N-1Annual Report
13 passages
On March 31, 2025, the NSPSO submitted its first Annual Interconnection Process Proceeding Report (M12174) to the NSEB. The report provided a summary of its compliance status regarding Synapse's recommendations and the additional Board dir...
AI summary The NSPSO submitted an Annual Interconnection Process Proceeding Report (M12174) to the NSEB, addressing compliance with Synapse's recommendations and Board directives from M10905. The Board combined M10905 and M12174 for concurrent consideration, directed a stakeholder conference after public comments, and received feedback from Synapse, SBA, Natural Forces, and ESC. NS Power responded to comments, and the NSEB issued a decision in M10905/M12174.
Figure 3: Synapse Recommendation Re: Cost Refund Regulation Synapse Recommendation / Board Decision Directive Synapse Sub-Recommendations Synapse Recommendation: Support Development of Additional Distribution Network Upgrade Cost Refund Re...
AI summary Synapse recommends developing a cost-sharing regulation for distribution network upgrade costs, refunding portions to 'first moving' DER parties. The NSUARB directive supports this recommendation for additional distribution network upgrade cost refund regulation.
- detail as described in the final report: • Define two categories of Class 2 projects (small and large) for the purpose of cost allocation for distribution network upgrade costs. All direct interconnection costs remain the responsibility...
AI summary The text recommends splitting distribution network upgrade costs between interconnection customers (ICs) and Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) using a 50/50 model. It suggests defining Class 2 projects and establishing a proportional contribution from smaller projects to fund upgrades, while NSPI covers the remaining costs through rate-based investments. The approach should be reviewed periodically to assess its impact on small-scale renewable energy development.
nificant network upgrades. This proposal represents a simplified approach to cost allocation that is relatively simple to administer and aligns with the intent of Synapse's recommendation, as follows: • In the absence of another mutually a...
AI summary The document outlines a proposal for cost allocation of network upgrades, including a 50% refund mechanism for distribution upgrades with interest based on WACC, and references Synapse's recommendation to include a portion of distribution upgrade costs in the rate base. It also mentions a reference to a board review and a specific page in a final report.
In its comments of June 16, 2025, Synapse primarily focused on the straw proposal for refunds of - distribution network upgrades and recommended modifications to the straw proposal. Synapse - stated: While NS Power's straw proposal provide...
AI summary Synapse critiques NS Power's proposal for refunding 50% of distribution network upgrade costs, arguing it requires interconnection customers (ICs) to pay upfront for upgrades benefiting multiple parties. Synapse recommends a 50/50 split between rate-basing and ICs, with a threshold for class 2 projects to allocate costs proportionally and enable refunds based on future IC usage.
ecting resource, or the maximum MW of any energy exported onto the distribution network) of the initial 50% of costs and use the planned refund regulation mechanism to administer any required refunds. 2. For larger class 2 projects, alloca...
AI summary The text outlines cost allocation mechanisms for class 2 interconnecting customers. For smaller projects, 50% of upgrade costs are allocated to the rate base, with the remainder managed through a refund regulation mechanism. For larger projects, 25% of costs are allocated to the rate base, and the remaining 75% are managed through proportional allocation and refund mechanisms.
M10905, Board Review of NS Power's Interconnection Processes, Synapse Comments, June 16, 2025, page 2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3. NS Power is to report on the detailed outcomes of distribution network upgrade needs, costs, and cost allocat...
AI summary NS Power disagrees with Synapse's proposal to allocate a portion of distribution network upgrade costs to the rate base immediately, arguing that such allocation should be subject to a 50% refund over 20 years. NS Power also notes that defining a new MW threshold for interconnection projects lacks supporting data and could lead to strategic project sizing by customers.
In its M10905/ M12174 Decision, the Board provided the following direction to NS Power: DATE FILED: March 31, 2026 Page 21 of 33 M10905, Board Review of NS Power's Interconnection Processes, Synapse Comments, June 16, 2025, page 3. M10905,...
AI summary The Board directed NS Power to address cost allocation and refund provisions for distribution network upgrades, emphasizing the need to balance Interconnection Customer costs with broader system benefits and ratepayer impacts. NS Power is to provide a draft regulation for approval and justify its proposed methodology, including illustrative examples.
M10905/M12174, Board Review of NS Power's Interconnection Processes/NSPSO Annual Interconnection Process Proceeding Report, Board Decision, November 14, 2025, page 6-7. 1 needs (such as needs previously established through a system plannin...
AI summary The document outlines the cost allocation for distribution network upgrades (NUs) under the DGIP. It states that NUs are considered system investments, not allocated to the interconnection customer (IC), and that the refund mechanism for NUs is amortized over up to 20 years with interest at the Distribution Provider's WACC. The cost-causer approach is emphasized, where the IC is responsible for paying for interconnection and distribution upgrades.
3.2 Regulation 2.12 Regulation 2.12 establishes refunds to load customers of up to 90 percent for line extensions as noted by the Board, with the refund mechanism ceasing after a period of 15 years. As set out in the regulation, line exten...
AI summary Regulation 2.12 provides up to 90% refunds for line extensions funded by load customers, applicable when new customers connect and benefit from the extension. Refunds cease after 15 years. Network Upgrades (NUs), which modify existing infrastructure for multiple customers, are not eligible for proportional refunds due to uncertain benefit allocation, requiring a more conservative approach.
1 3.3 Illustrative Examples of the Proposed Cost Allocation 2 3 Please refer to the illustrative examples provided in the tables that follow. 4 5 Figure 4: Illustrative Example 1: Advancement Charge for a Planned Upgrade
AI summary The section provides illustrative examples of the proposed cost allocation, including Figure 4, which details an advancement charge for a planned upgrade. The examples are presented in tables and figures to clarify the allocation methodology.
Refunds: After energization in 2026, the IC receives 50 percent rebate of the $500,000 network upgrade cost in subsequent years: - $100,000 refund in 2027 + WACC - $100,000 refund in 2028 + WACC - $50,000 refund in 2029 + WACC As these ref...
AI summary Following energization in 2026, the IC will receive a 50% rebate of the $500,000 network upgrade cost over subsequent years, with refunds of $100,000 in 2027, $100,000 in 2028, and $50,000 in 2029, each including WACC. These refunds are added to NS Power's rate-base.
5.0 CONCLUSION As detailed in this report, the majority of Synapse's recommended actions and Board directives related to distribution processes are now complete, with remaining transmission-related items now transitioning to the IESO-NS. T...
AI summary The report concludes that most Synapse-recommended actions and Board directives on distribution processes are complete, with remaining items transitioning to IESO-NS. NSPSO will focus future reports on active directives and distribution interconnection items. NS Power addressed Board guidance on distribution upgrade cost allocation, emphasizing system benefits and minimizing financial barriers for customers, and will submit a draft regulation for approval.