Topic:"Debt Service Coverage Ratio" in M12696

Recognizing the impact of the delays to customers, NSPML negotiated an August 2021 start to the NS Block through the Acceleration Agreement. At that time, the physical components of the Lower Churchill Project were complete and, while flow...

AI summary NSPML negotiated an August 2021 start to the NS Block through the Acceleration Agreement, but delays in LIL software installation by NLH's contractor led to low delivery levels. A recent $500 million federal guarantee helped mitigate the impact of these delays on NS Power's system planning.

NSPML Responses to Consumer Advocate Information Requests 1 month that resulted in excessive icing). Additional details to support the request for relief 10 (f) Please provide the WACC calculations in a workbook, with formulas intact. 11 1...

AI summary NSPML provides responses to information requests from the consumer advocate, including details on WACC calculations, holdback retention, replacement costs for deferred energy, and the impact on customers. The responses reference attachments and audit processes by Bates White.

NSPML Responses to Consumer Advocate Information Requests 1 2 3 4 5 accordance with the 30-day outage coordination period previously established by the system operators for outages affecting the delivery of the NS Block, including planned...

AI summary The document contains a request from the Consumer Advocate to NSPML regarding the distribution of a retained holdback and the recovery of an additional $1.1 million in 'updated WACC consideration.' The request also inquires about the delay in applying for a review of the holdback mechanism and its impact on intergenerational equity.

NSPML Responses to Industrial Group Information Requests 1 Request IR-02: 2 3 Reference: N-01 Application, page 6, lines 7–13; Footnote 4 (page 6); Footnote 15 (page 4 12); and 2023 NSUARB 175, paras. 137–138. 5 Preamble: The Application s...

AI summary The document outlines information requests from an industrial group to NSPML regarding the Maritime Link project, including financial figures, cost assessments, and data models. It seeks clarification on the estimated value of energy delivered, assessment costs, and how FLG2 repayment obligations are factored into the analysis.

NSPML Responses to NSEB Information Requests 1 Request IR-01: 2 3 On page 6 of the application, NSPML requests an end to the holdback mechanism and that holdback 4 amounts retained after May 1, 2024, be distributed with updated WACC to the...

AI summary NSPML is requesting the end of the holdback mechanism and the distribution of retained amounts after May 1, 2024, with updated WACC. The NSEB is asking for clarification on how these balances have been treated in accounting, the delay in filing the application, and the use of NS Power's WACC rates.

NSPML Responses to Small Business Advocate Information Requests 1 Request IR-01: 14 c) Aside from the overall complexity of the collective assets(including hundreds of thousands 15 of components), NSPML is not aware of an issue that would...

AI summary NSPML responds to information requests regarding asset management and WACC calculations. It states that no unplanned outages are expected due to the LIL, which is managed by NLH, and explains how WACC was treated in the Holdback mechanism matter M11009, noting a potential reduction if equity financing is removed.

Q: Why might the Board wish to consider a different approach? - A: The Board may wish to consider whether NSPML recovering full WACC on deferred balances reflects risk-appropriate compensation. Where a utility's regulatory receivable is es...

AI summary The Board may consider using a debt-only carrying charge instead of WACC for NSPML's deferred balances, as the regulatory receivable is a risk-free asset. This approach is common in North American jurisdictions and aligns with recent financing arrangements involving Nova Scotia Power. The 21-month delay in recovery is seen as unusual, and the Board has discretion to apply this alternative method.

Adapted from: NSPML 2026 Holdback Mechanism NSEB IR-06 Attachment 2 Month Beginning Balance Holdback Retained Accumulated Interest (semi-annual, July and January) Ending Balance Debt Cost Jul-24 0 1,092,306 - 1,092,306 4,733 Aug-24 1,092,3...

AI summary The document presents a table showing the monthly changes in the NSPML 2026 Holdback Mechanism, including beginning balance, holdback retained, accumulated interest, ending balance, and debt cost. It also includes total debt cost and a table with debt cost rates for different periods.

- 3 previously held-back amounts be returned to NSPML, please explain in detail: - 4 (a) how those funds would be treated for financial reporting purposes 5 (including whether they would be recognized as current-period revenue, 6 prior-per...

AI summary The text requests detailed explanations regarding the financial treatment and implications of returning previously held-back amounts to NSPML, including impacts on revenue, financial statements, debt service coverage, and regulatory compliance.

1. Please refer to Exhibit N-1, page 11 lines 15-16 and footnote 11, and Appendixes A and C. 2. Please confirm that NSPML has not included Supplemental Block volumes from the “Make-up Balance” and “Make-up Balance (%)” columns in Appendix...

AI summary The text consists of a series of requests for information related to the inclusion of Supplemental Block volumes in Appendix A and Appendix C, the availability and performance of the Maritime Link, and references to specific exhibits and board matters. These requests are part of a regulatory proceeding involving Nova Scotia Power (NSPML) and the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB).

Summary The SBA respectfully submits that, while the first part of the test, namely the delivery of previously undelivered energy, appears to have been satisfied by March, 2023, whether NSPML has achieved the second requirement of the test...

AI summary The SBA argues that while NSPML may have met the first part of the test for releasing the Holdback Mechanism, it has not clearly met the second requirement of delivering 90% of energy in 12 consecutive months. The SBA also questions the justification for NSPML's request for WACC, suggesting it should be calculated based on NSPML's approved cost of debt.

ACC is paid to the utility when customers owe money. Should the Board agree with NSPML's request in this Application, the $15.3 million should have been paid to NSPML in 2024 and 2025.[14](#page-3-6) Although the Board has previously allow...

AI summary The document discusses a request by NSPML for ACC payments, with a recommendation by Mr. Wilson to adjust the carrying charge due to a 21-month delay in the application. The CA supports this recommendation, and the Consumer Advocate submits their comments to the Board.

f WACC 32 on customers is the same as if the funds were provided to NSPML in the first 33 place. 34 35 John Wilson proposed that holdback funds be released to NSPML since the end of the 36 Compliance Period, but with a carrying charge to b...

AI summary The document discusses the recommendation to release holdback funds to NSPML with a carrying charge calculated at NSPML's approved cost of debt, rather than using WACC. John Wilson suggests this approach, while NSPML agrees but prefers WACC. The discussion references past imbalances in Nova Scotia and cites a Board decision (M11009) supporting the use of WACC.