Topic:"Rate Base" in M10473

1 Table 3: Avoided Costs Used in Assessing the Settlement Plan Item Description of Avoided Costs Avoided Costs of Energy • DSM Plan & RBIA: Avoided costs of energy were based on NS Power's 2020 IRP Reference Plan (scenario 2.0C) for energy...

AI summary The text discusses the avoided costs used in assessing the Settlement Plan, including energy, capacity, transmission and distribution, and carbon. These costs are based on NS Power's 2020 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Reference Plan (scenario 2.0C) and the Federal Policy Position Document, with specific assumptions for demand response and energy efficiency.

6.1 THE 2020 INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLAN - Integrated resource plans are employed as foundational instruments to shape system planning and - operations, which informs such decisions as optimal supply alternatives including DSM. The IRP is - i...

AI summary The 2020 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) by NS Power is a foundational tool for system planning and operations, informing decisions on optimal supply alternatives including Demand Side Management (DSM). The IRP aims to identify the lowest revenue option over a 25-year horizon and is essential for developing the DSM Plan. The 2020 IRP was developed through a stakeholder process and includes Reference Plan 2.0C, which is considered a key indicator for DSM investment levels.

8.3.1 HISTORICAL RBIA E1's 2021 Historical RBIA indicates that ratepayers are already positioned to accrue aggregate bill savings in excess of $1.5 billion between 2011 and 2038 as a result of past DSM activities between 2011 and 2022. [Fi...

AI summary E1's 2021 Historical RBIA shows that ratepayers could save over $1.5 billion in aggregate bill savings between 2011 and 2038 due to past Demand Side Management (DSM) activities from 2011 to 2022. Figure 7 illustrates the average rate and bill impacts of DSM by rate class based on historical data.

12.1 HISTORICAL RATE AND BILL IMPACT ANALYSIS Currently, E1 files a historical RBIA on, or before, October 31 of each year. The historical RBIA estimates the high-level, long-term impact to rates and bills of all DSM activities up to and i...

AI summary E1 proposes to stop filing the historical RBIA annually except during DSM Plan Application years, citing limited utility and resource consumption. The change aims to reduce internal costs and has minimal impact on stakeholder assessments of DSM Plan performance.

12.2 PERFORMANCE ALIGNMENT STUDY IMPLEMENTATION The Board, in its decision in M09096, required E1 "to file terms of reference for the investigation of overestimation of costs by October 31, 2019, and to conclude the investigation and file...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board directed E1 to conduct a Performance Alignment Study following its decision in M09096. Synapse Energy Economics Inc. provided feedback, recommending improvements to budget reconciliation, jurisdictional review, reporting, and internal vetting processes. E1 responded by enhancing reporting practices and conducting a jurisdictional scan to inform the 2023-2025 DSM Plan.

13.1 OVERVIEW - The Alternate Scenario represents a total investment in energy efficiency and demand reduction of - $160.1 million over the 2023-2025 DSM Plan. The scenario projects 4,469 GWh of lifetime energy savings - utilizing a portfo...

AI summary The Alternate Scenario involves a total investment of $160.1 million in energy efficiency and demand reduction over the 2023-2025 DSM Plan, projecting 4,469 GWh of lifetime energy savings. It has a first-year energy savings of 377.3 GWh, which is 1.1% of NS Power's load and 12% less than the Settlement Plan. E1 notes that the scenario's benefits may be understated due to conservative avoided costs in the IRP Reference Plan 2.0C.

14. CONCLUSION - The Settlement Plan has been developed utilizing the historical knowledge and expertise of E1 in the best - interests of Nova Scotia ratepayers. The Plan incorporates the accumulated market knowledge and - intelligence col...

AI summary The Settlement Plan, developed by E1, aims to generate energy savings and system-peak demand reductions through a $173 million investment. It aligns with climate initiatives and provides affordable demand-side management measures for Nova Scotia ratepayers.

1 Table 1: Residential Sector Barriers to Participation & Mitigating Strategies Program Program Component Description Target Market Segment Market and/or Participant Barriers and How they are Addressed in the Settlement Plan

AI summary The text presents a table outlining barriers to participation in residential energy programs and strategies to mitigate them. It includes program components, descriptions, target market segments, and how barriers are addressed in the Settlement Plan.

ers achieve cost-effective energy solutions; - providing accessibility for a wider variety of market sectors and customer segments; and - increasing the level of system-peak demand reduction benefits. E1 considers affordability in the deve...

AI summary E1's Settlement Plan focuses on cost-effective energy solutions, affordability, and demand reduction. The plan includes EE, DR, and Enabling Strategies, with a payback period under five years. It is expected to offset 4,600 GWh of energy production and reduce peak demand by 97 MW, delivering lifetime benefits of $540 million.

14 Table 3: Balanced Plan Aspects Addressed in the Settlement Plan Balanced Plan Aspects 2023-2025 Settlement Plan Access to programs by all market sectors and rate classes by addressing barriers to participation • low-income investment –...

AI summary The Settlement Plan includes measures to increase access to energy efficiency and demand-side management programs for all market sectors, with a focus on low-income and residential customers. It also outlines rate impacts, including a RBIA performed on DSM model results and projected avoided costs exceeding initial investments by 2027.

7 Table 4: Key Global Assumptions in the 2023-2025 Settlement Plan Development Key Global Assumptions Model Line Loss Factors • Energy: residential (9.5%) and BNI (6.4%) were updated using the latest figures established in E1's 2020 DSM Pr...

AI summary The text discusses key global assumptions in the 2023-2025 Settlement Plan Development, including updates to line loss factors for residential and BNI based on E1's 2020 DSM Program Evaluation Report, and the setting of EE incentive levels with adjustments for future expectations and program activity goals.

2.3.3.1 PHASE 1 – MODEL CONFIGURATION - The model configuration process involves the initial configuration of the modelling tools associated with the Settlement Plan development: - 1. the DRSim™ model, which models DR activities within the...

AI summary Phase 1 of the model configuration process involves setting up the DRSim™ and ProCESS™ models for the Settlement Plan. This includes adjusting parameters such as cost effectiveness testing methodology and administrative cost build-out, as well as inputting initial assumptions like avoided cost information and electricity retail rates.

2.3.3.5 PHASE 5 – REVISION, REVIEW & VETTING - Following the production of draft model outputs, E1 performs model revisions, leveraging the feedback of - internal subject matter experts, Guidehouse, and DSMAG members to confirm and adjust...

AI summary Phase 5 of the process involves revising and vetting model outputs based on feedback from internal and external experts, as well as adjustments to the DSM Plan and key assumptions. This iterative process ensures alignment of E1's design efforts and improves the accuracy of the modeling.

- E1 has presented PAC test results on an information-only basis. The PAC test provides information relating - to the ratepayer and utility costs and benefits associated with the Settlement Plan, and notably excludes - voluntary participan...

AI summary E1 has provided PAC test results related to the Settlement Plan, highlighting ratepayer and utility costs and benefits. The results exclude voluntary participant contributions, which are included in the TRC. The cost effectiveness results are detailed in Section 3.3.

Table 8: 2023-2025 Settlement Plan Investment and Savings Year Investment a Lifetime Benefits b First-Year Energy Savings Lifetime Energy Savings Average Dem Peak EE Demand Savings Capacity Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) c Prog Admini Cost...

AI summary Table 8 outlines the 2023-2025 Settlement Plan Investment and Savings, detailing annual investments, energy savings, and cost-effectiveness metrics. The data includes lifetime benefits, energy savings, demand reductions, and capacity figures across three years, providing a comprehensive overview of the plan's financial and operational impact.

Annual avoided costs of energy and capacity and annual avoided CO₂e emissions were provided by NS Power, from the 2020 IRP using the Base level of DSM for Scenario 2.0C. Avoided costs of transmission and distribution were provided by NS Po...

AI summary The document discusses annual avoided costs and CO₂e emissions from energy and capacity, as well as the cost-effectiveness ratios of demand response (DR) and energy efficiency (EE) programs. It highlights the investment required for DR and the calculation of benefit/cost ratios using net present values and utility WACC.

Annual avoided costs of energy and capacity and annual avoided CO 2 e emissions were provided by NS Power, from the 2020 IRP using the Base level of DSM for Scenario 2.0C. Avoided costs of transmission and distribution were provided by NS...

AI summary The document provides data on annual avoided costs and CO2e emissions from NS Power's 2020 IRP using the Base level of DSM for Scenario 2.0C. It outlines cost-effectiveness ratios and discusses the investment required for demand response (DR) and energy efficiency (EE) programs, including collaboration between NS Power and E1.

9.5 RATE & BILL IMPACT ANALYSIS - E1 will file its historical Rate and Bill Impact Analysis (RBIA) and forward-looking RBIA as part of each DSM - Resource Plan. The historical RBIA estimates the high-level, long-term impact to rates and bi...

AI summary E1 is required to file both historical and forward-looking Rate and Bill Impact Analysis (RBIA) as part of each Demand Side Management (DSM) Resource Plan. The historical RBIA assesses the impact of past DSM activities, while the forward-looking RBIA estimates the impact of future DSM investments approved by the NSUARB.

9.7.2 PERFORMANCE TARGETS & THRESHOLDS - Performance Target[s46](#page-44-0) apply to the period of the NSUARB-approved Supply Agreement with NS Power, rather than annually; and - E1 is deemed to be in substantial compliance with the NSUAR...

AI summary Performance targets under the NSUARB-approved Supply Agreement with NS Power apply over the agreement period, not annually. E1 is considered in substantial compliance if it achieves 90% or more of cumulative annual energy and system-peak demand savings targets. If below 90%, the NSUARB may take discretionary action.

1 Figure 8: Municipal Rate Class – Settlement Plan Payback

AI summary The document presents Figure 8, which illustrates the Municipal Rate Class – Settlement Plan Payback. The figure likely outlines the financial implications or payback periods associated with a settlement plan for municipal rate classes.

C. Rate and Bill Impact Analysis E1 will also use the Fitted Series PRM adjusted stream (AVC 2.0C NPV 2023) of avoided costs of capacity as calculated by NS Power for the IRP Reference Plan (scenario 2.0C) and provided to the DSMAG on Augu...

AI summary E1 will use the Fitted Series PRM adjusted stream of avoided costs of capacity as calculated by NS Power for the IRP Reference Plan (scenario 2.0C) and provided to the DSMAG on August 20, 2021 for the E1 RBIA. These values are outlined in Table 3.

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EfficiencyOne (E1) delivers energy efficiency (EE) programs that offer benefits to customers and the electric utility. While cost-effective energy efficiency is a key resource option for delivering clean, affordable, r...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) delivers energy efficiency programs that benefit customers and the electric utility. While energy efficiency is a key resource, concerns about rate impacts can hinder investment. DSM programs typically reduce customer bills, but may cause rate increases for non-participants, raising equity concerns. E1's Rate and Bill Impact Analysis (RBIA) assesses the long-term rate and bill effects of DSM activities from 2023-2025, projecting impacts until 2039.

2. INTRODUCTION E1 files an historical RBIA to provide insight into the rate and bill impacts resulting from DSM activities that have been carried out since 2011, as well as those that have been approved by the Nova Scotia Utility and Revi...

AI summary E1 files a historical RBIA to analyze the rate and bill impacts of DSM activities from 2011 to 2022, comparing a no-DSM scenario with one that includes program investments. A forward-looking RBIA is also filed with the DSM Resource Plan Applications to assess the impacts of proposed DSM investments on rates and bills, aiding in cost-effectiveness evaluations.

3. UPDATE ON MODEL EVOLUTION - E1 filed its 2021 RBIA Report with the NSUARB on 1 November 2021. In response to requests by Synapse - and Resource Insights (RI), to increase transparency in the NS Power rate analysis, NS Power incorporated...

AI summary E1 submitted its 2021 RBIA Report to the NSUARB, incorporating transfer tables and cost allocation summaries in response to requests for greater transparency. The report also integrated updated avoided costs from the 2020 IRP Reference Plan.

3.1.2 AVOIDED COSTS The RBIA for the 2023-2025 DSM Plan used the following avoided costs. All values are nominal. - ENERGY: Updated avoided costs of energy from the recent NS Power 2020 IRP. Specifically, the Actual - Annual avoided costs...

AI summary The RBIA for the 2023-2025 DSM Plan incorporates updated avoided costs of energy from NS Power's 2020 IRP, specifically referencing the Actual Annual avoided costs from the IRP Reference Plan (scenario 2.0C).

- the E1 RBIA. These values are provided in [Table 2,](#page-153-0) below. Table 2: PRM Adjusted Fitted Series Avoided Cost of Capacity Values Used for This Analysis Year PRM Adjusted Fitted Series – AVC – Capacity ($/kW-year) 2023 $26 202...

AI summary The document references the E1 RBIA and presents a table outlining PRM adjusted fitted series avoided cost of capacity values from 2023 to 2040. These values are used for analysis related to transmission and distribution system-wide avoided costs calculated by Nova Scotia.

Power and distributed to the DSMAG on 22 May 2021. The calculated values are presented as a snapshot in time for the year 2021. For the 2023-2025 DSM Plan RBIA, E1 applied a 2 percent inflation rate to this starting point to produce a stre...

AI summary The document discusses the calculation of values for the 2023-2025 DSM Plan RBIA, using a 2 percent inflation rate applied to a 2021 snapshot to project annual values.

4.1 SETTLEMENT PLAN AND ALTERNATE SCENARIO - The 2023-2025 DSM Plan includes both a Settlement Plan and an Alternate Scenario, which contain - different investment levels and savings over the three years of DSM delivery. A RBIA was perform...

AI summary The 2023-2025 DSM Plan includes a Settlement Plan and an Alternate Scenario with varying investment levels and savings. A Rate Base Impact Analysis (RBIA) was conducted for both using identical Excel models, with differences in DSM costs, savings, and participation estimates for the 2023-2025 period.

4.2 SCENARIOS - E1's RBIA models both compare two scenarios: a DSM scenario and a no-DSM scenario. The DSM scenario - includes the estimated utility costs and resulting energy and system-peak demand reductions of DSM - programs that are pr...

AI summary E1's RBIA models compare a DSM scenario with a no-DSM scenario to assess the impact of DSM programs from 2023 to 2025 on rates and bills. The rate impact represents the difference between the two scenarios in the same year, not the change from one year to the next. A one-percent rate impact in all years would indicate initial rate increases to recover DSM costs, followed by no further changes.

4.4 TIME PERIOD DEFINITIONS - In this analysis, the following time period definitions apply: - DSM delivery period: the timeframe over which DSM programs are delivered. The DSM delivery period is 2023-2025. - cost recovery period: the time...

AI summary This section defines key time periods for DSM programs and cost recovery. The DSM delivery period is 2023-2025, while the cost recovery period for these programs is assumed to be within each year of the delivery period. The study period, which includes the full timeframe for modelling impacts, is 2023-2039.

4.6 CALCULATING RATE IMPACTS - Using the RBIA approach implemented for the first time in the 2020 RBIA, rate impacts are now calculated - in NS Power's Rate Model (Attachment 6 for the Settlement Plan and Attachment 7 for the Alternate The...

AI summary This section discusses the methodology used in calculating rate impacts through the Rate Base Impact Analysis (RBIA) approach, including updates to the number of Municipal Electric Utilities (MEUs) and the integration of Demand Side Management (DSM) into NS Power's Rate Model. The RBIA isolates the effects of DSM on rates by comparing scenarios with and without DSM.

4.8 CALCULATING PARTICIPATION IMPACTS - This section describes the development of participation figures, which are used for the participant bill - impact calculations. - For illustrative purposes, participation graphs, provided in Attachme...

AI summary This section outlines the development of participation figures used for participant bill impact calculations, referencing historical and planned participation in DSM programs from 2011 to 2022, as included in E1's revised 2021 RBIA.

4.8.2 PARTICIPATION FOR 2023-2025 DSM PLAN YEARS - E1 has estimated 2023-2025 annual and new participation figures based on actual participation records - from 2020[6](#page-162-1) , scaling factors to account for planned savings in 2023-2...

AI summary E1 has estimated participation figures for the 2023-2025 DSM Plan years using scaling factors based on 2020 data and planned energy savings, while excluding certain programs where participation was estimated directly. This approach accounts for the impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on energy usage and avoids skewing the estimates.

4.9 DEMAND RESPONSE - This section discusses how demand response has been incorporated into the E1 RBIA model and NS Power - Rate Model. - Demand Response costs, savings, measure life, and customer incentives are first calculated and provi...

AI summary The document discusses the integration of demand response into the E1 RBIA model and NS Power Rate Model. Demand response is modeled separately from energy efficiency, allowing for multiple scenarios, such as 'no DSM,' 'energy efficiency without demand response,' and 'demand response without energy efficiency.' Demand response is assumed to have no energy savings, only demand savings, and is modeled with a one-year measure life.

5.1 OVERALL RATE IMPACTS - DSM can lower rates by avoiding different types of electricity system costs (avoided energy, capacity, - transmission and distribution, and carbon costs). DSM may also increase rates, a result of recovering - pro...

AI summary Demand Side Management (DSM) can lower rates by avoiding system costs but may also increase rates due to program costs and lost revenues. The 2023-2025 DSM Plan RBIA analyzes long-term rate impacts, showing average rate changes ranging from -0.1% to +1.0% over 2023-2039, with significant upward impacts during program cost recovery (2023-2025) and smaller impacts afterward.

- 9 Integration of demand response 11 Table 7: Average Rate Impact compared to No-DSM Scenario, 2020-2022 Preferred Plan to 2023-2025 DSM Plan 12 Results Comparison Rate Class 2020-2022 Preferred Plan RBIA Result (average rate impact over...

AI summary The text presents a comparison of average rate impacts for different rate classes under the 2020-2022 Preferred Plan and the 2023-2025 Settlement Plan. The data shows slight variations in rate impacts, with some classes experiencing a decrease in impact under the Settlement Plan.

5.2 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 (o...

AI summary The 2023-2025 DSM Settlement Plan RBIA shows that DSM programs reduce electricity bills for participants by -7.9 to -1.2 percent and benefit all ratepayers with $0.4 billion in savings. Non-participants also see slight savings, while the overall impact ranges from -4.0 to -1.0 percent. The savings are attributed to reduced consumption and revenue requirements.

5.3 OVERALL PARTICIPATION IMPACTS Figures 6 through 9 present actual participation for 2011-2020 and estimates for 2021 through 2025. The estimates for 2021 and 2022 are the same as used in the revised historical 2021 RBIA (filed 20 Januar...

AI summary The document presents participation rates for energy efficiency programs from 2011 to 2025, distinguishing between tracked and untracked participants. Tracked participants are those with direct contact and identifying information, while untracked participants are those who join through point-of-sale programs. Large customer classes show 100% participation, whereas smaller classes show increasing participation rates over time.

5.4.8 MUNICIPAL - As modelled, the Municipal class includes Rate Code 24 only. - The average rate impact over the study period is an increase of 1.0 percent, or 0.14 cents/kWh. Municipal • Municipal utilities see an average bill decrease o...

AI summary The Municipal class includes Rate Code 24, with an average rate increase of 1.0% and a 2.7% decrease in average bills. All municipal electric utilities participated in E1 programs, leading to identical bill impacts for participants and total customers, though individual participation is not modelled.

7. FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS - E1 understands, from NS Power's January 2022 IRP Action Plan Update, that NS Power will be engaging - with stakeholders in an Evergreen IRP Update in 2022. E1 will work with stakeholders to consider any - potenti...

AI summary The document outlines future considerations related to the Rate Base Impact Assessment (RBIA) and upcoming regulatory filings. E1 will collaborate with stakeholders to address potential implications of the Evergreen IRP Update and the 2022-2024 General Rate Application on the RBIA.

8. CONCLUSION - Highlights from the 2023-2025 DSM Settlement Plan RBIA analysis include: - Over the 17 years of the study period, participants in DSM programs see average annual bill reductions ranging from a low of 1.2 percent (typical Me...

AI summary The 2023-2025 DSM Settlement Plan RBIA analysis highlights significant bill reductions for participants in DSM programs, with ratepayers saving $0.4 billion. The analysis also notes the evolution of the RBIA model, incorporating updated cost allocation and demand response factors to improve accuracy.

5. PARTICIPATION COUNTS BY CLASS - Participation estimates used in the RBIA model are different than participation estimates used in - development of DSM plans, since the RBIA tracks participating NS Power accounts, rather than the number...

AI summary The document discusses participation counts in the RBIA model, noting differences in participation estimates between the RBIA and DSM plans. Annual participation rates from 2011-2020 are tracked, and 2021-2025 estimates are based on factors related to program magnitude and product mix. Participation values from 2011-2022 are consistent with those filed in the 2021 Historical RBIA.

5.1 DEMAND RESPONSE PARTICIPATION Demand response participation inputs come from Guidehouse's DRSim™ model. Customer classes in the DRSim™ model were attributed to NS Power rate classes based on NS Power class customer counts. The demand r...

AI summary The document discusses demand response participation inputs based on Guidehouse's DRSim™ model, attributing customer classes to NS Power rate classes. Participation is counted annually, and in the DSM scenario, the greater of demand response or energy efficiency participation is assumed due to a lack of historical cross-participation data.

5.2 POINT-OF-SALE PROGRAM COMPONENT PARTICIPATION COUNTS - All forecasted 2021-2025 participation, inclusive of point-of-sale program participation, was estimated - based on 2020 results, using the methodology described above. Participatio...

AI summary The document discusses the methodology used to estimate participation rates for point-of-sale programs from 2011 to 2020, including re-participation and cross-participation rates, and provides formulas for calculating annual and cumulative participation by program and rate class.

6. ENERGY AND DEMAND RATES - NS Power provided estimates for 2011-2022 of rates by class (including energy, demand, and customer - charges). Beyond 2022, energy and demand charges are assumed to escalate at 2.0% per year, while - customer...

AI summary NS Power has updated its rate model to include a blended energy and demand rate, assuming equal savings in both energy and demand. This differs from the previous RBIA model, which only included energy rate impacts. The new model simplifies calculations but may slightly affect individual bill impacts, though total customer bill impacts remain unchanged.

8. AVOIDED COSTS - Avoided costs are calculated at the system level using evaluated DSM savings and avoided cost rates in four - categories: generation, transmission, distribution, and energy. In addition, avoided cost of carbon was used -...

AI summary Avoided costs are calculated at the system level using evaluated DSM savings and avoided cost rates across four categories: generation, transmission, distribution, and energy. Additionally, the avoided cost of carbon was used for a 'With Carbon' sensitivity analysis.

1 Table 1: Full Range of Avoided Cost Values Used for This Analysis Category Years Details Capacity ($/kW-year) 2023-2040 • Fitted series PRM adjusted stream (AVC 2.0C NPV 2023) of avoided costs of capacity, as calculated by NS Power for t...

AI summary Table 1 presents the full range of avoided cost values used in the analysis, including capacity, transmission, distribution, energy, and carbon costs from 2023 to 2040. These values are based on calculations by NS Power for the IRP Reference Plan and provided to the DSMAG.

10. CALCULATION OF RATE IMPACTS Rate impacts are calculated in NS Power's Rate Model and used as inputs within E1's RBIA model. - Forecast Unit Revenue (¢/kWh) is made up of the following components (presented in the 'NSP Input' tab): - Fo...

AI summary Rate impacts are calculated using NS Power's Rate Model and input into E1's RBIA model. The forecast unit revenue includes components with and without DSM, but customer and demand charges remain unchanged between scenarios.

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 used to determine changes in Nova Scotia Power's base cost rates due to Demand Side Management (DSM)-induced changes in class usage and total system costs.

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 has been modified to align with NS Power's COSS methodology for rate setting. NS Power will now provide annual inputs to E1's RBIA model for the historic DSM program effect horizon from 2011 to 2035, including forecast revenues, DSM program charges, sales forecasts, demand forecasts, and customer counts.

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 and demand categories, with generation costs depending on unit function. Transmission costs are classified based on load factors, while distribution and retail costs remain largely static except for inflation. NS Power uses a linear equation to estimate generation cost classification for the RBIA.

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: 11 March 2022 Page 7 of 16 _________________...

AI summary The FAM-related costs are allocated to rate classes using a two-step process, with benchmark unit costs derived from previous rate cases. This method does not differentiate between energy and demand-related costs, but this may be addressed in future RBIA applications due to the increasing share of demand-related costs, now at 15 percent.

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 This section discusses the method used by NS Power to determine unit revenues for different rate classes, excluding certain factors like fuel and non-fuel cost adjustments, cost deferrals, rate smoothing, and revenue-to-cost ratios. It states that excluding these factors does not significantly affect the relative changes in unit revenues between the 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' cases.

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 usage savings from DSM programs are tracked by rate class, using data from 2011 to 2022. Savings are calculated at the generator's gate and adjusted for losses using data from the Cost of Service Study (COSS). This method is consistent with how EfficiencyOne (E1) has used it in its Rate Base Impact Assessment (RBIA) Reports.

Comments The applied process is a simplification of a more elaborate cost allocation process in the COSS where energy- and demand- related non-FAM costs, are determined through application of rate base usage allocators developed separately...

AI summary The document discusses the simplification of a cost allocation process used in the Cost of Service Study (COSS), where energy- and demand-related non-FAM costs are determined using rate base usage allocators. The most recent rate setting procedure's class unit costs are carried forward for subsequent year simulations.

"NSPI Inputs into RBIA" tab "NSPI Inputs into RBIA" provides pricing inputs requested by E1. It includes the following annual class data in years 201-2035 broken out by "With DSM" and "No DSM" scenarios: - Forecast Unit Revenues Before DSM...

AI summary The 'NSPI Inputs into RBIA' tab provides pricing inputs for the Rate Base Impact Assessment, including annual class data from 201 to 2035 under 'With DSM' and 'No DSM' scenarios, such as forecast revenues, DSM program charges, sales forecasts, and customer counts.

Appendix B Attachment 8: E1 RBIA Model – Settlement Plan

AI summary This document is Attachment 8 of Appendix B, titled 'E1 RBIA Model – Settlement Plan,' which appears to be part of a regulatory proceeding involving Nova Scotia Power and the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board.

Annual avoided costs of energy and capacity and annual avoided CO 2 e emissions were provided by NS Power, from the 2020 IRP using the Base level of DSM. Avoided costs of transmission and distribution were provided by NS Power in 2021. a I...

AI summary The text discusses avoided costs and emissions from energy and capacity programs, with data provided by NS Power from the 2020 Integrated Resource Plan. It highlights investment requirements for Demand Response (DR) and Energy Efficiency (EE) programs, including the role of NS Power and E1. Metrics like TRC and PAC are used to evaluate program benefits and costs over time.

The figure below identifies the Contract Price to be paid by NSPI allocated for each year of the Term. 2023 2024 2025 UARB Approved Investment Amount 2020 – 2022 DSM Plan Underspend Net Contract Amount to be Paid by NSPI The Parties acknow...

AI summary The text outlines the Contract Price to be paid by NSPI for each year of the Term, referencing the UARB and the DSM Plan. It also mentions that any surplus realized by EfficiencyOne in meeting Performance Targets will be reported to and potentially refunded by the UARB.

3.1 Individual Impact Evaluation Results [Table](#page-27-0) 6 and [Table](#page-28-0) 7 below respectively list the evaluated energy and peak demand savings as well as the corresponding savings tracked by EOne for each program component o...

AI summary The section presents the results of individual impact evaluations for energy and peak demand savings from 2021 programs. Net savings are calculated using the net-to-gross ratio (NTGR), and lifetime energy savings are based on the effective useful life (EUL) of efficiency measures. Line loss factors were submitted to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) as part of a 2014 study.

8.2.6 Evaluated Gross Savings The annual gross savings are based on the revised unitary savings values established for each product sold in 2021. The results are presented in [Table](#page-139-0) 29 further below. The gross savings at the...

AI summary The annual gross savings are calculated using revised unitary savings values for products sold in 2021. Line loss factors of 1.095 and 1.147 were used to estimate gross energy and peak demand savings, respectively. These factors were submitted to the NSUARB as part of the 2014 Cost of Service Study Progress Update. Gross energy savings at the generator were estimated at 15.792 GWh, with a weighted average EUL of 8.12 years.

3.2.6 Evaluated Gross Savings The annual gross savings for each category of measure installed through HEA in 2021 are listed in [Table](#page-103-0) 18 below. Overall, total gross electrical energy and peak demand savings amounted to 3.618...

AI summary The annual gross savings from energy efficiency measures installed through HEA in 2021 are detailed, showing total electrical energy and peak demand savings of 3.618 GWh and 1.722 MW respectively. These savings are calculated using line loss factors and include contributions from the Klondike pilot. The weighted average EUL value for gross energy savings is 20.8 years.

23.2.4 Evaluated Gross Savings The annual gross savings at the generator are presented in [Table](#page-25-0) 71 below. Overall, the annual gross energy and peak demand savings at the generator amounted to 0.402 GWh and 0.186 MW respective...

AI summary The annual gross energy and peak demand savings at the generator are 0.402 GWh and 0.186 MW, respectively, with a weighted average EUL of 17.7 years. Line loss factors were used to estimate these savings, based on rate codes and submitted to the NSUARB in 2014.

INTRODUCTION EfficiencyOne (EOne), an independent, non-profit organization, is responsible for helping Nova Scotians improve the energy efficiency of their homes and workplaces by designing, marketing, and delivering energy efficiency and...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (EOne), an independent non-profit, manages energy efficiency programs in Nova Scotia, funded by NS Power ratepayers. EOne's 2021 DSM portfolio includes the New Residential program, which focuses on New Home Construction (NHC). Econoler evaluated this program using impact evaluation parameters such as unitary savings values and net-to-gross ratios.

[Table](#page-198-2) 11 below presents the annual gross savings for NHC. Overall, the total gross energy and peak demand savings amounted to 6.245 GWh and 2.511 MW at the generator respectively. Based on EUL values of 36 years for Tier 3 p...

AI summary The table presents annual gross energy and peak demand savings for NHC, totaling 6.245 GWh and 2.511 MW respectively. Lifetime gross energy savings are estimated at 190.712 GWh based on EUL values. Line loss factors used in the calculation were updated in the 2019 evaluation and submitted to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board as part of the 2014 Cost of Service Study Progress Update.

The savings achieved for each Mail-in measure category are presented in [Table](#page-56-0) 13 below. Both energy and peak demand savings were revised by applying the adjustment ratios discussed in Subsection [4.2.1](#page-48-3) above. The...

AI summary The document discusses energy and peak demand savings from Mail-in measure categories, using line loss factors and data from the 2014 Cost of Service Study Progress Update. The total energy and peak demand savings at the generator are 16.366 GWh and 2.433 MW, with lifetime energy savings of 258.596 GWh and a weighted average EUL of 15.8 years.

11.2.4 Evaluated Gross Savings The annual gross savings at the generator are presented in [Table](#page-81-2) 30 below. Overall, the annual gross energy savings at the generator amounted to 0.491 GWh, which represents 1.472 GWh in lifetime...

AI summary The annual gross energy savings at the generator amounted to 0.491 GWh, representing 1.472 GWh in lifetime savings. Line loss factors were used to estimate these savings, based on rate codes and data from the 2014 Cost of Service Study Progress Update submitted to the Utility and Review Board.

part of DSM Plan development, which analyzed incentive levels against thresholds contained in the Incentive Setting Methodology, as accepted by the NSUARB in 2017."[1](#page-58-0) E1 has relied on its internal subject matter expertise when...

AI summary E1 has conducted multiple reviews of incentive levels in the DSM Plan development process, analyzing them against thresholds accepted by the NSUARB in 2017. The financial simulation included three key thresholds, and E1 has calculated aggregate electric bill savings from implementing the 2023-2025 DSM Plan, using the RBIA methodology.

Residual Suggested ID # Original finding Original Finding Description Status Remaining gaps Recommendations risk level timeframe 3.1 Access controls While EfficiencyOne has developed various Remediated + While EfficiencyOne has EfficiencyO...

AI summary EfficiencyOne has implemented logical access controls, but there are inconsistencies, especially with third-party IT providers, leading to a high risk. The original recommendations have been addressed, but further action is needed to align with the rate of access and permissions reviews.

is increase in demand would have on electric grid resiliency and reliability (Tr. 3, at 462-463; Exh. DPU-Comm 12-14). Considering the potential energy savings lost from customers not 74 The Department notes that the risk of installing hea...

AI summary The Department of Public Utilities is concerned about the potential negative impacts of installing heat pumps without prior weatherization, including increased demand on the electric grid, potential system upgrades, and increased costs for ratepayers. The Department suggests that weatherization should be encouraged prior to or as part of electrification projects to ensure energy consumption decreases and ratepayer bills are minimized.

incentives will continue to play an important role in encouraging distribution companies to pursue all cost-effective energy efficiency, including strategic electrification. Because the 145 The Department may also consider implementing a t...

AI summary The Department considers continuing incentives to promote energy efficiency and strategic electrification. It also discusses the potential implementation of a targeted decoupling mechanism in future base rate proceedings to align with electrification and GHG reduction goals. The discontinuance of full revenue decoupling is not immediate, and an electrification metric will remain for the current Three-Year Plans term.

greater than 20 percent. 2019-2021 Three-Year Plans Order, at 174-175. No amended RCS budget proposals were filed with the Department. B. Program Administrators Proposal Each Program Administrator proposes to include its RCS budget as part...

AI summary The document discusses the Residential Existing Buildings program and the proposed RCS budget for the 2019-2021 Three-Year Plan. Program Administrators plan to recover RCS costs through the EES and have provided a breakdown of the budget, though they did not include a home energy scorecard proposal in their Three-Year Plan.

r PV market should be compliant with any applicable DOER regulations or guidelines governing the solar program and St. 2016, c. 75. The Program Administrators shall file an update on the research and development of this strategy in their P...

AI summary The text discusses the need for compliance with DOER regulations in the solar PV market and outlines proposed statewide plan enhancements, including incentives for income-eligible residential multifamily new construction and C&I customers. The Compact proposes to collect costs for these enhancements from electric ratepayers through its EES.

ree-Year Plans Order, at 140. While the Governing Board may work with the Compact to develop a cost-allocation proposal, the Department must ensure that the Compact spends its ratepayer- provided energy efficiency funds in a reasonable and...

AI summary The text discusses the role of the Compact as a municipal aggregator and Program Administrator, emphasizing its responsibility to ensure that energy efficiency funds are used reasonably and prudently. It also highlights the Compact’s obligation to make rate recovery filings and be subject to the same regulatory standards as investor-owned utilities.

method. The Department’s precedent regarding costs shared between or among related entities often involves the same costs at issue in the Compact’s filings: apportioning rent and insurance when operating out of a single facility, employees...

AI summary The text discusses the Department's precedent for allocating shared costs among related entities, citing examples such as rent, insurance, and overhead. It references past cases and rulings from the Department of Public Utilities (D.P.U.) and highlights the importance of cost-effective and nondiscriminatory allocation methods, as seen in cases involving Aquarion Water Company and Oxford Water Company.

.7 37.1 32.0 30.8 30.3 34.0 34.1 28.4 36.0 45.6 Variance 0.4 (6.5) (11.6) (7.0) (2.4) (3.7) (0.9) 0.1 (6.0) 1.4 4.6 Date Filed: April 29, 2022 E1 (NSUARB) IR-20 Page 1 of 2 M10473 – EfficiencyOne (E1) Application for Approval of a Supply A...

AI summary E1 acknowledges the NSUARB's requirement to consider affordability in DSM plan approvals and emphasizes the importance of aligning DSM investments with the IRP. E1 also highlights the opportunity for ratepayers to benefit from unrealized energy savings through future investments, particularly in light of climate change challenges.

ities between E1 and NS Power (2023-2025 DSM Plan) E1 Responses to Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-40: 2 3 Appendix B – Attachment 1 – 2023-2025 Summary Results (Settlement a...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) responded to information requests from the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) regarding the 2023-2025 Demand Side Management (DSM) Plan. E1 provided an annotated version of the Summary Results document and directed the NSUARB to the RBIA models for full formulae and calculations.

blishes a goal for the Commission's Energy Savings Assistance Program that, by 2020, 100% of eligible and willing customers will have received all cost-effective low-income energy efficiency measures. The Commission’s Energy Savings Assist...

AI summary The Commission's Energy Savings Assistance Program aims to provide cost-effective low-income energy efficiency measures to 100% of eligible and willing customers by 2020. It is funded by ratepayers and governed by Public Utility Code Section 2790, which requires utilities to balance cost-effectiveness with reducing hardships for low-income households.

tment of Environmental Protection, The Office of Energy, the Florida Solar Energy Center, as well as information for Florida Weatherization Assistance and Florida's Local Weatherization Agencies List. Last reviewed: June 2020 ","Florida do...

AI summary Florida does not allow large customers to self-direct energy efficiency funds or opt-out of energy efficiency programs. The state does not have decoupling or lost revenue adjustment mechanisms for utilities, though legislation in 2008 directed the Public Service Commission to analyze decoupling. Florida Statute allows financial incentives and penalties for utilities based on energy efficiency performance, but no utilities have requested the additional return on equity.

ncy programs by 2030. Hawaii’s public utilities commission has also adopted an energy efficiency portfolio standard (Docket No. 2010-0037) with a goal of achieving 4,300 GWh of energy savings by 2030. Hawaii has decoupling in place and off...

AI summary Hawaii has implemented energy efficiency programs through a public benefits fee, supported by ratepayers of HECO. The state has adopted an energy efficiency portfolio standard with a target of 4,300 GWh of savings by 2030 and has a decoupling mechanism in place. The Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative was established through a 2008 Memorandum of Understanding with the DOE, aiming for 70% renewable energy by 2030.

an 1 MW demand for any one billing period within the previous 12 months to opt out of programs. Documentation is not required. No evaluation is conducted. About 70%-80% of eligible load has opted out. Last Updated: October 2018 ","The Comm...

AI summary Approximately 70%-80% of eligible load has opted out of programs requiring an 1 MW demand for any one billing period within the previous 12 months. The Commission limits lost revenue recovery to four years or the life of the measure, whichever is shorter, or until rates are implemented in the utility's next base rate case, whichever occurs first.

Approaches to Account for Health and Environmental Benefits of Energy Efficiency. Last Updated: January 2019 ","Requirements for State and Utility Support of Low-Income Energy Efficiency Programs Per Settlement Agreement, the Home Energy A...

AI summary The document outlines requirements for state and utility support of low-income energy efficiency programs, including budget allocations and cost-effectiveness rules. It mentions the Home Energy Assistance Program's budget allocation and the use of the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test framework. Additional considerations include adders for low-income programs and ongoing evaluations of non-energy impacts.

that all 26 Programs with the DSM have TRC ratios greater than 1.0. The Settlement Plan exceeds this 27 minimum requirement. The use of individual measures with TRC ratios <1.0 in the Date Filed: April 29, 2022 E1 (SBA) IR-16 Page 1 of 2 M...

AI summary The document discusses the development of Demand Side Management (DSM) programs with TRC ratios greater than 1.0, as approved by the NSUARB, providing E1 with greater program design flexibility for the 2023-2025 DSM Plan.

1 [Evidence] 2 Request IR-11: 3 4 Please refer to p. 61, Section 12.1, on the historical rate and bill impact analysis. 5 6 (a) Please indicate the source of the requirement for E1 to conduct a historical RBIA. If the 7 source is a Board O...

AI summary The document discusses a request for information regarding the historical Rate and Bill Impact Analysis (RBIA) required for EfficiencyOne (E1) under a Board Order from the 2016-2018 DSM Resource Plan (M06733). The request includes inquiries about the source of the requirement, the scope of the RBIA, and communication with other DSMAG members.

Expert Testimony FORUM ON BEHALF OF MATTER Arkansas Public Service Commission Arkansas Public Service Commission General Staff Formula Rate Plan Filings of Oklahoma Gas & Electric Company Pursuant to APSC Docket No. 16-052-U Docket No. 18-...

AI summary The text presents a table of expert testimony from various regulatory forums, including the Arkansas Public Service Commission and the Manitoba Public Utilities Board, with associated matters and entities involved. It includes references to energy efficiency plans, tariff applications, and acquisition approvals.

14 Table 3: Balanced Plan Aspects Addressed in the Settlement Plan Balanced Plan Aspects 2023-2025 Settlement Plan Access to programs by all market sectors and rate classes by addressing barriers to participation • low-income investment –...

AI summary The Settlement Plan addresses program accessibility and rate impacts. It includes low-income investments, energy savings distribution, and new program components targeting residential and BNI sectors. A RBIA was performed on DSM model results, and cumulative avoided costs are expected to exceed initial investments by 2027.

C. Rate and Bill Impact Analysis E1 will use the Actual Annual AVC Energy stream (AVC 2.0C NPV 2023) of avoided costs of energy as calculated by NS Power for the IRP Reference Plan (scenario 2.0C) and provided to the DSMAG on August 20, 20...

AI summary E1 will use the Actual Annual AVC Energy stream from the IRP Reference Plan (scenario 2.0C) as calculated by NS Power and provided to the DSMAG in August 2021 for the E1 RBIA. These values are presented in Table 2 as nominal.

A. Energy Efficiency Process Model E1 will use the system wide avoided costs of T&D as calculated by NS Power for the energy efficiency portfolio in the 2023-2025 DSM Plan. The calculated values are an outcome of resolving the remaining it...

AI summary E1 will use the system wide avoided costs of T&D as calculated by NS Power for the energy efficiency portfolio in the 2023-2025 DSM Plan. The values are based on NS Power's November 2020 filing to the UARB and are extrapolated using a 2% annual inflation rate.

Table 3. NPV Benefits, Costs, and Benefit-Cost Ratios by DR Option for Alternate Scenario DR Option NPV of Benefits 2021-2030 ($ million) NPV of Costs 2021-2030 ($ million) TRC Benefit-Cost Ratio TRC Levelized Costs ($/kW-yr.) BTM Battery...

AI summary Table 3 presents the NPV benefits, costs, and benefit-cost ratios for various demand response (DR) options under an alternate scenario. The table highlights that BTM Battery Control has the highest benefit-cost ratio, while DLC has the lowest. Figure 4 estimates peak load reduction from DR options, with BTM Battery Control and DLC contributing the most.

2. Demand Response Analysis Approach DR assessment establishes the foundation for DR portfolio development. Therefore, a specific task under the portfolio development exercise was to assess peak load reduction estimates from different DR o...

AI summary The document outlines the approach for assessing demand response (DR) peak load reduction estimates as part of E1's three-year portfolio plan development. This assessment forms the foundation for DR portfolio development and is a specific task under the portfolio development exercise.

- E1 has presented PAC test results on an information-only basis. The PAC test provides information relating - to the ratepayer and utility costs and benefits associated with the Settlement Plan, and notably excludes - voluntary participan...

AI summary E1 has presented PAC test results on an information-only basis, which relate to the ratepayer and utility costs and benefits of the Settlement Plan, excluding voluntary participant contributions. Cost effectiveness results by sector and program are detailed in Section 3.3.

14 Table 3: Balanced Plan Aspects Addressed in the Settlement Plan Balanced Plan Aspects 2023-2025 Settlement Plan Access to programs by all market sectors and rate classes by addressing barriers to participation • low-income investment –...

AI summary The 2023-2025 Settlement Plan aims to ensure equitable access to energy efficiency and demand response programs across all market sectors and rate classes. It includes a significant focus on low-income investment, residential and BNI program components, and market transformation initiatives. The plan also outlines rate impacts, including a return on investment analysis and projected avoided costs.

8 E1 has presented PAC test results on an information-only basis. The PAC test provides information relating to the ratepayer and utility costs and benefits associated with the Settlement Plan, and notably excludes voluntary participant co...

AI summary E1 has provided PAC test results on an information-only basis, which exclude voluntary participant contributions and focus on ratepayer and utility costs and benefits associated with the Settlement Plan. Cost effectiveness results by sector and program are detailed in Section 3.3.

Table 13: Rate Class Expenditures by Year Rate Class Settlement Plan Expenditures ($ million) by Rate Class 2023 2024 2025 2023-2025 Residential/Charitable (2,3,4) 28.2 31.7 34.5 94.3 Small General (10) 2.7 2.8 3.0 8.5 General Demand (11)...

AI summary Table 13 presents rate class expenditures by year from 2023 to 2025, showing increasing spending across residential, commercial, and industrial categories. Total expenditures are expected to reach $173 million by 2025, with energy efficiency (EE), demand response (DR), and enabling strategies investments included in the figures.

___________________________________ 1 2 Request IR-1: Please refer to p. 10 of the DSM Plan Application, regarding the alignment of the Settlement Plan with the IRP Reference Plan. 24 25 26 a. Please indicate the source of the requirement...

AI summary The text includes requests related to the alignment of the Settlement Plan with the IRP Reference Plan, the source of a requirement for a historical RBIA, and communication with DSMAG members regarding the elimination of the historical RBIA in non-DSM Plan years.

Document: 294149 Date Filed: April 14, 2022 Synapse (E1) Page 5 of 9 1 2 with the cost data in these figures. It appears that labels in the two figures are mislabeled. If this is correct, please provide corrected figures and/or tables. 3 4...

AI summary The text contains several requests for clarification and correction of figures and assumptions in a regulatory document. It highlights inconsistencies in labeling and color coding of figures, as well as questions regarding assumptions and methodologies used in battery adoption projections and EV charger load reductions.