Topic:"Operating Expenses" in M12780

1 Figure 2: 2027–2031 DSM Preferred Plan Average Annual Expenditures

AI summary The document presents Figure 2, which outlines the average annual expenditures for the 2027–2031 DSM Preferred Plan. It is part of a regulatory proceeding in Nova Scotia, focusing on demand-side management strategies and their financial implications. The figure is referenced in the context of energy policy and utility regulation, though specific data or analysis within the text is not provided.

3 5. THE BALANCED PLAN APPROACH - 4 The portfolio was developed in accordance with the "Balanced Plan Approach" outlined in the - 5 Standardized Filing Framework, which directs E1 to "produce DSM Resource Plans that balance multiple - 6 as...

AI summary E1 developed a portfolio under the 'Balanced Plan Approach' to balance DSM aspects, achieving 435.4 GWh energy savings, 85.0 MW demand savings, and other metrics by 2031. Principles include energy/capacity avoidance, cost efficiency, non-electric benefits, and equitable access. The plan emphasizes value for Nova Scotians through diversified programs and market engagement.

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.

5.5 DIVERSITY OF PROGRAM DELIVERY - Diversity in program delivery is a key way to minimize risk and involves the diversification of measures, - markets and strategies. The Preferred Plan includes a full suite of programs and strategies tha...

AI summary Diversity in program delivery reduces risk by diversifying measures, markets, and strategies. The Preferred Plan includes a broad range of programs targeting residential and BNI sectors. E1's diversified portfolio aims to ensure equitable participation despite higher unit costs or lower benefit/cost ratios for some opportunities.

1 Table 3: 2023-2026 Expenditures by Rate Class 2023-2026 Plan as Approved ($ million) 2023-2026 Actual/Forecast Expenditures ($ million) Rate Class Spending as a Percentage of Total Spending - DSM Plan Rate Class Spending as a Percentage...

AI summary Table 3 compares planned and actual expenditures (2023-2026) across Nova Scotia rate classes, showing residential/charitable as the largest spending category (54.2% of DSM plan, 55.4% actual), while large general and small industrial classes show spending declines. Total expenditures remain nearly unchanged (236.8M planned vs. 235.1M actual).

e. - Solar-PV - The Residential Solar-PV program component provides direct support to Nova Scotia's Mi'kmaw - communities participating in the energy efficiency Mi'kmaw New Home Construction program. - Enabling Strategies - 2027–2031 inves...

AI summary The document outlines Nova Scotia's Energy Efficiency initiatives, including Solar-PV programs supporting Mi'kmaw communities, Enabling Strategies investments (2027–2031), and DSM expenditure changes. E1 increased customer incentives (71% of total costs) and reduced full-time employees. The 2032–2036 DSM Plan and collaboration with NSIESO are highlighted.

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.

1 Table 51: 2027–2031 Solar-PV Performance Indicators Year Investment ($ million) Solar-PV Generation (GWh) Solar-PV Lifetime Generation (GWh) Installed Capacity (MW) Participation (products) Lifetime Unit Cost ($/kWh) Program Administrato...

AI summary Table 51 outlines projected Solar-PV performance indicators from 2027 to 2031, including investment, generation, capacity, and participation metrics. The table shows a gradual decline in investment and generation over the years, with a corresponding decrease in installed capacity and participation. The Program Administrator Cost (PAC) is defined as a benefit/cost ratio comparing lifetime benefits to DSM investment.

2. 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 The text states that flow-through costs for the Energy Board, Consumer Advocate, Small Business Advocate, and their consultants, along with E1's direct costs, are categorized under 'Other Enabling Strategies' investment. This highlights the inclusion of stakeholder-related expenses in broader energy strategy funding.

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.

Return of Information 10. On the earlier of either thirty (30) days following the termination of the Supply Purchase Agreement or at the written request of the Disclosing Party (and unless superceded by another form of writing), the Recipi...

AI summary The document outlines obligations for the Recipient to return or destroy confidential information upon termination of the Supply Purchase Agreement or at the Disclosing Party's request, with an exception allowing retention of one legal file copy for legal obligations.

tment of $236.8 million. - This Annual Progress Report (APR) provides: - a summary of the activities and milestones achieved in the prior year, including status of the annual performance indicators; - management's discussion of any materia...

AI summary The Annual Progress Report (APR) outlines prior-year activities, performance indicators, management discussions on discrepancies (25%+ variance), program expenditures, energy savings, system-peak demand reductions, capacity availability, four-year forecasts, and E1's rate class results.

2.3 2025 Expenditures - In 2025, E1's total expenditures were $60.4 million, $2.1 million, or 3.4%, below the 2025 Plan as - Approved spending level of $62.5 million. - The 2025 underspend represents lower spending by several programs, as...

AI summary In 2025, E1's total expenditures were $60.4 million, $2.1 million below the approved $62.5 million. Lower spending in programs like Demand Response and Enabling Strategies, along with budget management to stay within the $173 million 2023-2025 DSM Plan total, caused the underspend. Incentive expenditures remained comparable to 2023 and 2024 levels.

Figure 1: 2025 DSM Expenditures \ Expenditure amounts are unaudited and are rounded to the nearest hundred thousand. Expenditure amounts reported in previous quarters may have been updated and are reflected in the 2025 annual total.

AI summary The figure outlines 2025 DSM expenditures, noting that amounts are unaudited, rounded to the nearest hundred thousand, and may reflect updated figures from previous quarters.

BNI Demand Response Highlights

AI summary The document outlines BNI's Demand Response program, emphasizing its role in Demand-Side Management (DSM) and Program Administrator Cost (PAC) under the oversight of the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) and Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB). Key focus areas include regulatory proceedings and cost structures.

4.10 Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test results - In its decision on the 2026 DSM Extension, the NSEB directed E1 "to include PAC test results for - 2023, 2024, and 2025 in its 2025 Annual Progress Report and to continue reporting resul...

AI summary The NSEB directed E1 to include 2023-2025 PAC test results in its 2025 Annual Progress Report and future annual reports. E1 provided these results in Attachment 3.

2. 2025 RESULTS BY RATE CLASS 2025 actual expenditures were slightly lower than the 2025 Plan as Approved expenditures. Similar to 2024, the medium industrial rate class had the highest spending increase compared to the 2025 Plan, driven b...

AI summary 2025 actual expenditures were slightly lower than the approved plan, with medium industrial rate class spending rising due to higher BNI Demand Response participation. Municipal and small general rate classes exceeded planned spending from increased BNI Efficient Product Rebates participation, while large general and small industrial classes had lower spending due to reduced participation in Demand Response and Custom Incentives programs. Program timing and participant mix influenced outcomes.

16 2025 Rate Class Results by Program - 17 [Tables 2-6 p](#page-55-0)rovide a breakdown of 2025 net incremental energy and net peak demand savings, - 18 expenditures, and participation achieved by rate class within the energy efficiency pr...

AI summary Tables 2-6 provide 2025 data on net incremental energy and peak demand savings, expenditures, and participation by rate class across energy efficiency programs. The analysis focuses on program outcomes and financial metrics.

1 Attachment 3: 2023, 2024, and 2025 Program Administrator Cost Test Results 3 Table 1 provides actual Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test results for 2023, 2024, and 2025, 4 compared to the Plan as Approved PAC test for each year.

AI summary Attachment 3 presents actual Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test results for 2023-2025, comparing them to the Plan as Approved PAC test for each year. The document focuses on cost analysis and regulatory compliance for energy programs in Nova Scotia.

11 was calculated. This method captures the benefits and costs over the expected lifetime of the program, including Critical Peak Pricing (CPP), an 12 estimate of NS Power costs, and benefits and costs from 2022-2031. E1's capacity and cos...

AI summary The text discusses the calculation method used for a program that includes Critical Peak Pricing (CPP) and considers the costs and benefits from 2022-2031. It references the 2023-2025 DSM Plan and the actual results from the 2023, 2024, and 2025 PAC, incorporating DR 10-year annuity payment costs and benefits.

Date Filed: May 28, 2026 IG IR-12, Attachment 1, Page 1 of 1 DSM Statement of Operations ($ millions) Evaluation & Verification 1.35 0.06 0.03 0.08 0.12 0.11 0.04 0.03 - 0.14 0.31 0.06 - 0.13 - - - 0.10 0.13 Program Support 2.33 - - - - -...

AI summary The document presents a DSM Statement of Operations with detailed financial figures across various categories such as Evaluation & Verification, Program Support, Information Technology, and Salaries & Benefits. It outlines costs and expenditures related to energy efficiency programs and administrative functions.

The table below outlines key findings and observations derived from the documentation review. Element Documentation review findings General comments and considerations Skills and competencies Processes to support impactful work: Employees...

AI summary The documentation review identified inefficiencies in processes due to reliance on outdated systems and manual data sources, which hinder staff focus on impactful work. A recommendation is to implement process automation to address these issues.

19 Table 1: Metrics in 2023-2025 DSM Plan Application Column in 2023-2025 DSM Plan Application Attachment 4 Explanation Gross Per Unit One-Time Incremental Measure Cost ($) Following the Nova Scotia Energy Board's Decision on the Benefit-C...

AI summary The document discusses changes in the cost-effectiveness test for demand-side management (DSM) programs, specifically the removal of the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test after the Nova Scotia Energy Board's decision on the Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) test. The new Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test does not include incremental costs, leading to the exclusion of the 'Gross Per Unit One-Time Incremental Measure Cost' column in the 2027–2031 DSM Plan Application.

Table 5: Scenario 1DR-Base – Round 2 Modelling Results PAC Lifetime Available Program Scenario 1DR-Base Investment Benefits Capacity1 Administrator (2027-2031) ($ million) ($ million) (MW) Cost (PAC) BNI Demand Response 18.8 40.5 25.5 2.4...

AI summary Table 5 presents the modelling results for Scenario 1DR-Base in Round 2, focusing on the BNI Demand Response and BNI Curtailment programs. It outlines investment, benefits, available capacity, and program administrator costs for the period 2027–2031.

Figure 1: Glossary of Terms Term Definition Nova Scotia Energy Board Approved Cost effectiveness testing In the Board's Order on a new Benefit-Cost-Analysis Test (BCA) Test for Evaluating Demand-Side Management (DSM) Plans, the Board direc...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Energy Board directed E1 to use the Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of its Demand Side Management (DSM) Plan starting in 2027. The Board also mandated the use of NS Power's Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) as the discount rate. Strategic electrification must reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and electricity costs for customers.

Consolidated Statements of Income For the Three months ended Year ended millions of dollars December 31 December 31 2025 2024 2025 2024 Operating revenues $ 504 $ 479 $ 1,944 $ 1,855 Fuel for generation and purchased power 269 (216) 1,065...

AI summary The consolidated statements of income show operating revenues increased in 2025 compared to 2024, driven by higher fuel costs and other deferrals. Operating expenses also increased, particularly due to higher OM&G costs related to storm recovery and cybersecurity incidents. Net income decreased significantly in 2025 compared to 2024.

Net cash provided by operating activities decreased $801 million to $118 million in 2025 compared to $919 million in 2024. Operating cash flow before change in working capital decreased $538 million primarily due to increased fuel for gene...

AI summary Net cash from operating activities dropped significantly in 2025 compared to 2024, mainly due to increased fuel and purchased power costs, higher OM&G expenses, and changes in working capital, partially offset by increased electric revenues and tax recoveries.

Q4 2025 compared to Q4 2024 Q4 2025 net income decreased by $49 million compared to Q4 2024. The decrease is due to decreased income tax recovery and increased OM&G expenses. Income tax recovery decreased due to the utilization of tax loss...

AI summary Q4 2025 net income decreased by $49 million compared to Q4 2024 due to lower income tax recovery and higher OM&G expenses, driven by increased storm costs and cybersecurity incident-related expenses.

Q3 2025 compared to Q3 2024 Q3 2025 net income decreased by $11 million compared to Q3 2024. The decrease is due to increased OM&G expenses, and increased depreciation and amortization due to increased PP&E in service. OM&G expenses increa...

AI summary Q3 2025 net income decreased by $11 million compared to Q3 2024 due to increased OM&G expenses and higher depreciation and amortization from increased PP&E in service. The increase in OM&G expenses was driven by higher costs in transmission, distribution, and power generation operations, partially offset by higher administrative overhead allocated to PP&E.

Q2 2025 compared to Q2 2024 Q2 2025 net income decreased by $12 million compared to Q2 2024. The decrease is due to increased OM&G expenses, and increased depreciation and amortization due to increased PP&E in service. OM&G expenses increa...

AI summary Q2 2025 net income decreased by $12 million compared to Q2 2024, primarily due to increased OM&G expenses and depreciation and amortization from higher PP&E in service. Increased OM&G expenses were driven by higher power generation costs and expenses related to a Cybersecurity Incident.

Q1 2026 compared to Q1 2025 Q1 2026 net income decreased by $36 million compared to Q1 2025. The decrease is due to lower income tax recovery due to decreased clean technology investment tax credits and higher OM&G expenses due to higher s...

AI summary Q1 2026 net income decreased by $36 million compared to Q1 2025, primarily due to lower income tax recovery from reduced clean technology investment tax credits and increased OM&G expenses from higher storm restoration and power generation costs.

Aligned with the Nova Scotia Energy Board's Decision on E1's Application for a New Benefit Cost Analysis Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management Plans (M12282), E1 has used the Program Administrator Cost test to assess the benefits of t...

AI summary E1 has used the Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test to evaluate the proposed 2027–2031 DSM Plan, aligning with the Nova Scotia Energy Board's decision on a new benefit cost analysis test. Non-energy benefits are not included in the assessment. E1 considered including batteries in the Solar-PV program, based on data from a previous Home Battery Pilot, which could lower the PAC ratio below 1.0.

Request IR-3: Reference: Brattle Evidence, Section IV: Representation of Demand Response in E1's Preferred Plan, page 14, footnote 25: "In October 2022, IESO received a ministerial directive that increased the CDM budget by $342 million, f...

AI summary The document discusses the affordability of E1's preferred plan, referencing a ministerial directive in Ontario that expanded the CDM budget and launched the Peak Perks program. It contrasts this with Nova Scotia's statutory framework, where E1 operates under the Public Utilities Act and must meet the Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test. The response confirms that Peak Perks was launched under an Ontario directive and highlights the differences in regulatory and funding contexts.

NOTICE OF INTERVENTION OF: K + S Windsor Salt Ltd. CKF Inc. Crown Fibre Tube Inc. Irving Shipbuilding Inc. Maritime Paper Products Ltd. Michelin North America (Canada) Inc. Compass Minerals Canada Corp. Farnell Packaging Ltd. P & H Milling...

AI summary The Industrial Group, comprising multiple large and medium industrial companies, intervenes in a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding. They are customers of NSPI, whose costs are affected by the application. The issues addressed relate to those established by the Energy Board.

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.

Request IR-12: - Regarding Section 3.3 "Demand Response" of the Application: - a. Pdf pg. 34 states: "The demand response design in the 2027–2031 DSM Plan was informed by a combination of observed implementation experience, updated modelli...

AI summary The document requests clarification on updated demand response modeling assumptions, administrative cost changes, and DSMAG member feedback in the 2027–2031 DSM Plan. It seeks details on cost updates, investment moderation, and alignment with system planning objectives, emphasizing feedback from DSMAG members regarding prior concerns about demand response scale and cost-effectiveness.

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.

the Program Administrator Cost ('PAC') test at the portfolio level with a benefit-cost ratio of 2.4, satisfying this requirement. For the limited number of individual programs and measures that do not

AI summary The Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test at the portfolio level achieves a benefit-cost ratio of 2.4, meeting the required threshold. This satisfies the regulatory requirement for the PAC test under the proceeding.

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 5.2 Program Delivery Costs, page 49 of 71, lines 9- 13, which states: To manage overall investment levels in the Preferred Plan, E1 has reduced full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing i...

AI summary Request IR-6 references Exhibit E-1, the DSM Plan, Section 5.2, which details E1's reduction of FTE staffing from 114.3 (2026 DSM Extension) to 106.7 (2027–2031 Preferred Plan), along with reduced spending on enabling strategies and a focus on cost-effective program delivery. Questions ask about areas affected by FTE cuts and how E1 ensured program effectiveness.

1 (c) Please confirm Brattle's understanding that Nova Scotia is a winter-peaking system and that 5 Electrification (SE) with the Board's 2025 Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) Decision requirement 6 that SE measures must reduce both GHG emissio...

AI summary The text discusses Nova Scotia's winter-peaking system, the requirement for electrification measures to reduce both GHG emissions and electricity costs under the modified PAC test, and requests for information on non-DSM funding mechanisms for solar PV in Mi'kmaw communities and demand response capabilities.