Topic:"Customer Service" in M12282

e currently measuring Host Customer "Empowerment" impacts for their related BCA test? (Please identify the related states and whether the test is applied at the measure, program or portfolio level.)

AI summary The document questions the current measurement of Host Customer Empowerment impacts within the BCA test, seeking clarification on related states and the level (measure, program, portfolio) at which the test is applied.

rescribing what DSM must occur, not just a general outline of activities and programs that are broadly consistent with a Plan or Portfolio. - 2) Board must assess cost-effectiveness at the Portfolio level: Notwithstanding that it is engage...

AI summary The Board must specify precise Demand Side Management (DSM) activities, not just general outlines. It must assess cost-effectiveness at the Portfolio level and ensure DSM aligns with NSPI customers' best interests. These duties ensure alignment with customer interests and proper evaluation of programs.

Scotia? 2020 NSUARB 56 M08888, pdf page 2 of 19. - No. - First, although the legislation indicates that cost-effectiveness shall be measured at the portfolio level, - there is no prohibition against also assessing cost-effectiveness at oth...

AI summary The NSUARB must assess DSM cost-effectiveness at multiple granularity levels, not just portfolio level, to evaluate alternatives and ensure compliance with legislative requirements. E1's proposal fails to address mandatory customer interest assessments, including cost reduction, reliability, and availability, as previously interpreted by the Board.

rescribing what DSM must occur, not just a general outline of activities and programs that are broadly consistent with a Plan or Portfolio. - 2) Board must assess cost-effectiveness at the Portfolio level: Notwithstanding that it is engage...

AI summary The Board is required to specify detailed DSM activities, assess cost-effectiveness at the Portfolio level, and ensure DSM aligns with NSPI customers' best interests. These duties are critical for approving the Application, with analysis needing to apply to customer interests.

Does E1 appear to accurately portray the economic and policy framework for DSM in Nova Scotia? 2020 NSUARB 56 M08888, pdf page 2 of 19. - No. - First, although the legislation indicates that cost-effectiveness shall be measured at the port...

AI summary The document states E1 does not accurately portray the DSM framework in Nova Scotia. The NSUARB must assess cost-effectiveness at granular levels beyond the portfolio level to meet legislative requirements, including evaluating alternative DSM plans. E1's proposal fails to address customer interests, which the Board mandates as central to DSM assessments.

- assessment can include benefits to the utility in terms of added revenue, which is the fundamental benefit to the utility and its customers from added sales. - Under either of Option 1 or Option 2 above, E1 would need to continue to incl...

AI summary The analysis questions whether E1's Proposed BCA is the most reasonable alternative, arguing it's overly expansive. Option 1 (expanding TRC) has limitations, while Option 3 aligns with Canadian peers. The PAC test is preferred as it ties directly to utility and customer interests, unlike the delinked Proposed BCA.

Response: (a) Yes. (b) In Nova Scotia, it is necessary under the Public Utilities Act s. 79L(4) for the Energy Board to consider whether the Demand Side Management (including electrification activities, programs and plans) are in the best...

AI summary The Energy Board must assess whether electrification programs benefit all Nova Scotia Power customers under the Public Utilities Act. Critics argue E1's proposals focus on global societal benefits (e.g., GHG reductions) rather than specific customer impacts, violating legislative requirements. The Board must consider non-participating customers' rate impacts, which E1's portfolio-level analysis may overlook.

- Efficiency Vermont.Provided technical support in review of avoided cost assumptions, as well as related policies on cost-effectiveness analyses of efficiency resources (2019). - Earth Justice and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. Helpe...

AI summary The text outlines various organizations' contributions to energy efficiency initiatives, policy reviews, and technical support across regions. Examples include Efficiency Vermont's 2019 work on avoided cost assumptions, Earth Justice's 2019 review of Florida utility studies, and Green Mountain Power's 2016-2018 development of Vermont RPS compliance plans. Activities span policy drafting, expert testimony, and international efficiency program evaluations.

2.3 NS POWER CUSTOMER INTERESTS AS PRIMARY

AI summary The section emphasizes that Nova Scotia Power (NSP) must prioritize customer interests in regulatory proceedings, aligning with obligations under the National Standard Practice Manual (NSPM) and considering non-energy benefits (NEB) and demand-side management (DSM) initiatives.

termine what factors are relevant in the assessment of customers' best interests. E1 submitted that a reasonable interpretation of best interests was not limited to the context of electricity savings.

AI summary E1 argues that assessing customers' best interests in the 2020 Non-energy Benefits Decision should not be restricted to electricity savings. The NSUARB is evaluating the interpretation of 'best interests' in regulatory proceedings.

Request IR-16: - Table 8: Host Customer Impacts, please elaborate on the following terms and definitions relating - to energy efficiency: - a) Asset Value - b) O&M costs - c) Productivity - d) Economic well being - e) Comfort - f) Amenity...

AI summary Request IR-16 seeks clarification on definitions in Table 8 related to energy efficiency impacts, including asset value, O&M costs, productivity, economic well-being, comfort, amenity, empowerment, and pride. The request focuses on elaborating these terms for host customer analysis.

KIMBERLY PAINTING-MACLEAN Pronouns: She/Her Administrative Assistant to Crystal Henwood, Clerk of the Board Nova Scotia Energy Board T 902 424 1332 TF 1 833 809 0040

AI summary Contact information for Kimberly Painting-Maclean, Administrative Assistant at Nova Scotia Energy Board, providing phone numbers and role details.

i. PAC vs TRC Where the Industrial Group diverges from NSPI is with respect to the proposed primary test to be adopted for DSM going forward. In contrast to NSPI, the Industrial Group does not view the Total Resource Cost (" TRC ") test as...

AI summary The Industrial Group opposes NSPI's proposed use of the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test for demand-side management (DSM), arguing it inaccurately measures costs and benefits for utilities and customers. They advocate for the PAC test, which accounts for customer incentives and aligns with Nova Scotia's high electricity prices, aiming to lower ratepayer costs. The Public Utilities Act (section 79L(4)) mandates consideration of customer interests.

2.3 RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR COST (PAC) TEST The IG recommends the Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test as the primary cost-effectiveness test, citing its alignment with other Canadian jurisdictions and its focus on ut...

AI summary The IG recommends the Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test for its alignment with other Canadian jurisdictions and utility cost focus. E1 counters that the test must align with Nova Scotia's legislation, not other provinces, and notes that key stakeholders like NS Power, CA, and SBA do not support PAC. E1 emphasizes NSPM guidance and jurisdiction-specific approaches.

termine what factors are relevant in the assessment of customers' best interests. E1 submitted that a reasonable interpretation of best interests was not limited to the context of electricity savings.

AI summary E1 argues that assessing customers' best interests in the 2020 Non-energy Benefits Decision should consider factors beyond electricity savings, emphasizing a broader interpretation.