Topic:"Cost Recovery" in M12780

3.2 ENERGY EFFICIENCY: SETTING APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF ENERGY SAVINGS E1 established energy savings levels by balancing IRP guidance, cost‑effectiveness, delivery capacity, and affordability. The Preferred Plan reflects a continuation and evo...

AI summary E1 set energy savings at 0.8% of NS Power's load, balancing affordability, cost-effectiveness, and sector allocation. This aligns with APEX's jurisdictional scan and the 2023-2026 DSM Plan. The Preferred Plan allocates 29%/71% to residential/BNI sectors, with 11% of residential savings directed to low-income programs, consistent with prior targets.

3.2.1 THE ROLE OF THE IRP IN ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF DSM ENERGY SAVINGS One of the primary planning considerations for the development of the DSM Plan is NS Power's IRP. The IRP represents the most recent, comprehensive, and...

AI summary The IRP is central to the DSM Plan, providing a stakeholder-vetted assessment of optimal resource mix for Nova Scotia's electricity needs. NS Power's 2022 IRP incorporates updated policies like GHG targets and renewable goals, with DSM energy savings levels serving as a benchmark. Key themes include decarbonization, renewables, and electrification.

3.5 STRATEGIC ELECTRIFICATION Strategic electrification was added to E1's mandate by way of an update to section79A(b)(iv) of the PUA in 2022, as outlined in section [2.1.1](#page-8-3) above. The NSEB, in its decision on E1's BCA clarified...

AI summary Strategic electrification was added to E1's mandate via a 2022 PUA update. The NSEB requires strategic electrification to reduce both GHG emissions and electricity costs. E1 supports its inclusion in the 2027–2031 DSM Plan if it meets these criteria, though the Clean Power Plan lacks cost assumptions for guidance. The 2022 Evergreen IRP includes electrification scenarios but not optimal savings levels.

DSM is a long-term investment with lasting benefits and considerable lifetime savings, yet the Preferred Plan also contributes to short-term and immediate ratepayer benefits. In the short-term, the Preferred Plan will achieve 435.4 GWh of...

AI summary The Preferred Plan for DSM is highlighted as a long-term investment with immediate and lasting benefits. It will achieve significant energy savings and cost avoidance, with the investment being fully recouped by 2032. The payback analysis shows that the plan is in the best interests of ratepayers due to lower current investment costs and inflation mitigation.

5.2 PROGRAM DELIVERY COSTS The Preferred Plan gives due consideration to program delivery costs. E1 has heard some concerns from stakeholders that program delivery costs have increased unreasonably since the last plan. However, E1 submits...

AI summary The Preferred Plan addresses stakeholder concerns about rising program delivery costs by attributing increases to structural and market factors beyond E1's control. Customer incentives now account for 71% of costs, reflecting increased customer need for financial support. E1 cites a 2015 memo by Philippe Dunsky to justify cost management strategies.

5.8 RATE IMPACTS In designing the Preferred Plan portfolio, E1 explicitly balanced near-term rate impacts with the long-term value delivered to ratepayers. The portfolio reflects a measured approach to investment, limiting it to the same i...

AI summary E1's Preferred Plan balances near-term rate impacts with long-term value by maintaining 2026 investment levels, diversifying programming across customer classes, and prioritizing cost-effective, long-lasting measures. The approach emphasizes affordability, system flexibility, and equity through targeted low-income programs and efficient delivery, supported by a forward-looking Rate and Bill Impact Analysis.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS Term Definition or equipment. For the reference measure or equipment, the baseline may include such information as the hours of operation, wattage, and base consumption. Cumulative savings Sum of incremental savings achie...

AI summary The text defines key terms related to demand-side management (DSM) and cost recovery mechanisms. It outlines the DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR), which allows NS Power to recover costs of approved DSM plans, and describes the DSM Forecast, which tracks spending and savings against approved plans and mid-course adjustments.

7 2. PREVIOUS DSM PLAN RESULTS

AI summary The section reviews outcomes of past Demand Side Management (DSM) plans, focusing on energy efficiency, cost recovery mechanisms, and compliance with regulatory frameworks. It highlights metrics, challenges, and alignment with Nova Scotia's energy policies.

1 Figure 1: 2027–2031 DSM Preferred Plan – Payback DSM investment includes EE, DR, Solar-PV and Enabling Strategies. Green bars are nominal investment. Blue bars are nominal avoided cost. Yellow line is a 2027 net present value (NPV) of th...

AI summary The 2027–2031 DSM Preferred Plan – Payback includes investments in Energy Efficiency (EE), Demand Response (DR), Solar-PV, and Enabling Strategies. Green bars represent nominal investment, blue bars show avoided costs, and the yellow line depicts NPV using NS Power's WACC. The analysis evaluates cost recovery and financial viability of DSM initiatives.

Energy Efficiency The investment for energy efficiency is reflective of the costs E1 expects to incur to achieve the savings with the suite of programs included in the Preferred Plan. Investment levels in Residential sector programs repres...

AI summary E1's energy efficiency investment allocates 56% to residential programs (29% savings) and 44% to BNI programs (71% savings), reflecting a shift toward non-lighting measures post-2025 LED baseline. Savings decline from 2027-2031 due to Canada Greener Homes Grant closure and removal of Residential Behaviour. 2024 billing analyses further reduced residential savings.

1 achieved per measure). The 2024 DSM Evaluation results for residential heat pumps, established through a billing analysis, reduced savings for this measure by approximately 50%[13](#page-126-0) 2 . - 4 Changes to costs in programs (progr...

AI summary The 2024 DSM Evaluation reduced residential heat pump savings by 50%. The Canada Greener Homes Grant's 2025 end increased Home Energy Assessment program costs, while E1 raised incentives for Affordable Multifamily Housing. Broader inflation, labor, and supply chain costs also elevated DSM program delivery expenses. E1 emphasizes competitive procurement to manage costs.

10 6.3 NEW RESIDENTIAL 4 9 13

AI summary Section 6.3 of the Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding discusses new residential energy initiatives, likely involving Demand Side Management (DSM) programs, cost recovery mechanisms (DCRR), and regulatory oversight by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB). Key entities include NS Power, E1, and the NSEB, with focus on energy efficiency (EE), demand response (DR), and program cost testing (PAC).

12 6.5 CUSTOM INCENTIVES PROGRAM

AI summary Section 6.5 of the Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding discusses the Custom Incentives Program, focusing on demand-side management (DSM) and energy efficiency (EE) initiatives. The program involves entities like NS Power, NSEB, and DSMAG, with considerations for cost recovery, rate design, and regulatory compliance under the ERBA and PUA frameworks.

7 6.6 DIRECT INSTALLATION PROGRAM

AI summary The Direct Installation Program under Nova Scotia's Demand Side Management (DSM) framework aims to enhance energy efficiency and reduce GHG emissions through targeted initiatives. Key stakeholders include NS Power, NSEB, and ERBA, with regulatory considerations involving cost recovery and program effectiveness.

5

AI summary This document is from a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding, listing acronyms and entities relevant to energy regulation, including organizations like NS Power, programs such as DSM, and regulatory frameworks like the PUA and ERBA. It outlines key terms for energy efficiency, demand response, and utility cost recovery mechanisms.

3 [Table 47](#page-169-0) provides the program performance indicators. 5 Table 47: 2027–2031 Demand Response Performance Indicators Year Investment ($ million) Available Capacity (MW) Participation (devices) Participation (participants) Le...

AI summary Table 47 outlines the 2027–2031 Demand Response (DR) performance indicators, including investment, available capacity, participation numbers, and the Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test. The table shows a steady increase in investment and available capacity over the years, with participation numbers remaining relatively stable. The PAC test is defined as a benefit/cost ratio comparing lifetime benefits to DR investment, with levelized costs calculated over a ten-year period.

INFORMATION & ANALYTICS

AI summary The INFORMATION & ANALYTICS section outlines regulatory proceedings in Nova Scotia, involving energy efficiency, demand-side management, and utility rate structures. Key entities include NS Power, NSEB, and ERBA, with topics focusing on DSM, EE, and rate design.

DSM PLANNING

AI summary The document outlines the context for Demand Side Management (DSM) planning in Nova Scotia, referencing key regulatory bodies, programs, and acronyms relevant to energy efficiency, utility regulation, and DSM cost recovery mechanisms.

3. Energy Board and stakeholder consultant costs In addition to E1's directly incurred costs, flow-through costs related to the Energy Board and its consultants, the Consumer Advocate and its consultants, and the Small Business Advocate an...

AI summary Flow-through costs from the Energy Board, Consumer Advocate, Small Business Advocate, and their consultants, along with E1's costs, are categorized under 'Other Enabling Strategies' investment. These costs are included in the broader investment framework for regulatory proceedings.

1.1.1 Innovation Goals E1's Innovation team uses established Innovation Goals to define the long-term outcomes of all projects from concept, planning to close. Innovation Goals ensure that long-term outcomes align with the DSM mandate. Acr...

AI summary E1's Innovation team uses Innovation Goals to align long-term outcomes with the DSM mandate, focusing on improving cost-effectiveness, advancing new DSM measures and programs, leveraging system insights, and utilizing other funding sources.

2.1 Innovation Oversight The Executive Leadership Team oversees E1's innovation activities, providing strategic direction, approvals, and compliance oversight. - Responsibilities include: - Reviewing and approving innovation projects; - De...

AI summary The Executive Leadership Team oversees E1's innovation activities, ensuring alignment with strategic goals, 2027–2031 DSM priorities, and available resources. Responsibilities include project approval, resource allocation, and performance monitoring through success metrics.

3.1 OVERALL RATE IMPACTS - DSM can lower rates by avoiding electricity system costs (avoided energy, capacity, transmission and - distribution). DSM may also increase rates, a result of recovering program costs as well as lost revenues - d...

AI summary DSM initiatives may lower electricity rates by avoiding system costs but could increase rates due to program recovery costs and lost revenue. The 2027–2031 DSM Plan RBIA analysis shows average rate impacts ranging from -0.1% to +0.9% over 2027–2046, with higher short-term increases (+1.6% to +4.7%) during program cost recovery (2027–2031) and lower long-term impacts (-0.8% to -0.1%) post-recovery (2032–2046).

11 3.2 OVERALL BILL IMPACTS Generally speaking, ratepayers that participate in DSM programs directly benefit by reducing their electricity consumption and thereby lowering their electricity bills. Together, the level of reduced consumption...

AI summary DSM programs in Nova Scotia reduce electricity bills for participants by 0.04% to -37%, while non-participants see minimal increases (0.1% to +0.8%). Total customer bill impacts range from -0.04% to -3.4%, with $0.4 billion in savings for ratepayers due to reduced revenue requirements from 2027–2031 DSM initiatives.

2 Alternate Scenario)

AI summary The document references an alternate scenario within a regulatory proceeding, likely exploring demand-side management (DSM) strategies, cost recovery mechanisms, and energy efficiency programs. Key entities include NS Power, NSEB, and DSMAG, with topics focusing on regulatory frameworks and program evaluations.

7. FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS E1 understands that NS Power has developed an updated Cost of Service Study (COSS) which has been filed with the NSEB as part of NS Power's 2026–2027 General Rate Application (M12451). Once concluded, E1 will work...

AI summary E1 acknowledges NS Power's updated Cost of Service Study (COSS) filed with the NSEB as part of its 2026–2027 General Rate Application (M12451). E1 will collaborate with stakeholders to assess implications for the Rate and Bill Impact Analysis (RBIA). Future RBIA applications will address the 2032–2036 DSM Resource Plan and 2035 historical RBIA, expected in early 2035.

-counting of participants from multiple resources. DATE FILED: March 31, 2026 Page 2 of 8 4 7 8 10 11 44 This graph shows bill impacts of all DSM resources combined,as percentage differences relative to the no-DSM scenario. 'Participants'...

AI summary The text discusses the bill and rate impacts of Demand Side Management (DSM) resources, comparing participants (customers with average DSM savings) to non-participants. Graphs illustrate annual and active participation rates, noting double-counting adjustments. Metrics include total customers, weighted-average measure life, and participation across resources like energy efficiency and demand response.

10. NS POWER RATE MODEL SCENARIOS - This section describes at a high-level how the NS Power Rate Model works and some recent - improvements that were made. - Both the E1 RBIA model and NS Power rate model include the actual costs and benef...

AI summary The NS Power Rate Model incorporates historical and planned DSM savings, calculating revenue requirements with and without DSM resources. The 'DSM Benchmark' includes all DSM costs and savings, while the E1 model allows users to adjust avoided cost scenarios and select DSM resources. Revenue requirements are prorated based on cost drivers like consumption and peak demand.

Methodology for determination of changes in NS Power's base cost rates as a result of DSM-induced changes in class usage and total system costs November 27, 2020

AI summary This document outlines the methodology for adjusting NS Power's base cost rates based on DSM-induced changes in class usage and system costs. It involves regulatory analysis under the ERBA and NSUARB frameworks, focusing on cost recovery and rate design considerations.

1.0. Introduction In an effort to more precisely and accurately align EfficiencyOne's (E1) RBIA Model with the methodological process used by NS Power in setting of its base cost rates, all rate setting functionality from E1's RBIA model h...

AI summary EfficiencyOne's RBIA model is being realigned with NS Power's COSS methodology, shifting rate-setting responsibility to NS Power. NS Power will provide annual inputs (e.g., revenue forecasts, DSM charges) to E1's RBIA model under 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' scenarios, with NS Power responsible for cost allocation methods and data assumptions.

2.0. Background The regulated base cost rate setting process involves the following three sequential analytical steps: - Determination of total annual revenue requirement; - COSS concerned with apportionment of total costs among rate class...

AI summary The regulated base cost rate setting process involves three steps: determining total annual revenue requirement, conducting a Cost of Service Study (COSS) for cost apportionment among rate classes, and setting class rates. The document was filed on March 31, 2026.

Revenue Requirement Ordinarily, the base cost rate setting process used in rate case applications requires a great amount of detailed cost inputs to determine revenue requirement. Annual rate base data needs to be collected on a variety of...

AI summary The revenue requirement process typically requires detailed cost data, but for the RBIA, only DSM-induced avoided costs are considered while keeping other costs constant. This simplifies analysis by focusing on directional and relative rate changes due to DSM programs.

Cost of Service Studies COSS provides the most insight into class cost causation as based on changes in its energy and demand usage. It shows in a transparent way how rate class usage of demand and energy services within each functional ar...

AI summary COSS provides insights into cost causation by analyzing energy and demand usage changes. NS Power's annual Load Forecast Report and E1's long-term usage forecasts enable simplified COSS analysis for rate adjustments, bypassing detailed future cost data collection.

Rates and Revenues There is little that can be inferred about the cost causation process from the rate structures used by the utility to generate customers' bills. The rates are bundled and therefore do not allow tracking of cost recovery...

AI summary NS Power's bundled rate structures hinder tracking cost recovery by functional areas. Residential and small general classes recover demand costs via energy charges, while others use a mix of demand and energy charges. Misalignment exists between revenues and costs for certain rate classes, as noted in the COSS.

Conclusions Bypassing the detailed COSS ratemaking step, which is intended to show how DSM-induced, cost causative changes in usage affects rates will produce misleading results and create difficulties in interpretation. Any such rate anal...

AI summary Bypassing the COSS ratemaking step leads to misleading rate analyses by failing to account for DSM-induced changes in usage and embedded system cost reallocations. A simplified COSS process is recommended to provide precise results and better insights into how usage changes affect total service costs.

3.1 Revenue Requirement The annual revenue requirements under the "With DSM" scenario are kept consistent with the test year information from the preceding rate cases. The non-FAM costs in the years following the 2014 test year from the 20...

AI summary The document outlines revenue requirements under 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' scenarios, adjusting costs for inflation and DSM impacts. FAM and non-FAM costs are modified based on test year data and avoided fuel costs. Historic cost true-ups are excluded due to minimal impact, lack of rigor, and complexity. The analysis uses data from 2011-2035 and references prior rate proceedings.

3.2 Cost of Service Studies Cost of service Studies consist of an application of the following three sequential steps: - functionalization of revenue requirement to the four areas: generation, transmission, distribution and retail; - class...

AI summary Cost of Service Studies (COSS) involve three steps: functionalizing revenue requirements across four areas (generation, transmission, distribution, retail), classifying costs into energy, demand, and customer categories, and apportioning costs among rate classes. Most costs are shared by all customers, except streetlight fixture costs, which are assigned exclusively to unmetered street and area light customers in NS Power's COSS.

3.2.1 Functionalization of System Costs As indicated in the Revenue Requirement section above, NS Power has used the test year revenue requirements, already functionalized by the four areas, from the historic rate cases. In the "With DSM"...

AI summary NS Power has functionalized system costs based on historic rate cases, adjusting revenue requirements for changes in load and inflation. The impact of DSM on load savings and avoided costs is considered, with examples provided on the true-up of depreciation costs from the Maritime Link project.

3.2.2 Classification of System Costs Costs within each area are classified into appropriate services. Generation and transmission costs are classified into energy and demand. Distribution costs are classified between demand and customer. R...

AI summary System costs are classified into energy, demand, and customer categories. Generation costs depend on unit type (baseload, peaking, environmental), with NS Power using a linear equation for classification. Transmission costs align with load factors, while distribution and retail costs remain static except for inflation. DSM impacts reclassification but does not alter customer numbers.

3.2.3 Allocation of Costs to Rate Classes Annual cost requirements within each service of each functional area are apportioned to rate classes based on class share in the underlying usage both in the "With DSM" and "No DSM" case.

AI summary Annual costs for each service and functional area are allocated to rate classes based on their share of usage in both 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' scenarios. This approach ensures cost distribution reflects actual consumption patterns across different rate classes.

FAM-related Costs The FAM-related costs are allocated to rate classes using the following two-step process: • Annual class energy usage is multiplied by the benchmark unit cost $/MWh DATE FILED: March 31, 2026 Page 7 of 16 - o In the "With...

AI summary The Fuel Adjustment Mechanism (FAM) allocates costs via a two-step process using benchmark unit costs, with distinct methods for 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' cases. The current model does not differentiate between energy and demand-related costs, a limitation stemming from historical low demand costs. Recent increases (15% of FAM costs due to Maritime Link) may warrant future RBIA adjustments.

Non-FAM related Costs The non-FAM-related costs are allocated to rate classes using the following two-step process: - Annual class usages of energy and demand services are multiplied by benchmark $/MWh and $/MW unit costs, respectively - o...

AI summary Non-FAM-related costs are allocated to rate classes via a two-step process: multiplying annual class usages by benchmark costs from 'With DSM' or 'No DSM' cases, then scaling estimates to match revenue requirements per functional area. The 'With DSM' case uses the most recent prior rate case, while the 'No DSM' case references the same calendar year as the 'With DSM' case.

DSM Costs The annual DSM-related costs incurred by individual rate classes, as provided by E1, are apportioned to rate classes based on the 25/75 rule. 75 percent of the costs incurred by each class is treated as direct responsibility of e...

AI summary The document outlines the apportionment of annual DSM costs among rate classes using a 25/75 rule, with 75% directly assigned to each class and 25% distributed based on energy and demand usage metrics, including load factor, system generation share, and winter peak demand.

3.2.4 Generic COSS Results The actual results from the above cost allocation process under the "With DSM" and "No DSM" scenarios are presented in the "COSS Outputs" tab within NS Power's rate model, where the long-term trends in annual rel...

AI summary The COSS Results compare 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' scenarios, showing higher unit costs in historic periods due to DSM program costs and lower differentials in out-years as DSM measures expire. Fuel-cost-heavy classes (e.g., Large Industrial) benefit more from DSM, while fixed-cost-heavy classes (e.g., Domestic) see less impact. Trends are analyzed via NS Power's rate model.

3.3 Unit Revenue Determination For the directional purposes of the RBIA model, it is not considered necessary to develop annual rates with all charges under the "With DSM" and "No DSM" cases. Rather, it is sufficient for NS Power to provid...

AI summary NS Power determines unit revenues for rate classes by providing blended revenues in cents per kWh, excluding customer charges for residential and small general classes. Factors like fuel cost adjustments, deferrals, rate smoothing, and revenue-to-cost ratios are excluded, but this has no material effect on relative changes between 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' cases.

"COSS Data Inputs" tab This tab includes all annual test year class usage and embedded costs from the COSS and BCF COSS filed in GRA and BCF proceedings as well as a forecast of annual usage by class per the most recent ten-year Load Forec...

AI summary The 'COSS Data Inputs' tab compiles annual test year class usage, embedded costs from COSS and BCF COSS filings in GRA and BCF proceedings, a ten-year load forecast, and DSM expenditures by rate class. This data informs class unit cost and revenue calculations.

"E1 Data Inputs" tab This tab includes information provided to NS Power by E1 on DSM Program measures and avoided unit costs, all of which are used in determination of class unit costs and revenues.

AI summary The 'E1 Data Inputs' tab contains information provided by E1 to NS Power regarding DSM Program measures and avoided unit costs, which are essential for calculating class unit costs and revenues.

Savings in energy and demand usage by rate class Savings in energy and demand usage arising from DSM programs for each class are tracked in the following class tabs: R-Savings, SG-Savings, G-Savings, LG-savings, SI-Savings, MI-Savings, LI-...

AI summary The document outlines how energy and demand savings from DSM programs are tracked across rate classes (R-Savings, SG-Savings, etc.) using data from 2011–2022. Annual savings are calculated by E1 using methods from its RBIA Reports, with adjustments for energy losses based on the COSS study.

"Total-Savings" tab The "Total-Savings" tab provides a sum of annual class savings in energy and demand usage at the generator's gate and customer's meter. In addition, class demand savings at the high side of the bulk power substation are...

AI summary The 'Total-Savings' tab calculates annual energy and demand savings at the generator's gate and customer's meter, including avoided fuel, generation, transmission, and distribution costs. FAM-related avoided costs use unit fuel costs multiplied by energy savings, while non-FAM costs use avoided infrastructure costs per MW demand savings.

Cost of Service Studies Apportionment of costs to rate classes is done separately for the "With DSM" and "No DSM" cases" in the tabs bearing the same names.

AI summary The document discusses the separate apportionment of costs to rate classes under 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' scenarios, as outlined in corresponding tabs. This approach allows for distinct cost allocation analyses based on demand-side management considerations.

"With DSM" tab The "With DSM" tab provides annual cost allocation to rate classes based on long-term usage as included in NS Power's most recent Annual ten-year Load Forecast Report. This usage already reflects inclusion of DSM Program eff...

AI summary The 'With DSM' tab allocates annual FAM costs to rate classes using NS Power's load forecast, which includes DSM program effects. FAM costs for 2023-2035 are calculated via a two-step process: applying 2022 blended unit FAM costs to forecasted MWh usage, then scaling to match total annual FAM costs using a formula incorporating previous year costs and energy requirement deltas.

Comments The applied process is a simplification of a more elaborate cost allocation process from the COSS where some FAM costs, such as fuel costs, are allocated to rate classes based on their shares in monthly energy requirements; some o...

AI summary The text describes a simplified cost allocation process for FAM (Fuel Adjustment Mechanism) costs, distributing them based on factors like energy requirements, annual energy shares, and system load factors. It notes that non-FAM costs are fixed between rate cases but can be adjusted for inflation. Relative class unit costs from 2022 are carried forward to 2023–2035, with adjustments based on annual inflation and system load factor changes.

"COSS Var" tab "COSS Var" provides differentials between cell values in the "No DSM" and "With DSM" tabs. Please note that the data layouts in the "No DSM" and "With DSM" tabs are identical with the exception for the treatment of DSM costs...

AI summary The 'COSS Var' tab compares cell values between 'No DSM' and 'With DSM' scenarios, highlighting differences in cost calculations. The 'No DSM' tab excludes Demand Side Management (DSM) costs, while the 'With DSM' tab includes them, with identical data layouts otherwise.

1 Table 6: 2029 Alternate Scenario Savings and Investment by Program Component 2029 Investment ($ million) Lifetime Benefits ($ million) First Year Energy Savings (GWh) Lifetime Energy Savings (GWh) Peak Demand Savings (MW) Available Deman...

AI summary The text presents a table titled '2029 Alternate Scenario Savings and Investment by Program Component' with columns related to investment, benefits, energy savings, and other metrics. However, no data is provided under the 'Residential EE Programs' row, leaving the content incomplete.

14 4. PRICE & PAYMENT - 15 4.1 NSPI agrees to pay EfficiencyOne for EECA DSM as set out in Schedule "B" 16 Compensation (the "Contract Price"). - 17 4.2 The Contract Price shall constitute full compensation for the EECADSM, and no addition...

AI summary NSPI agrees to pay EfficiencyOne for EECA DSM services at the Contract Price outlined in Schedule B, with no additional compensation for indirect costs. Monthly payments are due on the first business day of each month, subject to HST and applicable tax withholdings. All amounts are in Canadian currency, and statutory withholdings may apply for non-resident services.

6 Schedule A

AI summary Schedule A of a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding document, likely related to energy management, utility regulations, and cost recovery mechanisms. Context includes acronyms and entities relevant to energy efficiency, demand response, and utility rate structures.

4.2 DSM Resource Plan Research

AI summary Section 4.2 discusses research related to Demand Side Management (DSM) resource planning in Nova Scotia, involving regulatory bodies, programs, and analyses of energy efficiency, demand response, and cost recovery mechanisms.

18 5. CONSOLIDATED ENDNOTES AND SOURCES - 1. M06733 E1 2016–2018 DSM Resource Plan, NSUARB Order, October 7, 2015. The Order approved the 2016–2018 DSM Plan and the Consensus Agreement. (Parties agreed to establish the Standardized Filing...

AI summary The document lists consolidated endnotes and sources from Nova Scotia regulatory proceedings, including approvals of DSM plans, directives on cost recovery, and the adoption of the PAC test. Key references include NSUARB decisions, the 2024 Energy Reform Act establishing NSIESO, and requirements for enhanced reporting and rate class analysis. Regulatory frameworks, cost-effectiveness criteria, and compliance with the Public Utilities Act are emphasized.

2025 and overall 2023-2025 spending being within the approved $173.0 million investment level; but also contributed to energy savings and demands savings coming in lower than the 2025 Plan targets. Demand savings for both E1's Residential...

AI summary The 2025 Plan's energy and demand savings fell below targets due to factors like NS Power's cybersecurity incident, program adjustments (e.g., LED measures removal), federal grant closures, and declining program efficacy. Residential Behaviour's energy savings dropped significantly, impacting overall results. Green Heat and Appliance Retirement programs ended due to sustained low savings.

- Affordable Single-family Homes' unit cost was lower than the 2025 Plan, as the energy savings were higher than expected, driven primarily by increased participation; and costs were lower, in part due to the transition in 2025 to managing...

AI summary The 2025 unit costs for DSM programs show mixed results: Affordable Single-family Homes had lower costs due to higher energy savings and project transitions, while Efficient Product Installation and Green Heat exceeded the 2025 Plan due to cost shifts and reduced savings. Home Energy Assessment costs were lower due to grant incentives. Factors like heating source splits and program adjustments influenced outcomes.

Appliance Retirement Highlights - Appliance Retirement pickups continued in early January, before the program component ended as of January 8, 2025, following a review of the program component precipitated by rising delivery costs and decl...

AI summary The Appliance Retirement program in Nova Scotia ended in January 2025 due to rising delivery costs, declining savings from retiring newer efficient units, and limited service providers. E1 staff redirected appliance retirement requests to local waste management companies post-closure.

Efficient Product Installation Highlights • Efficient Product Installation energy and demand savings results were lower than the 2025 Plan as Approved targets, as the program component phased out its lighting measures as of July 1, 2025 Da...

AI summary Efficient Product Installation program savings fell short of 2025 targets due to phasing out lighting measures by July 2025 and shifting focus to electrician-installed measures (smart thermostats, sensors). Despite a 12% drop in average energy savings per participant, higher unitary savings from new measures offset some losses. Air-sealing and water-saving measures were paused in 2025 but reintroduced in 2026. The program also supported Residential Demand Response with 13,687 devices installed in 2025.

Home Energy Assessment Highlights - Home Energy Assessment exceeded its 2025 Plan as Approved energy and demand savings targets, but results declined from 2023 and 2024 levels, as expected, following the Canada Greener Homes Grant (which E...

AI summary The Home Energy Assessment program met 2025 energy and demand savings targets but saw declining results post-2023 due to the Canada Greener Homes Grant closing in Q1 2024. Remaining grant participants must complete assessments by November 2025, with rebate processing expected by March 2026. The program was integrated into E1's Customer Information System in 2025, with process improvements ongoing.

Residential Behaviour Highlights - Residential Behaviour achieved 5.6 GWh of energy savings between January and April before the program component was paused indefinitely in May due to a cybersecurity incident at NS Power that resulted in...

AI summary Residential Behaviour achieved 5.6 GWh savings before being paused indefinitely in May 2025 due to a NS Power cybersecurity incident disrupting AMI data transfer. E1 reduced costs and maintained readiness to resume operations. Ongoing communication with NS Power continues, but no data restoration timeline exists. E1 will address 2026 impacts in its mid-course adjustment, filed May 25, 2026.

DEMAND RESPONSE (2025) - o In the Residential Demand Response program component, fewer domestic hot water direct load controllers were installed than planned, and enrolment of batteries and EV telematics and charger devices, fell short of...

AI summary The 2025 Demand Response programs faced underperformance due to lower-than-expected installations of domestic hot water controllers, reduced battery and EV device enrolment, and challenges in BNI program participation. E1, a new program, struggled with customer understanding. Expenditures remained high despite lower capacity results due to early-year foundational activities and cost structures.

Rate Class Expenditures - E1 reports on planned and actual DSM expenditures by rate class to aid in cost recovery - allocations.[29](#page-52-0) - The following sections provide information on E1's rate class allocation methodology, an - o...

AI summary E1 reports on planned and actual Demand-Side Management (DSM) expenditures by rate class to support cost recovery. The document outlines E1's allocation methodology, 2025 results by rate class, and the outlook for the 2023-2026 DSM Plan period.

1.2 Rate class allocation for 2026 Plan as Approved, and rate class forecasts Date Filed: March 31, 2026 Page 1 of 8 The October 7, 2015 NSUARB Order directed NS Power to file its proposed accounting treatment and cost recovery for the 201...

AI summary The 2026 rate class allocation method uses spending percentages from 2022-2024 applied to 2026 plan costs, excluding industrial classes from Education and Outreach in Enabling Strategies. The NSUARB Order of October 7, 2015, directed NS Power to file cost recovery proposals for DSM programs, referenced in M06733.

Request IR-14: Reference: Evidence, p. 54 "In designing the Preferred Plan portfolio, E1 explicitly balanced near-term rate impacts with the long-term value delivered to ratepayers. The portfolio reflects a measured approach to investment,...

AI summary E1 did not rely on industry standards or best practices when balancing near-term rate impacts with long-term value. Additionally, E1 has not compared its rate and bill analysis to recent DSM plans in other jurisdictions, citing limited value in a jurisdictional scan due to specific contextual reasons.

long term value. - (b) E1 has not conducted a jurisdictional comparison of its rate and bill analysis results. - A jurisdictional scan may offer limited value in this context for several key reasons: - Local planning objectives: DSM plan d...

AI summary E1 has not conducted a jurisdictional comparison of its rate and bill analysis due to local policy differences, varied cost recovery mechanisms, and lack of standardized metrics. These factors limit meaningful benchmarking across jurisdictions.

s of the measure from the customer's perspective absent program intervention. - (f) Not confirmed. Please refer to part (d) (i) of this IR response. DATE FILED: May 28, 2026 E1 (IG) IR-08 Page 4 of 4 Request IR-09: Reference: Exhibit E-1,...

AI summary The text outlines a request for clarification on the Demand Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) and its impact on ratepayers, including how E1 accounted for overspends and underspends during the 2023-2026 Plan period, and how these will be adjusted over the 2027-2030 period. It also asks for a detailed breakdown of the DCRR by customer class and year.

- 4 Attachment 2 to this IR response. Residential Instant Savings - Cost and Energy Savings Analysis Costs ($ millions) Affordable Single Family Homes 2026 Total Costs $ 7.68 Unit Cost Analysis Heat Pump Cleaning - NEW 0.58 2026 Unit Cost...

AI summary This attachment provides a detailed cost and energy savings analysis for the Residential Instant Savings program in Nova Scotia. It outlines various cost components, including heat pump cleaning, audit cost escalations, and administrative cost reductions, along with their impacts on total costs and energy savings from 2026 to 2031.

Conclusions When evaluated in the context of other jurisdictions, E1's submitted first-year energy efficiency costs for the 2027-2031 Plan are reasonable, prudent, and consistent with industry norms. It should be expected that there will b...

AI summary E1's 2027-2031 DSM Plan first-year energy efficiency costs are deemed reasonable and prudent, consistent with industry norms. The increase in \/kWh costs is attributed to factors like the phase-out of low-cost measures and increased investment in equity and electrification programs. These trends are consistent with regulatory findings in other jurisdictions.

avings for each affected customer class. (b) Please explain the allocation methodology used to allocate each category of expenditure to each customer class (and/or program/measure). Response IR-12:

AI summary The response IR-12 is requested to explain the allocation methodology for expenditures to customer classes and programs. The request focuses on how costs are distributed across different categories and customer segments.

A. Definitions Mid-Course Adjustment –The Mid-Course Adjustment (MCA) is a mechanism that provides E1 with an opportunity to reallocate savings and investments by program for any given DSM Plan year to allow for changes that occur during t...

AI summary The text defines various mechanisms related to the DSM Plan, including the Mid-Course Adjustment (MCA), Balance Adjustment (BA), and DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR). These mechanisms allow for reallocation of spending and savings, true-up of rate class spending, and recovery of DSM costs from ratepayers.

Request IR-16: Reference: Exhibit E-1, Application, Appendix A, Section 4.7, pages 40–42/112; Exhibit E- 1, Appendix B, Attachment 2. Preamble: E1 states that the rate-class allocation of expenditures was developed using three years of his...

AI summary The request seeks detailed information on the rate-class allocation methodology used by E1, including its full methodology, historical data, reconciliation with the 2027–2031 Preferred Plan, and confirmation of programs requiring bespoke assumptions. It also asks for confirmation on mid-course adjustments affecting spending allocations.

1 (f) Please provide a table that compares E1 Smart Synergy provisions for BNI participants 2 versus NSPI's Large Industrial Interruptible program (and separately provide for 3 telemetry vs. non-telemetry customers) that compares the follo...

AI summary The request asks for a comparison table of E1 Smart Synergy provisions for BNI participants with NSPI's Large Industrial Interruptible program, including details on interruption policies, credits, and program costs for 2027–2031. It also questions E1's justification for allocating program costs to Large Industrial Interruptible customers and whether the program affects interruption calls for this class.

E1 Responses to Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Lost revenues are not applicable for demand response because it shifts electricity use 2 rather than reducing overall consumption. Therefore, for deman...

AI summary The document discusses demand response programs and highlights that lost revenues are not applicable because demand response shifts electricity use rather than reducing overall consumption. It also notes that a corrected value of $3.2 billion was used in Appendix B, replacing an earlier reported value of $2.5 billion.

Date Filed: May 28, 2026 NSEB-17, Attachment 1, Page 46 of 46 REDACTED 1 Request IR-18: 2 Program Cost Recovery (PCR) portion of NS Power's Demand Side 3 Management Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) by rate class. Please refer to part 4 (c) of IG...

AI summary The text discusses the Program Cost Recovery (PCR) portion of NS Power's Demand Side Management Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) by rate class, noting that while PCR may increase electricity costs, E1's programs will help customers reduce consumption and realize bill savings. It also mentions that lighting measures in commercial projects will no longer be supported after 2028 due to higher upfront costs and the need for more financial support from E1.

The Custom Program Retrofit incentive provides a level of flexibility that is best-in-class. Incentives are individually negotiated, based on four different parameters: 1. Capped at percentage of project costs; - 2. Capped by simple paybac...

AI summary The Custom Program Retrofit incentive offers flexibility through four parameters, allowing ENS to balance customer, utility, and societal perspectives. Incentives are typically 20-25% of project costs and contribute to 60% of program expenditure. The framework allows for promoting non-lighting measures without changing parameters, though communication risks and local avoided costs are considerations.

Figure 23: Union Gas Targets & Performance Metric[s](#page-37-0) 4 Resource Acquisition Scorecard Large Volume Large Volume Large Volume - Revised Large Volume Overhead - Revised Evaluation - Revised Evaluation - Revised Large Volume Total...

AI summary The document presents a detailed budget and performance metrics table for Union Gas, including various program costs, overheads, and inflation adjustments. It outlines different categories of expenses such as market transformation, administrative costs, and program-level overheads, along with their respective financial figures and sections referenced.

Co ntr ol Ac tiv ity r 'I tan t' T ab of '2 02 2 B ER In ter l C tro l' F ile pe ns na on Ma ing pp C9 On S s f ffic art erl ba sis th e P cia list ts dis trib uto r li sts ice all ist ing od t c od in clu de d o n E ien Pa rtn ba tab le d...

AI summary The text discusses control activity related to the 2022 BER Interl Control File pensnaon, including adjustments to rebate calculations and contributions at 50% of the Public Service Commission's distribution.

19 Table 1: Metrics in 2023-2025 DSM Plan Application Column in 2023-2025 DSM Plan Application Attachment 4 Explanation 2 3 Appendix B - Rate and Bill Impact Analysis, 2027-31 DSM Resource Plan and 2026 Historical, 4 pp. 1-23 (Attach. 1-10...

AI summary The document discusses the recovery of program costs for the 2027–2031 DSM Plan, stating that EfficiencyOne (E1) expects these costs to be recovered within the same period, with exceptions handled through the Balance Adjustment (BA) mechanism. The Nova Scotia Energy Board's (NSEB) approved DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) process is referenced.

Table 9: Scenario 1DR-Base – Round 1 Modelling Results TRC & PAC NS Cost Test Available Total Program Scenario 1DR-Base Investment1 Lifetime Lifetime Capacity2 Resource Cost Administrator NS Cost Test (2027-2031) ($ million) Benefits Benef...

AI summary Table 9 presents the results of the Scenario 1DR-Base – Round 1 Modelling, detailing various demand response and energy efficiency programs, their investments, benefits, and costs. The table includes data for residential demand response, smart thermostats, water heaters, battery control, EV charging control, and BNI programs, with total investments and cost test figures provided.

Context for Discussion Mid-course adjustments give the DSM administrator flexibility to adjust program budgets and savings from those in the original approved Plan to respond to market conditions and program performance changes unknown at...

AI summary The document discusses mid-course adjustments in the DSM Plan, allowing E1 to modify program budgets and savings based on market conditions and performance changes. E1 has agreed to enhanced reporting and more stakeholder engagement. However, E1 maintains that the current process should remain, with proposed adjustments to address concerns around rate class spending and engagement.

NSPI has a NSEB approved FAM, allowing NSPI to recover fluctuating fuel and certain fuel-related costs from customers through annual fuel rate adjustments. Differences between prudently incurred fuel costs and amounts recovered from custom...

AI summary NSPI has a Fuel Adjustment Mechanism (FAM) approved by the NSEB, allowing recovery of fluctuating fuel costs from customers. An audit of the FAM for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 resulted in a disallowance of $1 million plus interest, recorded in Q4 2025. Details are provided in note 5 of NSPI's consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2025.

Weather Risk A Material Adverse Effect may arise from weather seasonal variations impacting energy consumption, as well as severe weather events, changing air temperatures, wildfires and other severe weather conditions that are expected to...

AI summary The document discusses the risks posed by weather variations and severe weather events to Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI), including impacts on energy consumption, infrastructure damage, revenue loss, and increased costs. These risks may lead to material adverse effects if not mitigated through insurance or regulatory processes.

Foreign Exchange Risk The Company is exposed to foreign currency exchange rate changes. NSPI may enter foreign exchange forward and swap contracts to limit exposure on certain foreign currency transactions such as fuel purchases and capita...

AI summary NSPI is exposed to foreign exchange risk, particularly from USD-denominated fuel purchases and capital investments. It uses forward contracts to hedge this risk, with 64% of 2026 USD requirements covered as of December 31, 2025. The company does not use derivatives for trading or speculation and is allowed to recover prudently incurred foreign exchange costs.

General Economic Risk The Company has exposure to the macro-economic conditions in Nova Scotia. Like most utilities, economic factors such as consumer income, employment and housing affect demand for electricity, and in turn the Company's...

AI summary The Company is exposed to general economic risks in Nova Scotia, including factors like consumer income, employment, and housing, which can affect electricity demand and financial results. Adverse economic conditions and inflation may hinder customers' ability to afford rate increases, leading to potential credit risks, policy shifts, and challenges in recovering costs.

Commodity Price Risk The Company's fuel supply is subject to commodity price risk. The Company's fuel supply is exposed to broader global market conditions, which may include impacts on delivery reliability and price, despite contracted te...

AI summary The Company's fuel supply is exposed to commodity price risk due to global market conditions, including currency fluctuations, geopolitical risks, and supply disruptions. NSPI aims to hedge 50-100% of fuel costs for 2026 and 50-90% for 2027 to ensure fuel cost stability and manage affordability risks.

Operations NSPI's earnings are most directly impacted by the range of ROE and capital structure approved by the NSEB, the prudent management and approved recovery of operating costs, electric sales volumes, weather, the approved recovery o...

AI summary NSPI's earnings are influenced by factors such as the approved ROE and capital structure, operating costs, electric sales volumes, and capital investment. Earnings in 2026 are expected to be higher than in 2025 due to new base rates, but below the allowed ROE range. Capital investment in 2026 is projected to be around $700 million, primarily for power system reliability.

f energy savings as a percentage of load at 0.8 percent and the recommendation of the energy savings split between residential and business programs. (b) Please refer to part (a) of this IR response. Request IR-23: Page 48 of the Evidence...

AI summary The text discusses EfficiencyOne's (E1) cost management strategies, including competitive procurement practices and multi-year procurement arrangements used in its 2027-2031 DSM Plan to achieve best value and reduce transaction costs. It also requests detailed information on contracts up for competitive procurement and existing and new multi-year procurement arrangements.

11 Q. BESIDES THE PROPOSED THRESHOLDS, WHAT DO YOU THINK SHOULD 12 TRIGGER AN MCA? 13 A. The Preferred Plan deliberately acquires only 64% of the IRP-identified DSM savings, which E1 characterizes as maintaining a "trajectory" toward IRP l...

AI summary The response discusses the need for an MCA (Measure Cost Allocation) when there is a material change in optimal DSM (Demand Side Management) resource acquisition levels identified in the Evergreen IRP process, specifically if cumulative DSM savings levels differ by more than 20% from currently approved levels. It highlights concerns about deferring cost-effective DSM and the potential for higher-cost supply acquisition.

- 8 Update the SPP to include an MCA filing trigger to address updated IRP 9 projections. Any findings from the Evergreen IRP process that identify 10 optimal DSM resource acquisition levels that are more than 20% away from 11 the existing...

AI summary The text discusses updating the SPP to include an MCA filing trigger based on updated IRP projections and consolidating low-income program components into a single 'Low Income Program' subject to the MCA threshold. This aims to ensure proper monitoring and address significant underinvestment.

1 2 E1's affordability argument amounts to arguing that a cost-effective, benefit-positive 3 investment should be rejected because it increases near-term rates. This is inconsistent 4 with the purpose of DSM under the Public Utilities Act....

AI summary E1 argues that rejecting a cost-effective DSM investment due to near-term rate increases is inconsistent with the Public Utilities Act's purpose of reducing electricity costs. Historical DSM activities have saved customers $3.2 billion in net present value, and the IRP scenario would increase these savings. The incremental cost of the IRP scenario is $29M per year, delivering 247.7 GWh of annual energy savings.

10 Q. WILL CUSTOMERS PAY FOR UNDERINVESTMENT IN DSM IN OTHER 11 WAYS? 12 A. Yes. Not only will customers forego the net economic benefit of DSM, but they may also 13 need to pay for higher cost supply-side resources. As described previousl...

AI summary Customers may end up paying for underinvestment in Demand Side Management (DSM) through higher costs for supply-side resources and by forgoing the net economic benefits of DSM programs.

19 Q. WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND REGARDING HEAT PUMP INCENTIVES IN 20 THE INSTANT SAVINGS PROGRAM? - 21 A. I recommend that the Board: - 22 Direct E1 to offer incentives for mini-split and centrally ducted HPs as soon as 23 possible. Ideally th...

AI summary The respondent recommends that the Board direct E1 to offer incentives for mini-split and centrally ducted heat pumps in the Instant Savings Program, with specific rebate amounts and timelines. They also suggest maintaining current incentive levels and adjusting them if needed based on participation and freeridership rates.

1 programs and would result in double counting the same capacity."97 That same logic 2 applies here: load that is already committed and compensated under the interruptible 3 tariff should not also be counted and paid as Smart Synergy capac...

AI summary The text argues that load already committed and compensated under an interruptible tariff should not be double-counted as Smart Synergy capacity, as it would result in charging ratepayers twice for a one-time reduction.

19 Q. PLEASE SUMMARIZE YOUR KEY FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS - 20 A. In summary, I respectfully recommend that the Board should: - 21 1. Require explicit Board approval for any MCA filing. To expedite this process, 22 intervenors should be gi...

AI summary The witness recommends that the Board require explicit approval for MCA filings, modify the SFF to clarify the cumulative nature of collars, update the SPP with an MCA trigger based on IRP projections, align DSM savings targets with the IRP, set a low-income savings target, consolidate low-income programs, and conduct measure-specific research for high-value measures.

Testimony and Proceeding Participation Forum On Behalf Of Docket/Matter Date Issues Addressed Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board The Consumer Advocate of Nova Scotia Matter No. M10473 An Application by EfficiencyOne for Approval of a 202...

AI summary The document outlines various regulatory proceedings involving entities such as the Consumer Advocate of Nova Scotia and the Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General. Key topics include demand side management plans, energy efficiency programs, and cost recovery for wildfire mitigation. These proceedings address issues like affordability, program design, and cost-effectiveness.

High Level Assessment of E1's Preferred Plan At a high level, E1's proposed 2027–2031 DSM Plan is framed around affordability, near-term ratepayer protection, and continuity of DSM programming. That framing is appropriate. Nova Scotia cust...

AI summary E1's 2027–2031 DSM Plan focuses on affordability, ratepayer protection, and continuity of DSM programming. It maintains a consistent investment level of $63.75 million annually, totaling $318.75 million over five years, with a PAC ratio of 2.4 and estimated lifetime benefits of $682.5 million. However, the plan is urged to undergo stronger scrutiny regarding the allocation of DSM funds and alignment with system needs.

Q. What is E1's approach to managing program delivery costs? A. On the overall DSM plan, E1 states that it has "heard some concerns from stakeholders that program delivery costs have increased unreasonably since the last plan. However, E1...

AI summary E1 explains that program delivery costs have increased due to factors like reduced government funding and market changes, but claims it has taken steps to manage and contain costs. Customer incentives make up 71% of the Preferred Plan's costs, and E1 plans to use benchmarking, competitive procurement, and third-party audits to improve cost-effectiveness.

1 2 Q. Does E1 address the high program delivery costs for the residential demand response program specifically? 3 A. No. E1 does not address the high delivery costs of the residential demand 4 response program specifically. According to t...

AI summary E1 does not specifically address the high delivery costs of the residential demand response program. The response notes that while E1 reviewed DR incentives and program delivery costs, it did not evaluate delivery costs for demand response programs. E1's spending on incentives is much lower compared to similar programs in other regions, with a significant portion allocated to program delivery. Recommendations include conducting a process evaluation and reviewing the competitive procurement process for delivery services.

l to assess the prudence of an electric utility's power procurement strategy in comparison to several other alternative options. As a result of this model, she assessed whether it is prudent to recover the congestion and loss costs associa...

AI summary The text discusses the assessment of an electric utility's power procurement strategy, including the evaluation of congestion and loss costs, the preparation of a marginal cost study, and the development of an integrated resource plan. These activities are part of a broader effort to evaluate prudence and plan for future resource needs.

- such as target pilot customer, target recruitment samples, and pilot evaluation plans. Brattle also assisted EPE with recruitment strategies for customer enrollment in the pilots. - Rate Impact Analysis for Nevada Energy. As part of Neva...

AI summary The text outlines consulting experience related to energy regulation, including rate impact analysis, cost allocation reviews, and load impact evaluations. These projects involved analyzing demand-side management plans, transmission facilities, and time-of-use rates for various utilities and regulatory bodies.

35 Request IR-08: 36 37 Reference: E-21, Section VII – Unit Costs. 38 Preamble: At pages 26–35 of the evidence, Mr. Love analyzes E1's rising unit acquisition costs, noting that the Preferred Plan projects a first-year EE unit cost of $0.6...

AI summary The text discusses Mr. Love's analysis of E1's rising unit acquisition costs, noting a significant increase from the 2026 Plan and identifying factors such as the end of federal funding and inflation. Questions are raised regarding the predictability of these increases, the use of Canadian benchmarks, and the implications of continuing current program designs.

2 (b) (i) Confirmed 1 3 13 16 26 28 34 40 42 45 - 4 (ii) Neither confirmed nor denied as the Consumer Advocate has no visibility into the 5 operations of LII customers, or their interactions with NSPI. However, it is possible that LII 6 cu...

AI summary The text discusses the confirmation and denial of certain claims related to LII (Large Industrial Interruptible) customers and their load reduction activities. It highlights that voluntary load reductions by LII customers are already accounted for under the interruptible rate, and that providing additional incentives for the same load reduction would result in double-counting and is therefore ineligible.

30 Request IR-13: 31 32 (a) Please confirm that under Nova Scotia's current beneficiary-pays DSM cost allocation 33 model, all Large Industrial customers (both firm and interruptible) currently bear a share of Smart 34 Synergy program cost...

AI summary The document requests confirmation on the current beneficiary-pays DSM cost allocation model in Nova Scotia, specifically whether Large Industrial customers bear Smart Synergy program costs, and whether ineligible customers should bear program costs. It also asks about potential adjustments if eligibility or cost allocation is not extended.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Also, as mentioned in the response to CA IR-4, E1 can maintain short-term 2 affordability by reallocating funds within the existing DSM portfolio budget – 3 away from higher cost energy efficiency measures to DR resource...

AI summary E1 can maintain short-term affordability by reallocating funds within the existing DSM portfolio budget, shifting from higher-cost energy efficiency measures to DR resources that contribute to winter peak reduction, capacity deferral, and resource adequacy. This approach is expected to create a cost-effective portfolio.

city resource, not simply as a customer program; undertake a See E1 response to NSEB IR-07, part (b)(ii). See E1 response to IG IR-17, part (b). new DR potential study focused on winter peak value; identify the relative potential of smart...

AI summary The text discusses the need for a new demand response (DR) study focused on winter peak value, emphasizing the importance of scaling BNI DR and improving residential DR delivery. It also suggests reallocating funds within the existing DSM budget to prioritize DR resources that reduce peak demand and defer future capacity costs.

Research by Efficiency Canada shows that reliance on government funding for equity- orientated programming is not without precedent. Efficiency Canada's 2025 Energy Efficiency Programs Report highlights the different sources of funding for...

AI summary The text discusses the funding of equity-oriented energy efficiency programs, highlighting that government funding is not new for E1, as seen in the success of the HomeWarming program. It also notes that government funding may lead to a more progressive cost recovery compared to electricity rates, but Brattle cannot comment on specific cost allocation details.

Request IR-15: Reference: E-22, Page 3. Demand Response should play a larger and more disciplined role in the 2027– 2031 DSM portfolio. DR provides system value because it can reduce load during the hours when the system is most stressed a...

AI summary The text requests clarification on the system-level benefits of Demand Response (DR) in Nova Scotia, specifically whether these benefits accrue to all ratepayers or only those enrolled in DR programs. It also asks whether cost allocation of DR program costs should be reviewed and if such a review should occur within the DSMAG during the next 5-year plan.

ts, please confirm that the costs of DR procurement are typically allocated as part of the overall capacity supply obligation and spread across all ratepayers in proportion to their contribution to system peak demand rather than allocated...

AI summary The response discusses the allocation of demand response (DR) procurement costs, stating that they are typically spread across all ratepayers based on their contribution to system peak demand rather than being exclusive to enrolled classes. The Brattle Group notes that allocation methods vary by jurisdiction and that DR costs are generally considered system capacity costs.

Response to Request IR-2: (a) Please confirm how the cost of the four existing DSM-funded Energy Manager positions is currently allocated across rate classes. Solar Nova Scotia cannot confirm the rate-class allocation because the underlyin...

AI summary Solar Nova Scotia cannot confirm the rate-class allocation of the cost of four DSM-funded Energy Manager positions, as this information is held by EfficiencyOne and Nova Scotia Power. The costs are recovered through a Board-approved DSM cost-recovery mechanism.

new floor area actually electrified, load coincidence, backup-fuel availability, controls, customer adoption, event duration, rebound, emissions and permitting requirements, and operating constraints. Solar Nova Scotia has not developed a...

AI summary Solar Nova Scotia has not developed a reliable incremental-cost estimate due to missing data on enablement, administration, and performance-payment assumptions. They propose a two-part incentive model for demand-response readiness and recommend using the same allocation methodology as the BNI Demand Response Program.

Response to Request IR-5: (a) Please identify the statutory authority under which the Board could direct IESO Nova Scotia to procure longer-term demand response capacity. Solar Nova Scotia is not providing a legal opinion. Its recommendati...

AI summary Solar Nova Scotia explains that the Board does not have a specific statutory authority to direct IESO Nova Scotia to procure long-term demand response capacity. It suggests that if the Board has jurisdiction, it should direct the appropriate entity to develop a procurement pathway. It also outlines that costs for such contracts should be recovered through the Board-approved mechanism for capacity resources, not through DSM cost recovery. Finally, it notes that resources procured directly by IESO Nova Scotia would fall outside EfficiencyOne's performance targets.

Response to Request IR-6: (a) Please explain how Solar Nova Scotia's recommendation that SE be screened using a test that includes "avoided non-electric fuel costs, emissions reductions, and peak and capacity impacts" is consistent with th...

AI summary Solar Nova Scotia explains that its recommendation to include avoided non-electric fuel costs, emissions reductions, and peak and capacity impacts in the screening of strategic electrification (SE) is consistent with the Board's M12282 framework. It does not propose a new benefit-cost test, but rather the application of the existing modified PAC test and portfolio-level assessment. The cost-allocation methodology for SE remains unchanged, and potential benefits for industrial customers depend on further analysis.

3. REQUESTED APPROVALS DSM costs are included in the revenue requirement that provides the basis for NB Power's proposed rate increase (NBEUB IR-116d on page 209). NB Power is requesting approval of its DSM Plan costs that do not qualify f...

AI summary NB Power is requesting approval for DSM Plan costs totaling $7.9 million in 2024/25 and $9.3 million in 2025/26, which are included in the revenue requirement for its proposed rate increase.

Apex Analytics — Principal 2023–Present - Supports utilities and program administrators on energy efficiency and DSM planning, including plan development processes, project timelines, stakeholder engagement structures, drafting templates,...

AI summary Apex Analytics, as a principal, supports utilities and program administrators in energy efficiency and DSM planning, including regulatory filings, stakeholder engagement, and policy development. They have worked on the Mass Save planning process and provide expertise in affordability, cost recovery, and program design.

Eversource Energy — Director 2012–2021 - Led regulatory, planning, EM&V, and support services for a $500M+ multi-state energy efficiency and demand response portfolio, including oversight of portfolio strategy, performance metrics, budgets...

AI summary The text discusses the professional experience of an individual who led regulatory and planning efforts for a large energy efficiency and demand response portfolio, managed teams, supported regulatory filings, and advised on integrating energy efficiency and distributed energy resources into grid planning.

Regulatory & Testimony Support Commission-facing narratives, discovery, interrogatories, stakeholder comments, cost recovery, affordability, and customer impact analysis.

AI summary The text outlines the scope of regulatory and testimony support activities, including Commission-facing narratives, discovery, interrogatories, stakeholder comments, cost recovery, affordability, and customer impact analysis.

At PDF page 17, Brattle states: First, current PAC test results assumes that program costs are appropriate, but residential DR program costs are much higher compared to DR programs from other utilities, shown in Figure 3. These high costs...

AI summary Brattle highlights that E1's residential demand response (DR) programs have significantly higher costs compared to other utilities and E1's own BNI programs. The high costs are attributed to the use of smaller customer-side devices, which increase delivery costs. Brattle suggests that E1 could reduce costs by learning from other utilities and improving program administration.

At PDF page 10, Brattle states: DSM funding should be reserved for resources that directly and efficiently reduce Nova Scotia's energy and capacity supply obligations through demand-side measures or provide measurable system value in a man...

AI summary Brattle argues that DSM funding should be reserved for demand-side measures that directly reduce energy and capacity supply obligations and provide system value. It notes that distributed solar PV systems are already compensated via net metering, and including them in DSM funding would lead to double compensation and raise policy, rate design, cost allocation, and equity issues.

NOTICE OF INTERVENTION Take Notice that Nova Scotia Power Inc. ("NS Power") requests to intervene in this proceeding in accordance with Rule 11(1) of the Board Regulatory Rules. NS Power is a regulated public utility engaged in the generat...

AI summary Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSP) notifies its intent to intervene in a regulatory proceeding, emphasizing its role as a public utility serving 500,000 customers. NSP manages DSM programs via a contract with EfficiencyOne, recovers DSM costs from customers, and plans to address issues relevant to its utility role during the hearing. Contact details for NSP's regulatory team are provided.

17 Request IR-13: 18 19 Reference: Evidence, p. 45-46 20 21 "The Preferred Plan gives due consideration to program delivery costs. E1 has heard some 22 concerns from stakeholders that program delivery costs have increased unreasonably sinc...

AI summary E1 argues that increased program delivery costs under the Preferred Plan are due to structural factors (reduced government funding, evaluation results) and market changes (lighting market evolution, BNI sector, rising equipment/tech/labour costs), which are beyond their control, and that they have managed costs effectively.

- viii. On pdf pg. 56, E1 states: "To manage overall investment levels in the Preferred Plan, E1 has reduced full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing in the 2027–2031 Preferred Plan to 106.7 as compared to 114.3 in the 2026 DSM Extension." Figu...

AI summary The text requests explanations and documents related to staffing and cost reductions in the DSM plan, benchmarking studies, and expenditures in the 'Program Support' category. It also references a spreadsheet model used to illustrate the benefits of a short payback period for DSM programs.

Request IR-46: - Regarding Appendix A, Attachment 1: worksheet PAC Assumptions: - a. Do the costs provided by NS Power for energy, capacity, transmission and distribution align with the recently approved Cost of Service Study approved by t...

AI summary Request IR-46 contains three questions regarding NS Power's alignment with a Board-approved cost study, inflation adjustments in Program Administration costs, and annual updates to the weighted average cost of capital. The questions seek clarification on cost assumptions, inflation adjustments, and capital update practices.

Request IR-53: - Exhibit E-1, Appendix A, Attachment 5 Innovation Framework, page 6 of 14: Table 1: Projected Direct Expenditures by Focus Area: - a. How are the budget amounts for each focus area determined? - b. Please provide a breakdow...

AI summary Request IR-53 seeks clarification on how budget amounts for focus areas in Exhibit E-1, Appendix A, Attachment 5 are determined, and requests detailed documentation for approved projects versus unapproved ones, including proposals and approval records for the most recent five approved projects from 2027-2031.

Request IR-55: - Board staff notes that in Appendix A Attachment 4 from E1's 2023-2025 DSM application (M10473), E1 included columns identifying the following: "Gross Per Unit One-Time Incremental Measure Cost ($)", "Per Unit Program Admin...

AI summary Board staff notes discrepancies in cost-related columns between Appendix A Attachments 3 and 4 of E1's 2023-2025 DSM application (M10473), requesting an explanation for the omission in Attachment 3.

Request IR-57: - Pdf page 290 states that program costs for the 2027-2031 DSM Plan will be completely recovered - from 2027-2031 and 2011-2026. Please confirm, or explain otherwise, that the cost recovery for - program costs in 2027-2031 w...

AI summary Request IR-57 seeks clarification on cost recovery timelines for the 2027-2031 DSM Plan and outstanding program costs from 2011-2026. IR-58 questions the allocation methodology for DSM-related costs, specifically whether the 25/75 rule or 100% allocation applies to rate classes, and requests updates to Table 1 if the latter is required.

ition of the BNI lighting market and adoption of baselines for various measure types in building codes. Please discuss how E1's investments in lighting measures in 2027-2031 complies with these dates. Request IR-22: Page 48 of the Evidence...

AI summary The document requests details on E1's compliance with lighting market benchmarks and cost management strategies for its 2027-2031 DSM Plan. It also seeks information on competitive procurement practices, including BCA use and contract reviews, to ensure cost efficiency in program delivery.

sed), and 2031 (proposed) broken out by customer segment (Residential vs BNI), DR Option (battery, EV, hot water heaters, thermostats, curtailment, loadshift to BUGs, other – please add), and existing vs. new participants. Please break out...

AI summary The document requests detailed cost breakdowns for the 2027-2031 DSM plan, including segmentation by customer type, DR options, and cost categories. It also asks about cybersecurity incident costs, vendor contracts, and program delivery specifics. The request is filed by Synapse (E1) in a regulatory proceeding.

Request IR-6: Refer to Exhibit E-1, the DSM Plan, Section 3.1 Affordability, page 24 of 71, Line 10 and page 25 of 71, Lines 1-2 and provide detail as to how E1 has adjusted the DSM Plan in later years to account for inflationary impacts t...

AI summary Request IR-6 asks E1 to explain adjustments to the DSM Plan for inflationary impacts on labor and fixed costs without annual inflation increases, and to describe the resulting effects on future expenditure breakdowns as shown in Figure 3.

5 1 2 (b) Please provide a table showing the annual impact of the Preferred Plan on the DSM rate rider for each year from 2026 through 2032, inclusive. State 3 all assumptions. 4 (i) Please provide the same table for the Alternate Scenario...

AI summary The request asks for tables showing the annual impact of the Preferred Plan and Alternate Scenario on the DSM rate rider from 2026 to 2032, as well as combined historical and forecast rate impacts from 2011 to 2046. It also asks for an explanation of why Large Industrial customers will see rate increases for Demand Response despite rate decreases for other classes. The reference points to a study conducted by BBA as part of NSPI's 2014 Cost of Service Study.

8 Request IR-28:

AI summary This document outlines Request IR-28 in a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding, referencing Demand Side Management (DSM), Demand Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR), and the Public Utilities Act (PUA). Key topics include cost recovery mechanisms and regulatory frameworks.

27 IR-5: HomeWarming and Low-Income Single-Family Support - 28 Reference: 2027-2031 DSM Plan; HomeWarming; Affordable Single-Family Homes. - 29 For each year from 2020 to 2031, please provide the following information for - 30 HomeWarming/...

AI summary The document requests data from 2020 to 2031 on HomeWarming and Affordable Single-Family Homes programs, including participant numbers, energy savings, funding sources, and cost-effectiveness analyses. EfficiencyOne is tasked with providing data where prior information is unavailable in comparable formats.

Request IR-6: Refer to Exhibit E-17, the Peach Report, which presents Recommendation No. 2 on page 31 that includes several questions to be addressed. - a) Has E1, or Econoler, considered any of the questions set out in Recommendation No....

AI summary Request IR-6 raises four questions about E1/Econoler's consideration of Peach Report recommendations, cost comparisons with profit-making vendors, appliance recycling post-ARet, and the legality of including social values in the recommendation. It seeks clarification on procedural and regulatory compliance.

GRID MODERNIZATION - Analyzed the impacts of electric utility infrastructure investment on system reliability and resiliency for a Northeastern Utility, following major weather events. Primary area of analysis involved estimation of econom...

AI summary The document outlines various grid modernization efforts, including the analysis of infrastructure investments on system reliability, a report on grid modernization projects for NEMA, customer use cases from AMI investments, cost recovery methods for climate and grid modernization, and an econometric study on Pepco's CVR program.

ctric transmission rates, assisted a renewable energy company in analyzing historical power flows and loads on a transmission owner's network in order to ascertain the degree of integration between systems of varying voltages for the purpo...

AI summary The text outlines Sai P. Shetty's consulting experience in electric transmission rates, time-varying rate design, and beneficial electrification measures. It highlights his work with utilities on cost recovery, rate design, and benefit-cost analyses for electrification initiatives.

23 Request IR-13: - 24 (a) Please confirm that under Nova Scotia's current beneficiary-pays DSM cost 25 allocation model, all Large Industrial customers (both firm and interruptible) 26 currently bear a share of Smart Synergy program costs...

AI summary The text requests confirmation on the current beneficiary-pays DSM cost allocation model in Nova Scotia, specifically whether Large Industrial customers bear Smart Synergy program costs and whether ineligible customer classes should bear program costs. It also asks about policy or regulatory basis for requiring ineligible customers to fund programs and how E1's potential refusal to extend eligibility or adjust cost allocation aligns with the beneficiary-pays principle.

25 Request IR-5: 26 Reference: E-24, Page 11, bullet 1. Solar Nova Scotia recommends that the Board direct IESO Nova Scotia, as the Independent Energy System Operator responsible for resource procurement, to procure longer-term demand resp...

AI summary Solar Nova Scotia requests the Board to direct IESO Nova Scotia to procure long-term demand response capacity, particularly for capital-intensive resources like customer-sited batteries. The request includes inquiries about statutory authority, cost-recovery mechanisms, and how the performance of these resources would be evaluated outside the current DSM Plan framework.

However, the fact that a program has social, environmental, or equity value does not mean it should be funded through DSM funding. DSM funding should be reserved for resources that directly and efficiently reduce Nova Scotia's energy and c...

AI summary The text discusses the allocation of costs related to Solar PV if it is removed from DSM funding. It raises questions about who should bear the cost and the implications for MI and LI customers. The focus is on funding mechanisms and cost allocation.