proposed 2013-2015 DSM Plan investments and programs for 2013-2014 but retain rights to challenge future aspects of DSM planning, cost allocation, forecasting, investment levels, and program measures.

Amended Cost Allocation (Appendix C) - 4. The proposed cost allocation as developed in consultation with Stakeholders and outlined in Appendix "C" of the Application should be approved whereby: - a. Part 1 allocates all costs to programs s...

AI summary The proposed cost allocation, developed with stakeholders, is to be approved. Part 1 separates ratepayer and taxpayer costs, while Part 2 allocates DSM program costs (EDSM) to NSPI customer classes using 25% system benefits and 75% participant benefits. Enabling Strategy costs follow a similar approach with true-up adjustments.

ENSC Responsibility for DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) - 9. The Parties support the transition of responsibility for filing the annual DCRR from NSPI to ENSC as outlined in the Application. - 10. ENSC acknowledges the concern raised by Sta...

AI summary Parties support transitioning DCRR filing responsibility from NSPI to ENSC as per the Application. ENSC agrees to collaborate with Stakeholders and UARB to include review periods in the DCRR schedule before UARB decisions.

Opening Statement of Consumer Advocate DSM Plan 2013-2015 (M04819) Residential ratepayers are experiencing continued upward pressure on electricity rates. Reducing energy use is the only controllable means a residential ratepayer has to lo...

AI summary The Consumer Advocate highlights rising residential electricity rates and advocates for improvements to Efficiency Nova Scotia's DSM Plan 2013-2015, including enhanced oversight, program effectiveness, transparency, and fair cost allocation. The proposed settlement aims to approve a two-year plan with ratepayer protections and stakeholder input.

Amended Cost Allocation (Appendix C) - 4. The proposed cost allocation as developed in consultation with Stakeholders and outlined in Appendix ofthe Application should be approved whereby: - a. Part 1 allocates all costs to programs so tha...

AI summary The proposed cost allocation, developed with stakeholder input, is recommended for approval. Part 1 separates ratepayer and taxpayer-funded costs, while Part 2 allocates demand-side management (DSM) program costs to NSPI customer classes for rate rider calculations.

ENSC Responsibility for DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) - 9. to - concern comment on some

AI summary The document discusses ENSC's responsibility regarding the DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR), with involvement from various stakeholders including the Consumer Advocate, Small Business Advocate, and Nova Scotia Power Inc. Key entities and acronyms are outlined, though specific arguments or cross-references are not detailed in the provided text.

PRELIMINARY ISSUES LIST The following issues will be dealt with in the public hearing on Efficiency Nova Scotia's ("ENS") Application for approval of its electricity Demand Side Management (HDSM") Plan for 2013-15: - 1. Proposed 2013-15 DS...

AI summary The document outlines preliminary issues for a public hearing on Efficiency Nova Scotia's (ENS) 2013-15 Demand Side Management (DSM) Plan. Key topics include the DSM Plan's appendices, cost allocation methods, evaluation of past programs, CFL disposal, financing strategies, savings evaluation baselines, cost recovery riders, and the structure of a new DSM Advisory Group.

FINAL ISSUES LIST The following issues will be dealt with in the public hearing on Efficiency Nova Scotia's ("ENS") Application for approval of its electricity Demand Side Management ("DSM") Plan for 2013-15: - 1. Proposed 2013-15 DSM Plan...

AI summary The document outlines 11 issues for public hearing regarding Efficiency Nova Scotia's (ENS) 2013-15 Demand Side Management (DSM) Plan. Key topics include cost allocation, evaluation of past programs, avoided cost values, CFL disposal, financing strategies, and the structure of a new DSM Advisory Group.

1 Request IR-19: 2 Is ENSC planning to include evaluation of Enabling Strategies in future third part program 3 evaluations and, if not, why not? 4 5 Request IR-20: 6 7 Please provide an update on the implementation Econoler's recommendati...

AI summary The document contains a series of requests directed at ENSC regarding the evaluation of Enabling Strategies, implementation of Econoler's recommendations, cost-allocation methods, and the allocation of costs for enabling strategies, as well as requests for detailed financial information and attachments.

2 Please explain exactly how ENSC proposes to update the 3 CP kW Demand allocator and the MWh 3 Energy Requirement in Attachment 1-1 of Appendix C in actual cost-recovery filings. 4 a. What sales values would be used in the adjustment in n...

AI summary The text presents a request for clarification on how ENSC proposes to update the 3 CP kW Demand allocator and the MWh requirement, and questions regarding the allocation of costs based on system benefits and the impact of energy-efficiency programs on billing tables.

22 Request IR-24 - (a) Does ENSC have a "program manager" (or similarly otherwise titled individual)23 - responsible to liaise with each Large Industrial customer with respect to its DSM24 - programs?25 - (b) What, if any, surveys were don...

AI summary The document contains questions directed to ENSC regarding DSM program management, including the existence of a program manager for Large Industrial customers, survey practices for 2013-2015 DSM planning, tracking of BNI program measures by customer class, cost allocation methodologies, and requests for variance analysis of DSM expenditures from 2010-2012. ENSC is also asked about the value of customer engagement in DSM planning.

Re: NSUARB-E-ENSC-R-12 – Request for Hearing Adjournment Upon filing its Responses to Information Requests (RIRs) on Friday March 30, 2012, ENSC found what appeared to be a limited formula error in Navigant Consulting's Energy Efficiency R...

AI summary ENSC discovered errors in Navigant Consulting's RAM Tool, initially limited but later found to have broader impacts on program budgets, cost allocations, and test results. Navigant confirmed a duplication error in the NTG factor, requiring revisions to ENSC's evidence. ENSC seeks adjournment to address these issues with Navigant and Elenchus Research Associates.

1 The following index identifies revisions to ENSC's Evidence filed on April 18, 2012. Document: Revision: Main Evidence Pages 18-21, Figures 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 (2013-2015 Savings and Investment tables) Page 24, Figure 4.8 (Cumulative S...

AI summary This document outlines revisions to ENSC's evidence filed on April 18, 2012, including updates to savings and investment tables, cost allocation reports, and various attachments related to DSM plans and rate impacts.

21 Request IR-31 - Reference: ENSC (Synapse) IR-14a, Confidential Attachment 1 2012 Annual Avoided22 - Costs of DSM.23 - (a) The attachment shows total avoided costs With DSM and No DSM. Please24 - separate the totals between capacity cost...

AI summary The document outlines multiple requests (IR-31 to IR-35) directed to Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation (ENSC) regarding avoided costs, generation output, capacity calculations, reserve margin updates, and cost allocation methodologies. Requests include separating capacity/energy costs, providing unit-specific generation data, explaining reserve margin discrepancies, and clarifying cost allocation bases.

1 Request IR-36 Reference: ENSC (Avon) IR-14(d), lines 13-152 Please describe qualitatively and quantitatively by what objective measure as expenditures3 occur, "ENSC will 'consider' the affected rate classes and directly assign costs"?4 5...

AI summary The text contains several regulatory requests related to cost allocation, renewable energy procurement, and capacity planning. It asks for explanations on how costs are assigned to rate classes, whether resource plans include proposed renewable energy procurements, and details on capacity additions, solicitations, and cost calculations.

Amended Cost Allocation (Appendix C) - 4. The proposed cost allocation as developed in consultation with Stakeholders and outlined in Appendix ofthe Application should be approved whereby: - a. Part 1 allocates all costs to programs so tha...

AI summary The proposed cost allocation, developed in consultation with stakeholders, includes Part 1 allocating all costs to programs for determining total ratepayer- and taxpayer-funded activities, and Part 2 allocating ratepayer-funded DSM program costs (EDSM) to NSPI customer classes for preliminary and final rate riders.

ENSC Responsibility for DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) - 9. to - concern comment on some

AI summary The document addresses ENSC's responsibility for the DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) in a regulatory proceeding. The provided text is incomplete, containing only partial bullet points and no detailed arguments or positions.

6.4 Amended Cost Allocation Methodology ENSC has developed its methodology for allocating Enabling Strategies costs and tracking the participant benefit costs to be allocated to participating classes. It may not be possible to allocate exp...

AI summary ENSC outlines its methodology for allocating Enabling Strategies costs, noting exceptions like the Green Schools program, which benefits both Residential and BNI sectors. It emphasizes the need for accurate, up-to-date data sources for future DCRR filings and internal consistency.

6.5 2014 Preliminary Cost Allocation An updated 2014 preliminary cost allocation, which incorporates 2012 expenditures, is provided as Appendix A.

AI summary An updated 2014 preliminary cost allocation incorporating 2012 expenditures is provided in Appendix A of the document, reflecting adjustments to prior cost distribution estimates.

INTRODUCTION 4 Efficiency Nova Scotia is committed to using the most accurate system of accounting for costs - 5 and benefits of achieving its energy savings. To this end, ENSC will use a dual baseline practice - 6 for calculating its ener...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENSC) employs a dual baseline approach to calculate energy savings and costs for program planning. This method distinguishes between enhanced savings during the remaining useful life (RUL) of replaced equipment and regular savings afterward, while also comparing full costs of energy-efficient and baseline equipment over time.

nication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone, andreturn theoriginalmessage to usat theaboveaddress viamail. Thank you. In reviewing this anomaly, members of th...

AI summary Concerns were raised about potential rate-shock from filing the DCRR 'as is', leading the DSM Advisory Group and ENSC to collaborate on solutions. A September 20, 2013 meeting identified ways to address immediate and long-term issues, with stakeholders seeking an extension to finalize adjustments before the planned October 1, 2013 DCRR filing.