Topic:"Prudence Reviews" in M11927

jected the initial and supplemental proposals, delaying the approval process until further information on the Project's potential impacts could be submitted. Midgard's opinion is that despite its best efforts, NS Power had little choice bu...

AI summary The text discusses delays in the approval process of a project due to changing requirements from DFO, leading to significant costs for NS Power and ratepayers. Midgard concludes that these changes were a primary driver of the costs associated with the ATO Application and that NS Power acted prudently in responding to DFO's requests.

1 (f) Please elaborate on what Midgard means when it says "subsequent data 2 (a 2006 bathymetric map) suggested the estimate incorporated elements 3 beyond subjective evaluation", and how Midgard reached this conclusion? 4 Request IR-4: 5...

AI summary The text includes requests for clarification on Midgard's interpretation of data and its evaluation of an ATO application, focusing on economic justification, customer best interests, and lowest reasonable costs. It also references a site visit to the Ruth Falls Main Dam and seeks details on its purpose and outcomes.

: 35 No public utility shall proceed with any new construction, improvements or betterments in or extensions or additions to its property used or useful in furnishing, rendering or supplying any 3 Exhibit N-12, NSPI Reply Evidence, page 14...

AI summary The text discusses the requirements for public utilities in Nova Scotia to obtain Board approval before spending over $25,000 on new construction or improvements. It outlines the criteria for evaluating an Authorization to Overspend (ATO) application, including economic justification, ratepayer interests, and prudence in decision-making, referencing the 2005 NSUARB 27 ruling.

y requirements for the IDF and earthquake loading conditions.[8](#page-3-2) However, the application as filed does not properly allow for a review of the updated economic justification of the project. To determine whether a project is just...

AI summary The document states that there is insufficient evidence to assess whether the project remains economically justified. The Board would need to consider alternatives such as decommissioning, but NSPI has not provided a full analysis of these options, despite requests from the Industrial Group. Midgard emphasizes the importance of reviewing decommissioning as part of the economic justification process.