Topic:"Rate Smoothing Adjustment" in M12696

- 40 "Compliance Period." 1 IG Request IR-4: 2 3 Reference: N-8, Evidence of John D. Wilson (CA), p.7, lines 9-11. 4 5 6 7 I recommend the Board accept NSPML's request to end the Holdback effective April 2024. The Board may also wish to di...

AI summary The document discusses the recommendation to end the Holdback effective April 2024, with a request for action in response to two icing events. The Consumer Advocate (CA) notes the challenge in recommending actions involving NSPML's business partner, which is not directly regulated by the Board.

pan> 6 NSP Maritime Link Incorporated (Re), 2023 NSUARB 175 at para 94. 7 Ibid, at para 95. 9 Ibid at para 12. - 2. The 12-month period does not need to begin prospectively, and can begin no earlier than May 2023 (the month after LIL commi...

AI summary The document discusses the regulatory proceedings related to the Labrador Island Link (LIL) commissioning and its impact on the monthly holdback imposed on NSPML. The Board emphasized that planned outages should not be used to avoid holdback consequences and confirmed the use of WACC in such cases. NSPML filed a termination application in February 2026, seeking to end the holdback dating back to May 2023 and requesting accumulated WACC on the held-back funds.

CONSISTENT PERFORMANCE HAS NOT BEEN ACHIEVED OVER THE COMPLIANCE PERIOD The Industrial Group notes the importance of examining the full picture of the 12-month Compliance Period in determining whether the multiple failures in delivery, inc...

AI summary The Industrial Group argues that NSPML has not consistently met delivery performance thresholds over the 12-month Compliance Period, with significant underdeliveries, and that terminating the Holdback would be unreasonable given ongoing performance issues and the financial burden on ratepayers. They emphasize the need for continued compliance before removing protections.

3.10 The Delivery Shortfall in March 2024 Had No Economic Impact on Ratepayers The IG Submission page 11 states: The Industrial Group does not suggest that repairing damaged equipment, or taking corrective action to address reliability con...

AI summary The IG Submission argues that the delivery shortfall in March 2024 did not shift economic burdens to ratepayers, as customers received more energy than expected. It emphasizes that the Board's test for terminating the holdback does not consider economic impacts on customers, and the IG did not challenge whether the corrective work was in line with good utility practice.