Topic/Matter Intersection

Topic:"Regulatory Compliance" in M12282

Matter: EfficiencyOne - New Benefit Cost Analysis Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management (DSM) Plans Application for Approval of New Benefit Cost Analysis Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management (DSM) Plans
195 passages 39 documents

Regulatory Compliance across all matters →

E-1Notice of Application and Evidence 34 passages
Section 18
1 1. INTRODUCTION 2 The energy landscape in Nova Scotia is in a state of significant change. The ambitious emissions reductions 3 targets under both provincial and federal legislation are fueling a transition to integrating more renewable...

AI summary Nova Scotia's energy sector is undergoing transformation due to provincial and federal emissions targets, with the Energy Reform (2024) Act creating a new Energy Board to regulate sustainable development. The Total Resource Cost (TRC) test is central to evaluating EfficiencyOne's demand-side management (DSM) plans, aligning regulatory assessments with climate policy objectives.

Section 23
Table 1: Impact Categories Under TRC Test Total Resource Cost Impact Category Sub-Category Utility System Electric • Generation • Transmission • Distribution • General 12 The cost-effectiveness assessment of E1’s current 2023-2025 DSM Plan...

AI summary The document outlines the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test applied to EfficiencyOne's DSM Plan, emphasizing avoided costs in generation, transmission, and distribution. It notes NS Power's current methodology for calculating utility avoided costs and the upcoming transition to the Independent Energy System Operator. The TRC test requires a cost-effective ratio of 1.0 or greater, but the current test is criticized for not aligning with recent legislative changes.

Section 52
1 6.2 CHANGES UNDER ENERGY REFORM ACT 2 The Energy Reform (2024) Act, SNS 2024, c 2, (“Energy Reform Act”) which was passed in early April 2024, 3 establishes two new statutes: 4 5 • The Energy and Regulatory Boards Act 6 • The More Access...

AI summary The Energy Reform (2024) Act introduces two new statutes, the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act and the More Access to Energy Act, and amends existing energy-related statutes such as the Electricity Act, Gas Distribution Act, and the Public Utilities Act. The Energy and Regulatory Boards Act expands the Energy Board's mandate to consider factors like competition, innovation, and sustainable development in regulatory decision-making.

Section 55
1 The More Access to Energy Act establishes the following purposes: 2 3 2 The purpose of this Act is to 4 5 (a) increase competition and innovation in the Province's energy sector; 6 7 (b) ensure the provision of a safe, secure, reliable a...

AI summary The More Access to Energy Act aims to increase competition and innovation in Nova Scotia's energy sector, ensure a reliable energy supply, and support sustainable development and prosperity as defined by the Environment Act and Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act. It also outlines a transition to an independent energy system operator.

Section 57
ative changes noted above have broadened the scope of what the Energy Board must now 7 consider when assessing the applications that come before it, including those pertaining to DSM activities. 8 9 6.3 LEGISLATIVE MANDATE TO CONSIDER NON-...

AI summary Recent legislative changes have expanded the Energy Board's mandate to consider non-utility impacts, including environmental and sustainability factors, when assessing DSM activities. The Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act and the More Access to Energy Act now require the integration of GHG reduction targets and sustainable development into regulatory decisions.

Section 59
rimary costs and the non-utility impacts (other fuel savings and GHG 13 emissions savings) become the primary benefits. Without their inclusion the testing cannot be conducted 14 appropriately. 15 16 6.4 LEGISLATIVE MANDATE TO CONSIDER HOS...

AI summary The text discusses the legislative mandate under the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act, which requires the Energy Board to consider sustainability-focused factors, including impacts on future generations, environmental stewardship, and social responsibility, in its regulatory decision-making.

Section 68
lance between 5 the materiality of impacts, and the importance of transparency in measuring all relevant impacts. 6 7 Each of these design objectives is discussed more fully in this section. 8 9 8.1 EXTENSIVE DSMAG PROCESS 10 E1 recognizes...

AI summary E1 is developing a new Best Interest of Customers (BCA) test by following a structured DSMAG consultation process and aligning with the NSPM guidelines. This process ensures the test is comprehensive, technology-neutral, and consistent with Nova Scotia legislation and policy goals.

Section 80
 Requirements Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order No. 2222 1 2 3 10.3 NON-UTILITY SYSTEM IMPACTS 4 As explained in the NSPM, best practices suggest that all impacts relating to a jurisdiction’s policy goals 5 and objectives...

AI summary The document outlines the inclusion of non-utility system impacts (N-USIs) in the Best Interest of Customers (BCA) test, emphasizing the need to consider efficiency and distributed energy resources (DERs). It references legislative changes, particularly the More Access to Energy Act, and recommendations from the EfficiencyOne Group (EFG) and the Demand Side Management Advisory Group (DSMAG).

Section 113
est with 7 Legislative Framework 8 Q: What steps did EFG take to ensure the recommended Nova Scotia BCA test is aligned with and 9 reflects Nova Scotia policy and legislative priorities? 10 A: Conducting an inventory of Nova Scotia’s relev...

AI summary EFG ensured alignment of the Nova Scotia BCA test with policy and legislative priorities by reviewing relevant legislation, including the Public Utilities Act and Energy Reform Act. Amendments to the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act and More Access to Energy Act expanded the scope of impacts considered in regulatory decisions to include sustainable development and prosperity.

Section 156
01234567897 73 ÿ ÿÿ  ÿ   ÿ!"ÿ# ÿ$#%&'ÿ()''ÿ#ÿ ' +" ÿ, -)ÿ.'" 'ÿ/0123ÿ45ÿ67ÿ 89:;9<=ÿÿ9ÿ>;?<@964:ÿ4Aÿ67ÿ0964:9<ÿB:75CDÿ1@577::Cÿ254E7@6ÿ/0B12=Fÿ7ÿ0B12ÿÿ57>577:67Gÿ?Dÿ9ÿ69H74 ÿ4Aÿ45C9:...

AI summary The document discusses the 01234567897 73 ÿ and its implications on regulatory processes, including the role of various entities and the use of specific methodologies and standards. It references topics such as energy efficiency, demand-side management, and regulatory compliance.

Section 198
!ÿ #!!$%&ÿ '()ÿ +, -.)ÿ-/ÿ0( .ÿ1 7ÿ28ÿ38 ÿ4ÿ678ÿ9 67ÿ ÿ76ÿ8 ÿ 8ÿ 78 ÿ123456ÿ89ÿ:;<ÿ=>?@>ABÿCDÿ:8ÿ; :ÿK@D:8=<9DLÿ ) -a), PTÿN+.0- ),.ÿ0-ÿ- 0 i)ÿ0() ,ÿ)PSM+.).ÿVPSÿ /VN W 0 )._ÿ]^.ÿ PNW+S)ÿ]]hÿ\^hÿ\ehÿ\fhÿ N-...

AI summary The document discusses the implementation and evaluation of energy efficiency programs, focusing on topics such as demand-side management, regulatory compliance, and the impact of various initiatives on energy usage and cost recovery. It also references regulatory processes and stakeholder engagement.

Section 199
SÿVÿYZ[ÿ/,V )a-,jÿQ0()ÿkflmÿ U+ WS PT._ÿ]^.ÿNVPÿ) 0(),ÿU)ÿ-Pÿ0()ÿ YZ[ÿn,V )a-,jRÿ0(V0ÿS)/ P).ÿ0()ÿ.0) .ÿVÿo+, .S N0 -PÿNVPÿ (-.0ÿN+.0- ),ÿ. S)ÿ-/ÿ0()ÿ+0 W 0Xÿ P0),N-PP)N0 -Pÿ - P0ÿQ _)_hÿU)( PSÿ0()ÿ +.)ÿ0-ÿS)O)W- ÿ 0.ÿ , V,XÿN-.0M)//)N0 O)...

AI summary The text discusses the importance of regulatory compliance and the need for accurate forecasting methodologies in utility proceedings. It references a variety of regulatory processes, including benefit-cost analyses and prudence reviews, and highlights the role of entities such as Nova Scotia Power and the Office of People’s Counsel in these matters.

Section 242
ÿ/ .-6 3- 1+ÿ1,,<%"#Hÿ!136.ÿ#+/ÿ/ .0!#6;".ÿ/36 +;ÿ-!"ÿ/ .-6 3- 1+ÿ%"#Hÿ!136.>ÿ ŽÿEGÿ6"/30".ÿ/"$#+/ÿ/36 +;ÿ/ .-6 3- 1+ÿ%"#Hÿ%"6 1/.ÿ#+/16ÿ.! ,-.ÿ&1#/ÿ,61$ÿ/ .-6 3- 1+ÿ%"#Hÿ%"6 1/.ÿ-1ÿ / .-6 3- 1+ÿ1,,<%"#Hÿ%"6 1/.>ÿ ŽÿE .-6 3-"/ÿJKÿ6".1360"...

AI summary The document discusses regulatory proceedings related to energy efficiency and cost management in Nova Scotia, including topics such as fuel-cost-adjustment mechanisms, energy efficiency programs, and regulatory compliance. It references various legal and procedural matters and mentions entities involved in these proceedings.

Section 270
ÿ5/0F15ÿ0F/0ÿ/ÿO75 4- .0 8,ÿ/33: 14ÿ0F1ÿGHIJÿPQRÿS5/21985Tÿ08ÿ51L 19ÿ 04ÿ 1 40 ,6ÿ38: . 14ÿ08ÿ-1L1:83ÿ/ÿ.840N1;;1.0 L1,144ÿ0140ÿ9F .Fÿ51;:1.04ÿ:8./:ÿ38: .Mÿ[email protected] L14Aÿ !#) !Cÿ$& "UDVVD$"#WD'D ÿ"D "+ÿ0F1ÿ.840N1;;1.0 L1,144ÿ0140ÿ0F/0ÿ/ÿO75...

AI summary The text discusses the impact of the O75 mechanism on fuel-cost-adjustment and its influence on rate structures, including concerns about incentives and cost recovery. It also mentions regulatory considerations related to efficiency programs and compliance with standards.

Section 425
ÿ&'ÿ(ÿ6&D'ÿ"+&/&+0ÿ) D&#ÿ+ &+% 0ÿ-(0ÿM+'!ÿ50%'!ÿ+,ÿ5% ! )ÿ %.ÿ+,(+ÿ) D&#ÿ+ &+% 0ÿ5#(")ÿ%.ÿ+,ÿ 6&%'(/ÿ'(+" ÿ%.ÿ-%)+ÿ2,%/)(/ÿ-( 3+)1ÿ2,&#,ÿ+'!ÿ+%ÿ '#%-4())ÿ-"/+&4/ÿ"+&/&+0ÿ) D&#ÿ+ &+% &)7ÿE,")1ÿ 6"/(+% )ÿ' !ÿ+%ÿ!#&!ÿ2,+, ÿ+%ÿ&'#/"!ÿ+,ÿ -( 3+...

AI summary The document discusses regulatory proceedings related to energy efficiency programs, including the implementation of demand-side management initiatives and the role of the Nova Scotia Power (NSP) in these efforts. It also covers financial and operational considerations such as cost recovery, fuel adjustment mechanisms, and compliance with regulatory standards.

Section 431
#%"- ÿ+#,"!"%"1ÿ"1ÿ!-1%ÿ#1ÿ"%ÿ% #:!1ÿ#, -11ÿ %)ÿ2"1% "$3%"- ÿ1&1%7ÿ%-ÿ%)ÿ+" #!ÿ4-" %ÿ-+ÿ,- 1374%"- 'ÿ()"1ÿ" ,!321ÿ!-111ÿ- ÿ%)ÿ2"1% "$3%"- ÿ!" 1ÿ # 2ÿ% # 1+- 7 1'ÿY" ÿ!-111ÿG4# 2ÿG4- %"#!!&ÿ#1ÿ%)ÿ1&1%7ÿG4 " ,1ÿ)"6) ÿ!:!1ÿ-+ÿ!-#2<ÿ1-ÿ ,-1%Z+...

AI summary The text discusses the regulation of utility costs and the impact of mechanisms such as fuel-cost-adjustment and rate-setting processes. It references the role of entities like Nova Scotia Power and Affordable Bill Cap, and mentions topics such as cost recovery, rate design, and regulatory compliance. It also references specific regulatory matters and the need for alignment between cost structures and service delivery.

Section 605
Fÿ YJPBJLC@ÿP@D@UJ LC@ÿQ@D@PJIBHD[ÿRHI@DIBJCCKÿEHAIAÿBMÿCHJN\AVBMIBDQÿ GOLCBEÿ^@JCIVÿ ÿ JEHDANIÿALÿJESORÿQ@D@PJIBHDÿEP@JI@ÿ@DYBPHDW@DIJCÿJDNÿROLCBEÿV@JCIVÿ cHUÿdDEHW@eÿfHEB@IKÿ Fÿ _D@PQKÿf@EOPBIKÿ Fÿ F8ÿg7ÿ8h ÿhÿkÿÿh 6ÿ678ÿÿi...

AI summary The text discusses the regulation and management of energy systems, including the evaluation of fuel-cost-adjustment mechanisms, the role of the Board in ensuring fair practices, and the impact of various regulatory processes on energy efficiency and affordability. It also touches on the importance of stakeholder engagement and compliance with energy regulations.

Section 700
@ ÿ#),+,ÿ +,+3ÿ+#./(,ÿ .&0-ÿ),0!ÿ00,8"#,ÿ,0, #/" ÿ+$+#,'ÿ+!"D,+3ÿ!.#, #"00$ÿ!8" (ÿ #),ÿ7 $ÿ5./ÿ'./,ÿ, . .'" ÿ,0, #/"5" #". 2ÿ? $ÿ+& )ÿ"'! #+ÿ. ÿ #&/0ÿ(+ÿ+&!!0",+ÿ -ÿ,'"++". +ÿ +).&0-ÿ%,ÿ,80&#,-ÿ. ÿÿ +,4%$4 +,ÿ%+"+2ÿ PQRQRÿ hicVÿj\cVi_XYÿki...

AI summary The text discusses the regulatory proceedings related to the Board of Fuel Costs (BFC) and the Board of Commissioners (BC), focusing on the implementation of the fuel-cost-adjustment mechanism and the impact of the Public Utilities Act (PQR). It references the need for regulatory oversight and the evaluation of cost-effectiveness and compliance.

Section 724
F34ÿ2;K=47ÿ9<ÿ2397ÿ74?290<ÿ76::;19q4ÿ234ÿ86==ÿ1; ÿ;ÿ?072>ÿ01ÿ 492341>ÿ@454<@9 ÿ01ÿA9?4ÿA417;EÿF34ÿ2;K=47ÿ9<?=6@4ÿ<0247ÿ0<ÿ ;55=9?;K9=92Cÿ23;2ÿ510A9@4ÿ8612341ÿ4[5=;<;290<ÿ801ÿ23074ÿ9:5;?27ÿ23;2ÿ:;CÿK4ÿ492341ÿ;ÿ?072ÿ01ÿK4<4892Eÿ F;K=4ÿstDsÿ5...

AI summary The text discusses the implementation and evaluation of fuel-cost-adjustment mechanisms and related regulatory processes, highlighting concerns about the alignment of base rates with actual costs and the effectiveness of various regulatory approaches in Nova Scotia.

Section 758
=C; A>:6=ÿ~s€spt‚ÿB6O>7EBÿ6BB@;>6<9FÿZ> 7?=6B<=C; B<=>DC<>@7ÿ@?ÿ J9<=@:9CAÿJ=@FC; <>@7Vÿ9:9;<=>?>;6<>@7ÿ@?ÿDC>:F>7EBÿ;67ÿ@DO>6<9ÿ 7Eÿ :F>7EBÿ<@ÿ B<=>DC<>@7ÿB8B<9AÿI>7;:CF>7Eÿ>7B<6::6<>@7ÿ@?ÿ6ÿE6BÿA9<9=KVÿB6O>7Eÿ @7BPÿSG>Bÿ ;67ÿ@;;C=ÿ>7ÿ...

AI summary The text discusses the regulatory process and considerations related to efficiency programs, including the evaluation of benefits and costs, and references to a National Standard Practice Manual. It touches on the importance of stakeholder engagement and the need for compliance with regulatory standards.

Section 775
1234ÿ678ÿ9 67ÿ ÿ76ÿ8 ÿ 8ÿ78 ÿÿ  ÿ DATE FILED: May 16, 2025 Page 179 of 302 Appendix A - EfficiencyOne Benefit-Cost Analysis Test Application Attachment 2: National Standard Practice Manual ÿ !"#$%ÿ&'ÿ(&)#( +!ÿ!(!"!$,%...

AI summary This document discusses the EfficiencyOne Benefit-Cost Analysis Test Application and references the National Standard Practice Manual. It outlines the methodology for evaluating energy efficiency programs, including cost-benefit analysis, program evaluation, and regulatory compliance considerations.

Section 827
278 ¿ÿ1À ÁÂÃ7ÿÄÅ ÆÇÿ ÿ WF<ÿC;EH]ÿF@IFJ@IF;Cÿ;F<ÿBGJJGL@:Iÿ@:;<=>?;@A<ÿ O;E= ?;@G:CÿD<;L<<:ÿ= ;ÿ>ÿC@:IJ<ÿ?EC;GN<=ÿC@;<ÿ>:HÿGO;@N@l I<ÿÿ ?F>=I@:IÿTB=GNÿG:KC@;<ÿQhUÿ>:HÿH@C?F>=I@:Iÿ;GÿN>M@N@l<ÿDG;FÿO<>iÿCF>A@:Iÿ>:Hÿ?EC;GN<=ÿA>JE<ÿB=GN...

AI summary The document discusses regulatory proceedings related to energy management and utility practices in Nova Scotia, focusing on topics such as fuel-cost-adjustment mechanisms, energy efficiency programs, and regulatory compliance. It also addresses the involvement of entities in these proceedings and references various legal and policy frameworks.

Section 848
1#ÿ#""# &,ÿ)%ÿ'1)!#ÿ ),&,ÿ2,##ÿ 3# &!)%ÿ4565785ÿ9%ÿ&+#ÿ ',#ÿ)"ÿ:;3ÿ!%!&!'&!1#,<ÿ&+#ÿ!%&#$' &!1#ÿ#""# &,ÿ)%ÿ'1)!#ÿ ),&,ÿ'$#ÿ=!>#=?ÿ&)ÿ -#ÿ,0'==<ÿ.%=#,,ÿ'%ÿ.%&!=ÿ&+#ÿ!%!&!'&!1#,ÿ$#' +ÿ+!@+ÿ$'&#,ÿ)"ÿ#(=)?0#%&5ÿ AÿCDEÿÿCDÿ66 5ÿ;+#%ÿ0.=&!(=...

AI summary The document discusses the regulation of fuel-cost-adjustment mechanisms and their impact on pricing and policy in Nova Scotia. It references proceedings and stakeholder involvement related to efficiency programs and regulatory oversight.

Section 860
p?I?P9 :>K?<9A:ÿP?I?P9 :> GÿK<ÿA@ÿ><=P?>Gÿjg k8Tÿ g:B9KA:H>:<?LÿpAHIL9?:P>ÿ i ÿ 9:PLGF>8ÿggÿ8?B9:;8ÿ?:FÿjlmÿAG >ÿ IÿMND ÿ ÿR9<=ÿ f(0(e&+240ÿ klDqpgDÿpAHIL9?:P>ÿ iÿ 8oAS8R><>Hÿ;>:>K?<9A:ÿI>?nTÿÿ r?Kn><ÿlK9P>ÿgJJ>P<8ÿ iÿ IK9H?BK9>LSKÿO<ÿ >ÿj...

AI summary The document discusses various aspects of regulatory proceedings related to energy efficiency, demand-side management, and utility regulations in Nova Scotia. It includes references to programs, policies, and regulatory processes involving entities like Nova Scotia Power and EfficiencyOne, as well as topics such as benefit-cost analysis and regulatory compliance.

Section 974
:ÿ7>BÿD>BM=BA90Fÿ8@A?=89B?ÿ9@ÿM=7A94DFÿ123ÿGBABD49:Kÿ4Aÿ67>948=07>ÿ9;Bÿ =94049Fÿ:F:9B5ÿGBABD49:Hÿj;B:Bÿ:9=?4B:ÿ7>Bÿ9F648700Fÿ<=>4:?4894@AC:6B84D48ÿ9@ÿBA:=>Bÿ9;79ÿ9;BFÿ788=>79B0Fÿ 8769=>Bÿ9;Bÿ@6B>794@A:ÿ7A?ÿ9;Bÿ456789:ÿ@Dÿ9;Bÿ=94049Fÿ:F:9B5...

AI summary The text discusses the application of a benefit-cost analysis test for EfficiencyOne, referencing regulatory practices and procedures. It touches on topics such as regulatory compliance, cost-effectiveness, and the evaluation of programs and policies.

Section 975
,2ÿ42ÿ $7#, %'$ ÿ&( ÿ ÿ9:;<=><?@ <?@<ABC=ÿ +)(-()ÿ+$') Dÿ LjkjkjÿTJMSVOIÿmPHNÿnJoOPÿpMPVISVUJVHRIÿ q!ÿ ' ÿ) ÿ !"ÿ-'$ÿ ' ÿ( + )% 6ÿ ÿr#$( "()%('!f +)(-()ÿ %#"2ÿ (73%ÿ!'%ÿ4ÿ & (, 4,ÿ-'$ÿ ' ÿ'-ÿ%3ÿ (!-'$ %('!ÿ! ""ÿ-'$ÿ ÿ./0Dÿq!ÿ%3 ÿ) 6ÿ(%ÿ 2ÿ...

AI summary The text discusses regulatory proceedings involving Nova Scotia Power, focusing on fuel-cost-adjustment mechanisms, cost recovery, and the impact of regulatory decisions on utility operations. It references proceedings, stakeholder engagement, and the importance of prudence reviews in ensuring compliance and fair practices.

Section 996
Cost Analysis Test Application Attachment 2: National Standard Practice Manual ÿ

AI summary This document is an attachment to a Cost Analysis Test Application and references the National Standard Practice Manual. It appears to be part of a regulatory proceeding, likely related to utility cost analysis and compliance with standard practices.

Section 1029
!"#$ÿ&'ÿ) +"#,#-!+.ÿ/-0,1&223,#4!00ÿ)0,0ÿ 5678ÿ9::;<=7>ÿ:?@A7=;8ÿ9ÿ=;8B?7:C7@<ÿ@DÿC6;ÿC?9=7C7@<9EÿC;8C8ÿF8;=ÿD@?ÿ988;887 ÿ 9E8@ÿ;O:6987g;8ÿC6;ÿ=78C7 ÿXÿD@?ÿO@?;ÿ=;C97E;=ÿ7 ÿ:?@A7=;8ÿ7 ÿ=;8B?7M;8ÿC6;ÿZ;fÿ;E;O; ÿ:?@A7=;8kÿ uÿXÿ=;8B?7:C7@<ÿ@D...

AI summary The document discusses the regulatory proceedings related to the Yukon Energy Program (YBZ) and the Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LML), including the analysis of cost recovery mechanisms, the impact of fuel-cost-adjustment, and the evaluation of energy efficiency programs. It outlines various regulatory processes, compliance, and stakeholder engagement.

Section 1062
QEFQRÿEFGÿDHIKGÿIMÿEFGÿEGDEAÿ EFGÿDHIKGÿIMÿEFGÿHIDE EGDEÿPDGYÿ EGDEÿPDGYÿ eJLE[ÿVGHGQXQRSÿjGRGMQEgÿkIDEÿHPDEI^GLDÿJLGÿE[KQHJNN[ÿEFGÿLGHQKQGREDÿ GMMGHEQXGRGDDÿEGDEWÿ IMÿMQRJRHQJNÿQRHGREQXGDAÿiFGQLÿQ^KJHEDÿJLGÿQRHNPYGYÿQRÿDI^GÿEGDEDÿ ZPEÿRIE...

AI summary The text discusses regulatory proceedings related to energy programs, including the Yukon Energy Program (YBZ) and the Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LML). It mentions the Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCD) and Clean Energy (CDE) initiatives, as well as Nova Scotia Power (NSP) and Mandatory Net Output (MNO). The content involves discussions around energy efficiency and regulatory compliance.

Section 1144
alysis Test Application Attachment 2: National Standard Practice Manual ÿ ÿ"87ÿ#878$ÿ$# ÿ&'(ÿ) +&,-.ÿ/(01'(ÿ1'ÿ2)-314-ÿ&56ÿ&784.- (5-.ÿ01'ÿ0'((9')7('.3)+ÿ&57ÿ .+)::1;('<ÿÿ ÿ1 ÿ#878$ÿ$# ÿ)5,:47(ÿ&784.- (5-.ÿ01'ÿ0'((9')7('.3)+ÿ&57ÿ...

AI summary This text discusses the application of the National Standard Practice Manual in the context of regulatory proceedings, focusing on the implementation of standard practices for utility regulation, including the evaluation of costs, performance metrics, and the use of standardized procedures for compliance and oversight.

Section 1237
energyfuturesgroup.com 30 At the fifth workshop, the working group reviewed quantitative examples and host customer impacts. The working group also discussed the consultant team’s recommendation for host customer non-energy impacts (NEIs)...

AI summary The working group reviewed quantitative examples and host customer impacts, discussing the consultant team’s recommendations on non-energy impacts (NEIs) and societal NEIs. They also reviewed Nova Scotia's applicable policies, including the Energy Reform Act (ERA), which has significant implications for the structure and regulatory authority of the newly created NSEB and the categories of impacts in a new Nova Scotia test.

Section 1238
uncil. The ERA has major implications for the structure and regulatory authority of the newly created NSEB, as well as for the categories of impacts to be included in a new Nova Scotia test. 1. The Energy Reform Act The ERA as passed makes...

AI summary The Energy Reform Act (ERA) introduces significant changes to the Public Utilities Act, expanding the regulatory oversight Board's consideration to include sustainable development and prosperity. The ERA also impacts the structure and regulatory authority of the newly created NSEB and the categories of impacts included in a new Nova Scotia test.

Section 1244
GhG al Policy Section 1: Nova Scotia PRIORITY POLICIES 6 2 6 3 4 4 4 1 NSUARB Mandate NS Power Performance Standards (Public 2 1 2 1 2 Utilities Act) Demand Side Management (Public Utilities 2 1 2 Act) Electricity Act 6 1 1 1 Environmental...

AI summary The text outlines key priority policies in Nova Scotia, including the NSUARB mandate, NS Power performance standards under the Public Utilities Act, Demand Side Management, the Electricity Act, the Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act, and Nova Scotia’s Climate Change Plan for Clean Growth (2022).

Section 1262
Page 38 of 68 EfficiencyOne Benefit-Cost Analysis Test Application Appendix B energyfuturesgroup.com 39 comfort, and health) to societal impacts such as economic output, energy security and reduced environmental and economic damages from G...

AI summary The document discusses the inclusion of non-utility system impacts in a new Nova Scotia Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) test, emphasizing the importance of considering broader policy goals such as economic output, energy security, and environmental impacts under the Energy Reform Act (ERA).

E-3E1 (EE) RIR 1-12 2 passages
Preamble p. p. 1
Request IR-01: - Reference: Evidence Page 7: A benefit-cost ratio threshold of 1.0 or greater of a DSM Plan must - always be satisfied at the portfolio level. While measures that do not meet the ratio threshold - can be included, E1 must j...

AI summary The proceeding addresses EfficiencyOne's (E1) approach to justifying demand-side management (DSM) measures that fail to meet a benefit-cost ratio (BCR) threshold of 1.0. E1 plans to use a regulator-approved cost-effectiveness test, citing factors like equity, emerging technologies, and market needs. The request also asks if prior Board approval is required and if stakeholder input is sought for such measures.

E1 Responses to Eastward Energy Inc. (Eastward Energy) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. pp. 1-4
process with the Demand Side Management Advisory Group (DSMAG) to undertake this work. M10473, E1 2023-2025 DSM Plan, Board Order, November 8, 2022, Directive (3), page 2. Request IR-03: Reference: Evidence Pages 18/19: E1 indicates that t...

AI summary Eastward Energy confirms it is not a party to the DSMAG and declines Eastward Energy's request to join, citing the DSMAG's defined mandate for energy efficiency and alignment with regulatory goals. The DSMAG's Terms of Reference emphasize stakeholder engagement and program evaluation, with Eastward Energy's non-participation attributed to mandate clarity and policy alignment.

E-4E1 (IG) RIR 1-6 4 passages
E1 Responses to Industrial Group (IG) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. p. 1
E1 Responses to Industrial Group (IG) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 (d) E1's assertion that the BCA test is in the "best interest of ratepayers" does indicate that the 2 test is intended to continue serving as a key tool for eval...

AI summary E1 responds to Industrial Group (IG) requests regarding the proposed Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) test, emphasizing its alignment with policy priorities and provincial legislation. It contrasts the BCA with the existing Total Resource Cost (TRC) test, noting that energy impacts outweigh non-energy impacts. Energy Futures Group (EFG) confirms energy impacts dominate in the BCA test (77% of total impacts). The 2026 DSM Plan extension and DSMAG engagement are referenced.

Preamble p. pp. 1-17
Date Filed: July 4, 2025 E1 (IG) IR-06 Page 2 of 4 Bill No. 228, Royal Assent, November 9, 2022 (5) The Board's review of the proposed demand-side management for the purpose of the approval must consider any matters deemed appropriate by t...

AI summary The document discusses legislative amendments from the Energy Reform (2024) Act, which expanded the Energy Board's mandate to ensure demand-side management (DSM) plans are cost-effective and in the best interests of customers. EfficiencyOne (E1) advocates for a single, consistent cost-effectiveness test for all distributed energy resources to avoid ambiguity in decision-making.

2 Energy Reform Act, April 5, 2024, Schedule A: Energy and Regulatory Boards Act. p. p. 23
2 Energy Reform Act, April 5, 2024, Schedule A: Energy and Regulatory Boards Act. 1 stewardship and social responsibility are integrated and recognized as being 2 interconnected." 3 4 (e) The following IR response has been provided by Ener...

AI summary The document discusses the Energy Reform Act, April 5, 2024, Schedule A: Energy and Regulatory Boards Act, and references the Nova Scotia benefit cost analysis (BCA) test, which considers both increases and decreases in fuel and electricity use. Energy Futures Group (EFG) confirms that utility system impacts are included in the analysis, with details provided in Section IV of the EFG Report starting on page 33.

E1 Responses to Industrial Group (IG) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. pp. 29-30
ation of how E1 proposes to address the contents of Appendix - A of the NSPM (Rate Impacts) including which tests would be applied, and at which stage of - the BCA approval? Response IR-11: - The National Standard Practice Manual's (NSPM)...

AI summary E1 responds to the Industrial Group's query about addressing NSPM Rate Impacts and BCA approval by stating that rate impacts are separate from cost-effectiveness analyses. E1 conducts a Rate and Bill Impact Analysis (RBIA) alongside DSM Plan Applications, aligning with NSPM recommendations. References include M12282 and M12249.

E-5E1 (NSEB) RIR 1-46 3 passages
Section 23 p. p. 12
xviii) How many states in the database are currently measuring Host Customer "Pride" impacts for their related BCA test? (Please identify the related states and whether the test is applied at the measure, program or portfolio level.) (e) P...

AI summary The response discusses the National Energy Screening Project (NESP), its mission to improve cost-effectiveness screening practices for distributed energy resources (DERs), and its products including the National Standard Practice Manual (NSPM) and Methods, Tools, and Resources (MTR) Handbook. It highlights NESP's role in convening stakeholders and providing BCA resources.

Section 24 p. pp. 12-20
Resources Handbook](https://www.nationalenergyscreeningproject.org/resources/quantifying-impacts/) [(MTR Handbook)](https://www.nationalenergyscreeningproject.org/resources/quantifying-impacts/) . NESP is primarily funded by E4TheFuture wi...

AI summary EfficiencyOne proposes a BCA framework aligned with NSPM principles for DSM plans. The framework requires further analysis of utility system impacts, though EFG believes benefits may outweigh costs. Impact quantification will occur during DSM plan development, with the MTR handbook as a technical reference.

M12282 – EfficiencyOne (E1) Application for Approval of a New Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management (DSM) Plans p. p. 42
M12282 – EfficiencyOne (E1) Application for Approval of a New Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management (DSM) Plans

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) is applying for approval of a new Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) test to evaluate Demand Side Management (DSM) plans. The application involves regulatory processes and may impact energy policy and cost assessments.

E-6E1 (SBA) RIR 1-20 1 passage
but not host customer benefits. [1](#page-13-0) Please refer to Table 4 of Appendix A (reproduced below)[2](#page-13-1) and the associated discussion. p. pp. 11-13
but not host customer benefits. [1](#page-13-0) Please refer to Table 4 of Appendix A (reproduced below)[2](#page-13-1) and the associated discussion. Cost Effectiveness Test Impact Category New Nova Scotia Test Total Resource Cost Test (N...

AI summary The document discusses the Nova Scotia proposed Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) test, which aligns with the National Standard Performance Manual (NSPM) and includes new impact categories such as other fuels, criteria air pollutants, and host customer non-energy benefits. The test was developed with input from the Demand Side Management Advisory Group (DSMAG) and reflects legislative changes, including the Energy Reform Act and amendments to the Public Utilities Act.

E-7E1 (Synapse) RIR 1-24 1 passage
3 p. p. 8
3 1 Request IR-06: 2 3 Refer to Figure 1 and Figure 2 on pages 15 and 16 of the Evidence of David Hill. Please provide 4 Figure 1 and Figure 2 and all supporting analysis and workpapers in Microsoft Excel format with 5 all cells unlocked,...

AI summary The text outlines requests and responses from a regulatory proceeding, including requests for documents, instructions given to the DSMAG, and clarification on the inclusion of utility system impacts in the Nova Scotia Test. Energy Futures Group (EFG) provides responses referencing EfficiencyOne and the National Standard Practice Manual (NSPM).

E-8See new revised evidence submitted under E-14 (Evidence of P. Bowman, on behalf of IG) 10 passages
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT - This evidence relies on the following context for E1, and the broad understanding of the regulation of E1 - and the role of the Board. - E1 is the current franchise holder for development and delivery of DSM plans...

AI summary E1, the current franchise holder for DSM in Nova Scotia, requires Board approval for its DSM activities under the Public Utilities Act sections 79A to 79W. The Act distinguishes between DSM operations and purchase agreements with NSPI but treats both similarly in requiring Board approval. However, the legislation lacks explicit guidance on tests for 'reasonable availability' of DSM, focusing instead on cost-effectiveness.

What is E1 proposing as a BCA?
vel: 12 - The Nova Scotia Energy Board retains discretion to allow inclusion of DSM portfolio - components that may not individually satisfy the BCA test. This discretion is grounded in - both the Board's broader mandate to consider planni...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Energy Board retains discretion to include DSM components not meeting BCA individually, considering planning objectives and public interest. E1's responses to IRs from IG and NSEB are referenced, with critiques that E1's quote does not address the Board's power to disallow components and uses wording not in legislation.

Is the E1 commentary a fair criticism of the TRC as previously applied in Nova Scotia?
Is the E1 commentary a fair criticism of the TRC as previously applied in Nova Scotia? - Yes, from a principled perspective. In general, BCA should include all measurable and meaningful benefits - and costs at the proposed assessment scale...

AI summary The E1 commentary criticizes the TRC for excluding non-energy benefits, but the NSUARB previously limited jurisdiction to energy impacts per M08888. The new Energy and Regulatory Boards Act may permit non-energy considerations, though legal interpretation is pending. Technical challenges remain in revising TRC to meet updated requirements.

Does E1 appear to accurately portray the economic and policy framework for DSM in Nova
Does E1 appear to accurately portray the economic and policy framework for DSM in Nova

AI summary The document evaluates whether E1 accurately represents the economic and policy framework for Demand Side Management (DSM) in Nova Scotia, involving regulatory considerations and stakeholder inputs.

Scotia?
Scotia? 2020 NSUARB 56 M08888, pdf page 2 of 19. - No. - First, although the legislation indicates that cost-effectiveness shall be measured at the portfolio level, - there is no prohibition against also assessing cost-effectiveness at oth...

AI summary The NSUARB must assess DSM cost-effectiveness at multiple granularity levels, not just portfolio level, to evaluate alternatives and ensure compliance with legislative requirements. E1's proposal fails to address mandatory customer interest assessments, including cost reduction, reliability, and availability, as previously interpreted by the Board.

Is the Proposed E1 BCA the only possible response to the criticism?
Is the Proposed E1 BCA the only possible response to the criticism? - No. From the outset, the assessment to be conducted was to consider two alternatives to the TRC – - either relying primarily on PAC, or developing a new Nova Scotia spec...

AI summary The Proposed E1 BCA is not the only response to criticism, as three alternatives exist: relying on PAC, developing a Nova Scotia-specific test, or adjusting TRC to include non-energy benefits. Legislative changes enabled the third approach. References include Public Utilities Act sections and a 2020 NSUARB board order.

Why is the E1 proposal on discount rates inconsistent with utility system resources?
Why is the E1 proposal on discount rates inconsistent with utility system resources? - In conducting Integrated Resource Planning ("IRP"), utilities typically compare alternative new energy - generation resources using their Weighted Avera...

AI summary The E1 proposal to use a 2% social discount rate for DSM evaluation conflicts with NSPM's requirement for consistent methods, as WACC is standard for utility IRP. Treasury Board guidance cited by E1 applies to regulatory proposals, not infrastructure investments. NSPM mandates equal footing for DSM with other resources using WACC, not lower social rates.

AREAS OF EXPERIENCE:
AREAS OF EXPERIENCE: - Utility Regulation and Rates, including Depreciation - Project Development and Planning - Utility Resource Planning

AI summary The document outlines key areas of experience related to utility regulation, project development, and resource planning. It emphasizes expertise in depreciation, utility rate design, and strategic planning for energy resources.

Sample Projects:
Sample Projects: For the Office of the Utilities Consumer Advocate of Alberta (2016 - 2024): Analysis and strategic support of Government agency representing the interests of small utility customers. Addressed matters of utility rates and...

AI summary The text outlines a range of regulatory and utility-related projects across Alberta, Ontario, British Columbia, Manitoba, Jamaica, Yukon, and other regions. It details work involving utility rate analysis, regulatory filings, asset depreciation, rate design, and stakeholder representation before various utility commissions and boards.

Utility Proceeding Work Performed
Utility Proceeding Work Performed Before Client Year Oral Testimony NTPC 2001/03 Phase I General Rate Application Analysis and Case Preparation NWTPUB NTPC 2000 - 2002 No - Negotiated Settlement Newfoundland Hydro 2002 General Rate Applica...

AI summary The table presents a list of regulatory proceedings involving various utilities in Canada, detailing the work performed, the regulatory bodies involved, the clients, timeframes, and whether oral testimony was provided. These proceedings include general rate applications, integration hearings, and rider revisions.

E-9Evidence and Resume of Courtney Lane - Synapse 7 passages
I. INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS p. p. 2
I. INTRODUCTION AND QUALIFICATIONS - Q. Please state your name, title, and employer. - A. My name is Courtney Lane. I am a Senior Principal at Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. - ("Synapse"), located at 485 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA...

AI summary Courtney Lane, a Senior Principal at Synapse Energy Economics, Inc., describes her firm's expertise in energy regulation, including demand-side and supply-side analysis, energy efficiency, and utility filings. She highlights over 20 years of experience in energy policy, including work on performance-based regulation and grid modernization, prior to joining Synapse at National Grid.

Evidence of Courtney Lane p. pp. 10-11
Evidence of Courtney Lane 1 20 programs, and the Energy Reform Act that broadens what the Board should consider 2 when it makes regulatory decisions and establishes the Energy and Regulatory Boards 3 21 Act and the More Access to Energy Ac...

AI summary Courtney Lane discusses the use of the Nova Scotia Policy Model (NSPM) in other jurisdictions, noting that 12 U.S. states and the District of Columbia have adopted it for DER cost-effectiveness tests. She also states that no Canadian provinces have used the NSPM for BCA tests, but sees no reason why they should not. The NSPM is described as objective, policy-neutral, and economically sound.

Q. How does the proposed Nova Scotia Test compare to the TRC? p. pp. 14-15
Q. How does the proposed Nova Scotia Test compare to the TRC? - A. [Table 2](#page-16-0) below provides a comparison between the proposed Nova Scotia Test and the - TRC test as most recently applied in the 2023–2025 DSM Plan. Response to N...

AI summary The proposed Nova Scotia Test is compared to the TRC test in Table 2, referencing the 2023–2025 DSM Plan. The response cites the amended Public Utilities Act (SNS 2022, c 53) and references NSEB IR-01 and IR-07(c).

Q. What is your overall assessment of the proposed Nova Scotia Test? p. p. 18
Q. What is your overall assessment of the proposed Nova Scotia Test? - A. I find that the proposed Nova Scotia Test is an improvement upon the current TRC test. - Unlike the current TRC test, the Nova Scotia Test accounts for both host cus...

AI summary The proposed Nova Scotia Test is considered an improvement over the current TRC test as it accounts for host customer benefits and costs, ensuring proper valuation of DERs and avoiding biased BCA results. It aligns with Nova Scotia's energy policy goals by incorporating non-energy impacts as directed by recent legislation.

Review of Policy Developments Impacting Host Customer NEBs p. p. 22
Review of Policy Developments Impacting Host Customer NEBs

AI summary The document reviews policy developments affecting Host Customer NEBs, focusing on regulatory frameworks, cost methodologies, and energy management practices in Nova Scotia. Key considerations include DSM, WACC, and GHG regulations, with references to national standards and cost tests.

Nova Scotia Utility Board, Decision in M0888, April 15, 2020, paragraph 49. p. pp. 22-23
Nova Scotia Utility Board, Decision in M0888, April 15, 2020, paragraph 49. 1 benefits and an array of environmental benefits with the definition of electricity 2 44 efficiency and conservation activities in the Public Utilities Act. Speci...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility Board discusses the reevaluation of cost-effectiveness criteria, incorporating environmental and non-energy benefits, based on recent legislative changes such as the Energy Reform Act and the Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act. This reevaluation aims to align rate-setting with broader policy goals, including sustainability and market competition.

PRESENTATIONS p. p. 33
PRESENTATIONS Lane, C. 2021. "Accounting for Interactive Effects: Assessing the Cost‐Effectiveness of Integrated Distributed Energy Resources." Presentation at the 2021 American Council for an Energy‐Efficient Economy (ACEEE) National Conf...

AI summary The document lists presentations by Lane, C., covering topics like integrated distributed energy resources, ratepayer impact tests, wireless alternatives, renewable energy policy, Act 129, and electric retail competition. These were delivered at conferences, webinars, and forums from 2009 to 2021, focusing on energy efficiency, policy, and technology.

E-11Evidence of Eastward Energy 2 passages
Participation in the DSMAG p. p. 1
- insight and information of Eastward, as the incumbent natural gas supplier, is provided to E1 and - the other members of the DSMAG. Eastward particularly notes that in its Application EI mentions - amendments to the Gas Distribution Act...

AI summary Eastward, as the incumbent natural gas supplier, emphasizes its legislative mandate under the amended Gas Distribution Act (GDA) to pursue hybrid peaking resources. It argues that DSMAG members, including E1, should consider hybrid heating in their 2027-2031 plans and that Eastward's input is essential. The GDA now explicitly supports gas as a hybrid peaking resource to meet electricity demand, aligning Eastward's role with provincial strategic electrification goals.

Conclusion p. pp. 6-7
Conclusion 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 16 Eastward provides the following points to summarize its position on this matter: - Participation in DSMAG - Eastward's involvement in the DSMAG would pose no further conflict of interest than wha...

AI summary Eastward argues its DSMAG participation poses no greater conflict of interest than NSPI's. It highlights expertise in hybrid heating, natural gas systems, and GHG reduction via hydrogen/RNG blending. The GDA and More Access to Energy Act support hybrid heating for demand management. Eastward aligns with NSPI's IRP analysis and E1's 2027–2031 DSM Plan goals.

E-12Evidence of Posterity Group Consulting, on behalf of Eastward Energy 1 passage
Introduction p. p. 1
Introduction - Posterity Group was retained by Eastward Energy to review EfficiencyOne's (E1) Application for - Approval of a New Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management - (DSM) Plans and make potential recom...

AI summary Posterity Group was retained by Eastward Energy to evaluate EfficiencyOne's application for a new Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Test for Demand Side Management (DSM) Plans. Posterity Group specializes in energy use analysis, climate change, and decarbonization consulting, providing evidence-based recommendations for energy decisions.

E-13Evidence of M. Whitten - SBA 4 passages
II. SBA PERSPECTIVE ON DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT INVESTMENTS p. pp. 2-4
II. SBA PERSPECTIVE ON DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT INVESTMENTS Q. What is the perspective of small businesses regarding DSM versus other types of investments recovered through customer rates? A. Having participated in DSMAG meetings for several...

AI summary The SBA acknowledges DSM's potential to reduce peak demand and lower capital investments, aligning with Nova Scotia's Clean Energy goals. However, factors like maintenance, load growth, and regulatory requirements may offset DSM savings, as evidenced by NS Power's capital expenditure filings. This is framed as an 'all else equal' comparison.

6 Q. Why did Efficiency One (E1) submit this Application at this time? p. p. 8
6 Q. Why did Efficiency One (E1) submit this Application at this time? - 7 A. E1 submitted this Application in response to a directive in the 2022 Decision issued by the 8 NSUARB that directed E1 to develop an optimal cost-effectiveness te...

AI summary Efficiency One (E1) submitted an application to the NSEB to replace the total resource cost (TRC) test with a benefit-cost analysis (BCA) test for assessing future DSM plans, citing changes in Nova Scotia legislation and regulations since the NSUARB's 2022 directive.

Preamble p. p. 9
In the Application, E1 explains that the amendment to the PUA that included strategic electrification to help reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions and electricity costs requires expanding the scope of the BCA test to include non-utility...

AI summary E1 argues that the amendment to the PUA requires expanding the BCA test to include non-utility impacts such as fuel savings, GHG emissions, and host customer benefits. It cites the ERBA and MAEA to support its interpretation of sustainability factors and sustainable development, while noting some host customer benefits will be represented by proxy.

V. BCA FRAMEWORK PROXY VALUES FOR EVALUATING E1's DSM PLAN p. pp. 9-10
V. BCA FRAMEWORK PROXY VALUES FOR EVALUATING E1's DSM PLAN - Q. What are your objections to E1's proposed framework based on host customer non-utility impacts? - A. The Application is intended to persuade the Board and intervenors that the...

AI summary The text discusses objections to E1's proposed BCA Test framework, citing shortcomings in aligning with new legislation (ERBA, MAEA, PUA). The answer references E-1 Application, Section 6.1, and highlights gaps in compliance with the Energy Reform Act (ERA).

E-13-(i)Resume of Melissa Whitten 1 passage
SELECTED EXPERIENCE p. p. 0
SELECTED EXPERIENCE - Conduct annual renegotiation of natural gas supply contract for basis and commodity pricing plus terms of service, and assist with review of renewable diesel procurement. for a major governmental authority; - Conducte...

AI summary Experience includes managing natural gas contracts, rate cases, infrastructure audits, and evaluations of utility strategies. Activities involve optimizing portfolios, negotiating supply agreements, and ensuring compliance with regulations like NERC. Work spans utilities, regulatory boards, and evaluations of LNG facilities and merger reviews.

E-14Evidence of P. Bowman, on behalf of IG - Revised (Old evidence filed under E-8) 6 passages
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT - This evidence relies on the following context for E1, and the broad understanding of the regulation of E1 - and the role of the Board. - E1 is the current franchise holder for development and delivery of DSM plans...

AI summary E1, the current DSM franchise holder in Nova Scotia, requires Board approval for DSM activities under the Public Utilities Act sections 79A to 79M. The Act links DSM operations and purchase agreements with NSPI, requiring Board review. However, legislative guidance on 'reasonable availability' tests is absent, focusing only on cost-effectiveness within availability constraints.

1 customers qua customer interests (e.g., price, reliability, availability, etc.) which appears to be
1 customers qua customer interests (e.g., price, reliability, availability, etc.) which appears to be 2 consistent with the Board's earlier determinations as well.4 This does not appear to prohibit the 3 Board taking into account any numbe...

AI summary The text discusses the Board's consideration of customer interests, including price, reliability, and availability, in line with earlier determinations. It emphasizes that the Board must prioritize the best interests of NSPI customers while adhering to the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act and other legislation promoting competition, innovation, and sustainable development.

Is the Proposed E1 BCA the only possible response to the criticism?
Is the Proposed E1 BCA the only possible response to the criticism? - No. From the outset, the assessment to be conducted was to consider two alternatives to the TRC – - either relying primarily on PAC, or developing a new Nova Scotia spec...

AI summary The Proposed E1 BCA is not the only response to criticism. Alternatives include using PAC, developing a new test, or adjusting TRC to balance non-energy benefits. Legislative changes enabled a third approach. Cited sections of the Public Utilities Act and a 2020 NSUARB order (M08888) are referenced.

Why is E1's approach of using balanced plan design problematic?
Why is E1's approach of using balanced plan design problematic? - E1 indicates that in addition to cost-effectiveness, its proposals are designed to reflect balance, such as - equitable allocation of investment and savings between resident...

AI summary E1's balanced plan design approach is criticized for prioritizing equity and access over cost-effectiveness, conflicting with NSPM Principle 1. The NSPM emphasizes cost-effectiveness as the primary DSM test unless explicitly mandated by policy. Nova Scotia's IRP principles (safety, reliability, least cost, decarbonization, robustness) are highlighted as the foundation for resource planning, with balance not typically justified in rate-funded DSM programs.

BOWMAN ECONOMIC CONSULTING INC., WINNIPEG, MANITOBA
t 2017-2018): Support in regulatory proceedings before the New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board on matters of Revenue Requirement, customer class and rate design, and smart meter implementation. For the PEI Federation of Agriculture (2...

AI summary Bowman Economic Consulting Inc. provides regulatory and technical support across various provinces, including rate design, cost of service modeling, revenue requirement analysis, and smart meter implementation. Clients include utility companies, government bodies, and law firms, with projects spanning energy, infrastructure, and environmental regulation.

Utility Proceeding Work Performed
Utility Proceeding Work Performed Before Client Year Oral Testimony Newfoundland Hydro Rate Stabilization Plan (RSP) Finalization of Rates for Industrial Customers Analysis, Preparation of Intervenor Evidence NLPUB Newfoundland Industrial...

AI summary The text provides a table listing various utility companies, their proceedings, and the work performed in regulatory processes, including analysis, preparation of evidence, and expert testimony. The proceedings involve rate applications, depreciation methodology, and investigations into needs and alternatives.

E-19IG (NSEB) RIR 1 to 4 1 passage
5 Response: p. p. 1
5 Response: - 6 See attached. The fundamental difference is that the TRC focuses on the utility, its customers, - 7 and the program participants, not the full scope of all effects on society broadly. For clarity, the - 8 table below has be...

AI summary The TRC's scope is limited to the utility, customers, and program participants, not broader societal impacts. The text clarifies differences in tax treatment and distinguishes between GHG global 'costs' (societal impacts) and GHG 'charges' (monetary costs to a party).

E-20IG (Synapse) RIR 1 to 3 2 passages
Response: p. pp. 2-3
on notes that multiple states include lost revenues in their primary or secondary cost-effectiveness tests, including Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Kansas, Louisiana, Colorado, and many others. (d) Mr. Bowman has not done a detailed...

AI summary The text discusses the inclusion of lost revenues in cost-effectiveness tests by multiple U.S. states and Manitoba's regulatory requirement to use the PAC test. Manitoba Regulation 119/2019 outlines a methodology for determining cost-effectiveness by comparing levelized costs and marginal value of energy efficiency initiatives.

Request IR-2: p. p. 3
Request IR-2: - Refer to the Evidence of Patrick Bowman at page 15, which states that "E1 has proposed - its BCA include multiple specific inputs that are not consistent with methods and - assumptions for alternative resource investments"....

AI summary The Board questions whether 'alternative resource investments' are approved like the E1 DSM Plan and if a BCA is required for them, citing Patrick Bowman's evidence that E1's BCA methodology differs from standard practices for alternative investments.

E-22CV - Chris Neme - E1 3 passages
Selected Projects p. p. 0
Selected Projects - Natural Resources Defense Council (Illinois, Michigan and Ohio). Critically review energy efficiency, demand response, electrification, distribution system investment and integrated resource plans filed by IL, MI and OH...

AI summary The document outlines two key projects: Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) engaging in energy efficiency reviews, regulatory testimony, and legislative support in Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio from 2010 to present. E4TheFuture co-authored the National Standard Practice Manual (NSPM) for distributed energy resources (DERs) and conducted training from 2016 to present, with updates expected in 2025.

Energy Futures Group, Inc p. pp. 2-3
efficiency programs and in opposition to a proposed rate case settlement agreement to eliminate such programs. (2021) - Sierra Club (Maryland). Provided strategic support on testimony on cost-effectiveness and other rules governing expansi...

AI summary Energy Futures Group, Inc. is involved in energy efficiency programs, opposing rate case settlements that would eliminate such programs. Entities include Sierra Club, New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, and others, with activities spanning strategic support for gas infrastructure rules, regulatory filings, and analysis of efficiency programs' cost-effectiveness and integration into capacity markets.

Selected Publications and Reports p. p. 6
- The Resource Value Framework: Reforming Energy Efficiency Cost-Effectiveness Screening , published by the National Efficiency Screening Project, August 2014 (with Tim Woolf et al.) - U.S. Experience with Participation of Energy Efficienc...

AI summary The document lists publications and reports on energy efficiency, including its role in capacity markets, policy design, and global best practices. Key contributors include the Regulatory Assistance Project, National Efficiency Screening Project, and authors like Richard Cowart. Topics span energy efficiency mechanisms, market integration, and policy frameworks.

E-24Rebuttal Evidence of E1 including Appendix A - Energy Futures Group Rebuttal Evidence 9 passages
E1 Response p. pp. 4-7
E1 Response - The argument that the Board can, and must, measure cost-effectiveness at the measure level requires - legislative interpretation and is a legal argument. Questions of law are within the power of the Board to - determine. Nota...

AI summary E1 argues that measure-level cost-effectiveness testing for DSM may hinder proactive market development and reduce overall benefits, advocating for portfolio-level evaluation. The Board previously allowed program-level screening but 2022 legislative amendments now mandate portfolio-level assessment. E1 asserts BCA is primarily a portfolio-level tool but will also be used at lower levels for informational purposes.

2.2.2 N S POWER CUSTOMER INTERESTS p. pp. 7-8
2.2.2 N S POWER CUSTOMER INTERESTS Unlike the PAC test, which accounts for only the DSM Administrator's costs and NS Power's avoided costs, the BCA test accounts for the DSM Administrator's costs and customer costs while recognizing the ex...

AI summary The BCA test is preferred over PAC and UCT as it includes customer costs and legislative requirements like those from the Energy Reform (2024) Act, ensuring alignment with sustainable development and ratepayer interests.

E1 Response p. p. 9
E1 Response and rate impacts.[11](#page-10-0) The balanced plan approach has been an established design principle of DSM in Nova Scotia for several years. In 2016, the Standardized Filing Framework ("Framework") was developed in consultati...

AI summary The document discusses the 'balanced plan approach' in Nova Scotia's Demand Side Management (DSM), established via the 2016 Standardized Filing Framework. Developed with E1, NSP, and DSMAG, it ensures DSM plans balance energy avoidance, costs, and accessibility. The NSUARB endorsed the framework, and E1 has adhered to it since 2016. The Industrial Group signed the Consensus Agreement supporting this approach.

3. SYNAPSE EVIDENCE p. pp. 11-12
3. SYNAPSE EVIDENCE - In response to Ms. Lane's concerns regarding justifying proxy adders, E1 relies on the Rebuttal Evidence of - EFG. E1 addresses Ms. Lane's suggestion for a 2029 updating process below.

AI summary E1 addresses Ms. Lane's concerns about proxy adders by relying on EFG's rebuttal evidence and plans to discuss a 2029 updating process. The response is part of a regulatory proceeding involving demand-side management and non-energy benefits considerations.

E1 Response p. p. 12
E1 Response - E1 supports this recommendation with the addition of a review and update for all impacts—not solely - those related to NEB proxies—commencing prior to the development of the next DSM Plan via the - proposed 'evergreen' proces...

AI summary E1 supports a recommendation to review all impacts, not just non-energy benefits (NEB) proxies, via an 'evergreen' process before developing the next DSM Plan. Engagement with DSMAG is expected to begin in 2029. E1 proposes a multi-step process to ensure the BCA test remains current, including quantifying impacts using jurisdictional data and customer surveys, with DSMAG input.

E1 Response p. p. 16
E1 Response E1 does not support the recommendation for further third-party evaluation, where it has been established these are challenging to quantify, or postponement. E1 maintains that incurring additional costs and extending the timelin...

AI summary E1 opposes further third-party evaluation of non-energy benefits (NEBs) and proxy values, arguing that existing analyses by EFG and DSMAG are sufficient. They propose an 'evergreen' process for ongoing re-evaluation and assert that delaying approval would impose unnecessary costs. The proxy value reflects aggregated NEB estimates, not individual components.

E1 Response p. p. 21
E1 Response E1 interprets this as referring to customer reliability impacts rather than system reliability impacts. - E1 agrees in principle that if a customer's reliability decreases as a result of electrification this should be considere...

AI summary E1 argues that customer reliability impacts from electrification should be considered in host customer proxy impacts, but only when natural gas customers lose backup capabilities or appliances that function without electricity. This would be reviewed via E1's 'evergreen' process, with specific conditions outlined.

Bowman p. p. 29
Bowman - Mr. Bowman asks that the Board require E1 to show that any avoided GHG emissions are in fact the result - of DSM, and not due to an outside factor such as a cap.[6](#page-29-3)

AI summary Mr. Bowman requests the NSUARB to require E1 to demonstrate that avoided GHG emissions result from DSM programs, not external factors like a cap, emphasizing the need for clear attribution in regulatory proceedings.

Bowman p. p. 29
Bowman - Mr. Bowman opposes the use of a 2% social discount rate, in favour of the NSPI Weighted Average Cost of - Capital ("WACC") as the discount rate for calculations. He argues: E1 indicates that the social discount rate is appropriate...

AI summary Mr. Bowman opposes the use of a 2% social discount rate, advocating for Nova Scotia Power's (NSP) Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) instead. He argues that E1's reference to the Treasury Board applies to federal policy, not infrastructure, and that NSPM Principle 1 requires Demand Side Management (DSM) to use the same discount rate as utility Integrated Resource Planning (IRP), which is WACC.

E-27Opening Statement - IG 1 passage
3 NOVA SCOTIA UTILITY AND REVIEW BOARD p. p. 0
3 NOVA SCOTIA UTILITY AND REVIEW BOARD 4 IN THE MATTER OF: The Public Utilities Act 5 IN THE MATTER OF: An Application by EfficiencyOne for approval of a New 6 Benefit-Cost Analysis Test for Evaluating Demand Side 7 Management Plans 8

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board is considering an application by EfficiencyOne under the Public Utilities Act for approval of a new benefit-cost analysis test to evaluate demand side management plans. The proceeding involves regulatory review of a proposed method for assessing energy efficiency initiatives.

100256Board Decision 20 passages
2.0 PROPOSED BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS TEST p. p. 5
s to address the limitations of the TRC test and enhance the rigour and relevance of DSM cost-effectiveness evaluation consistent with best practices and Nova Scotia-specific legislative requirements. [16] E1 submitted that the proposed BC...

AI summary E1 proposes a Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) test to replace the TRC test, aligning with Nova Scotia's policy objectives by incorporating non-utility impacts and long-term benefits like GHG reduction. The BCA test follows the National Standard Practice Manual (NSPM) principles, ensuring comprehensive evaluation of DSM programs per legislative requirements.

3.5 East Coast Environmental Law p. pp. 21-23
3.5 East Coast Environmental Law [56] East Coast Environmental Law (ECEL) is a party to the Consensus Agreement and supports E1's proposed new BCA test as amended by the contents of the agreement. It states in its closing submissions: … We...

AI summary East Coast Environmental Law (ECEL) supports E1's revised BCA test, emphasizing inclusion of avoided carbon social costs in DSM evaluations. It argues that the Energy Reform (2024) Act expands the Board's environmental mandate, aligning regulatory decisions with sustainable development and prosperity goals under multiple acts. ECEL stresses that these new responsibilities complement, not override, affordability and reliability considerations.

3.6 Eastward Energy p. pp. 23-24
3.6 Eastward Energy [61] In its submissions, Eastward Energy asked the Board to make a preliminary and final order that Eastward be added as a full member of DSMAG. On November 4, 2025, the Board noted that Eastward has a valuable perspect...

AI summary Eastward Energy requested DSMAG membership, which the NSUARB approved. They supported strategic electrification testing methods aligning with Posterity Group's recommendations and advocated for hybrid heating in E1's 2027-2031 DSM Plan, emphasizing economic benefits and regulatory alignment with the PUA.

4.1 Demand-side Management Legislation and Policies in Nova Scotia p. p. 27
4.1 Demand-side Management Legislation and Policies in Nova Scotia

AI summary The section discusses Nova Scotia's demand-side management (DSM) legislation and policies, highlighting key entities like the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) and Nova Scotia Power (NS Power). It references acronyms such as TRC, PAC, and BCA, and mentions the role of programs like DSMAG and the National Standard Practice Manual (NSPM).

4.1.1 Introduction p. p. 27
4.1.1 Introduction [69] The Public Utilities Act requires NS Power to engage E1 to undertake "costeffective demand-side management". The Board must approve these agreements and "determine the cost-effective demand-side management that must...

AI summary The NSUARB must determine the cost-effectiveness test for demand-side management under the Public Utilities Act. E1 argues the Board now has jurisdiction to consider non-energy impacts, while some intervenors disagree. Legislative amendments since 2020, including the Energy Reform (2024) Act, expanded the Energy Board's consideration scope. The Board will assess statutory interpretation and the meaning of 'cost-effective' in DSM provisions.

4.1.2 Statutory Interpretation p. pp. 27-28
4.1.2 Statutory Interpretation [74] Well recognized principles applied by courts and tribunals throughout the country guide the Board when interpreting legislation. A majority of the Supreme Court of Canada summarized these principles in C...

AI summary The text references the Supreme Court of Canada's Vavilov decision, emphasizing that statutory interpretation principles guide the NSUARB. It assumes legislators intended administrative bodies to apply these principles consistently when interpreting laws.

4.1.3 Board Approval of Demand-side Management p. pp. 28-30
4.1.3 Board Approval of Demand-side Management [78] Before 2010, NS Power undertook its own demand-side management programs. In 2009, responding to growing concerns over the potential inherent conflict between selling electricity and takin...

AI summary Before 2010, NS Power managed its own DSM programs. In 2009, the Legislature enacted the Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation Act, creating a not-for-profit to administer DSM programs and a fund, with NSUARB approving expenditures. The act aimed to resolve conflicts between electricity sales and demand reduction.

4.1.4 The 2020 Non-energy Benefits Decision p. p. 33
f customers and must be necessarily limited by the statutory definition of "electricity efficiency and conservation activities" outlined in Section 79A(b). - [38] The Board interprets the comments of the Minister of Energy cited by Efficie...

AI summary The NSUARB interprets Section 79A of the Public Utilities Act, requiring NS Power to implement cost-effective electricity efficiency programs without an environmental mandate. It rejects EfficiencyOne's environmental claims and aligns with the Industrial Group's view that regulatory jurisdiction is limited to statutory definitions. The 2014 amendments eliminated the Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation Act's environmental focus.

4.1.5 Statutory Changes p. pp. 33-36
4.1.5 Statutory Changes [86] In the present case, E1 notes there have been significant statutory changes since the NSUARB's decision in 2020. E1 argues that changes to the Public Utilities Act and s. 6(2) of the Energy and Regulatory Board...

AI summary E1 highlights statutory changes to the Public Utilities Act and Energy and Regulatory Boards Act since 2020, requiring the NSUARB to evaluate non-energy impacts of demand-side management. The new definition of 'demand-side management' includes strategic electrification, and affordability requirements were removed from legislation previously considered in the 2020 NSUARB decision.

Sustainable prosperity long-term objective p. p. 36
Sustainable prosperity long-term objective - 5 (1) The long-term objective of the Government is to achieve sustainable prosperity. - (2) To achieve its objective of sustainable prosperity, the Government shall - (a) establish, adopt, suppo...

AI summary The Government of Nova Scotia aims to achieve sustainable prosperity through integrated environmental and economic goals, raising awareness of climate change, promoting the clean economy, supporting well-being, enabling innovation, and improving social, environmental, and economic indicators.

4.1.6 The Meaning of "Cost-effective" under the Public Utilities Act p. pp. 36-40
4.1.6 The Meaning of "Cost-effective" under the Public Utilities Act [96] From the text used by the Legislature in s. 79I(1) of the Public Utilities Act , it follows that NS Power's statutory duty relates to demand-side management (as defi...

AI summary Section 79I of the Public Utilities Act mandates that NS Power's demand-side management (DSM) must be cost-effective and reasonably available, with the goal of reducing customer costs. The NSUARB must review DSM agreements, ensuring compliance with s. 79I and evaluating cost-effectiveness at the portfolio level. The Act does not explicitly define 'cost-effective,' leaving regulatory interpretation to the Board.

The current version is: p. p. 40
ts and strategies not only focus on cost-effectiveness but also contribute to broader environmental and social goals, fostering a more sustainable and equitable future. [Exhibit E-1, pp. 17-18 of 38] [116] E1 submits that the recent legisl...

AI summary E1 argues that legislative changes, including the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act and More Access to Energy Act , empower the NSUARB to prioritize environmental, social, and economic benefits of DSM programs alongside cost considerations. It emphasizes that the Board must align decisions with Nova Scotia's climate and sustainability goals, using the Proposed BCA as a tool to meet statutory obligations.

[124] Eastward expressed similar comments in its reply submissions: p. p. 40
[124] Eastward expressed similar comments in its reply submissions: E1 has continued in its Closing Submissions to put considerable emphasis on the Board's requirement at section 6(2)(d) of the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act to give "app...

AI summary E1 emphasizes the Board's duty under the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act to consider sustainable development in DSM evaluations, while East Coast Environmental Law argues this does not override other considerations like affordable energy rates. NSPI notes E1's BCA is driven by sustainability, not overall legislative requirements. E1 also disputes the Industrial Group's interpretation of legislative changes.

4.1.6.1 Findings p. p. 52
osts. As noted already, strategic electrification may only be undertaken if, in addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it reduces electricity costs. This is explicitly stated in s. 79A(b)(iv). [130] While the NSUARB's 2020 decision...

AI summary The NSUARB discusses jurisdiction over demand-side management (DSM), emphasizing cost reduction under the Public Utilities Act (PUA). It references s. 79A(b)(iv) and s. 79I(1), noting the Legislature's focus on electricity cost reduction. The Board aligns with the Industrial Group and NS Power, affirming that cost reduction remains central despite broader considerations like sustainable development. A prior matter (M12171) is cited regarding economical energy supply obligations.

4.2.1 Findings p. pp. 57-60
4.2.1 Findings [151] E1 and its consultants purported to follow guidance in the NSPM in determining the proposed BCA test. However, a process that simply takes account of an inventory of energy and climate change policy goals and objective...

AI summary The NSUARB rejects E1's proposed BCA test for DSM cost-effectiveness, citing misalignment with the PUA's mandate to reduce electricity costs. The TRC test is criticized for asymmetrical application, while the PAC test is endorsed as it aligns with statutory goals. The Board directs E1 to use the PAC test for DSM plans starting in 2027.

4.3.1 Findings p. pp. 62-63
4.3.1 Findings [162] The Board accepts the Industrial Group's suggestion that traditional cost effectiveness tests may be modified to suit specific jurisdictional requirements. The means of assessing strategic electrification in Nova Scoti...

AI summary The NSUARB accepts modifying traditional cost-effectiveness tests for strategic electrification in Nova Scotia. E1's approach to demonstrating cost reductions remains incomplete, so it must follow Mr. Bowman's PAC test recommendation temporarily. The Board allows E1 to propose an alternative method in its 2027-2031 DSM Plan if it meets statutory requirements for reducing both GHG emissions and electricity costs.

4.5 Discount Rate p. p. 65
ty savings, avoided generation, etc. is to use the same discount rate as is used for utility IRP, which is the WACC." Like EFG, Mr. Bowman added that E1 may provide discount rate sensitivity analyses. [179] In its rebuttal evidence, E1 sta...

AI summary The discussion centers on the appropriate discount rate for DSM programs, with E1 advocating for a 2% social discount rate to reflect societal and intergenerational impacts, contrasting with EFG's support for WACC. E1 argues that WACC fails to account for policy goals and GHG emissions, while the Industrial Group questions WACC's applicability to PAC tests. The Board aligns with using the 2% rate for both utility and non-utility costs.

4.5.1 Findings p. pp. 65-71
4.5.1 Findings [192] Discounting is a fundamental component of BCA. Applying a social discount rate places greater emphasis on future benefits than a standard discount rate typically would. Environment and Climate Change Canada's SC – GHGs...

AI summary The document discusses the importance of discounting in BCA, noting that Environment and Climate Change Canada's SC-GHG guidance uses a lower discount rate. It criticizes E1 for not following the Treasury Board's policy on when to apply a social discount rate, emphasizing compliance with the Treasury Board's Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide.

s. 7.1 about the discount rate to be used: p. p. 71
s. 7.1 about the discount rate to be used: The discount rate is the rate at which future costs and benefits are converted to their present equivalents. Discounting accounts for the fact that: - there is a time preference for current consum...

AI summary The NSUARB mandates using the opportunity cost of capital (WACC) as the discount rate for DSM programs, aligning with Treasury Board guidelines. This reflects the alternative investment returns of funds from NS Power ratepayers. The Board rejects social discount rates except for long-term regulatory proposals, emphasizing WACC's consistency with NS Power's IRP and PAC test requirements.

4.7 Eastward Energy on DSM Advisory Group p. pp. 75-76
4.7 Eastward Energy on DSM Advisory Group [206] Eastward Energy requested the Board order that it be added as a full member of the DSMAG. Although E1 acknowledged Eastward's valuable information and perspectives regarding natural gas hybri...

AI summary Eastward Energy requested to join the DSMAG, arguing its expertise in hybrid peaking resources and legislative mandates under the Gas Distribution Act. E1 opposed, citing narrow focus and potential conflicts, suggesting one-on-one engagement. Eastward emphasized its pilot projects and data on GHG emissions, urging inclusion in the 2027-2031 DSM Plan.

97702Letter EOne re: Application for Approval of Benefit Cost Analysis Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management (DSM) Plans 1 passage
Section 2 p. p. 0
ing methodology for Nova Scotia[:](#page-0-0) 1 1 Efficiencyone (E1) (Re), 2022 NSUARB 137 [M10473], Board Decision, paragraph 73. mcinnescooper.com The Board finds that E1's suggested approach is reasonable. The Board, therefore, directs...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board directed Efficiencyone (E1) to develop an optimal DSM cost-effectiveness testing methodology with the DSMAG. Legislative changes in 2022 and 2024, including amendments to the Public Utilities Act and the Energy Reform (2024) Act, significantly impacted the BCA test.

97925Notice of Intervention - East Coast Environmental Law 1 passage
NOTICE OF INTERVENTION
NOTICE OF INTERVENTION TO: The Nova Scotia Energy Board ("Board") AND TO: EfficiencyOne - 1. East Coast Environmental Law Association (2007) ("East Coast Environmental Law") requests to participate in the above-noted proceeding as an Inter...

AI summary East Coast Environmental Law Association requests intervention in a Nova Scotia Energy Board proceeding involving EfficiencyOne's DSM plans. The organization seeks to ensure the Board's mandate considers a new Benefit-Cost Analysis test for sustainable development. They aim to address issues related to environmental and climate justice, emphasizing sustainable prosperity.

97942Notice of Intervention - DOE 1 passage
To: Nova Scotia Energy Board
To: Nova Scotia Energy Board - 1. The Department of Energy intends to participate in this proceeding and may address any or all of the issues as established by the Energy Board. - 2. Through the Minister of Energy, the Department of Energy...

AI summary The Department of Energy intends to participate in the proceeding before the Nova Scotia Energy Board. It outlines its responsibilities, including energy policy development, resource management, intergovernmental coordination, and administration of energy-related legislation. The department requests that all proceeding communications be directed to specified individuals.

98033NSEB (E1) IR 1 to 46 2 passages
Request IR-4:
Request IR-4: - Page 4 of 38 discusses the shortfalls of the TRC test as ignoring the symmetrical benefits - corresponding to a cost, arguing that such an approach "unjustly favour or disadvantage certain - resources." - a) In the BCA are...

AI summary The text critiques the TRC test for ignoring symmetrical benefits, leading to unfair resource treatment. It questions the BCA's completeness, asking if benefits without costs or costs without benefits are included, highlighting potential methodological gaps in cost-benefit analysis.

Request IR-7:
ently measuring Host Customer "Economic Well-Being" impacts for their related BCA test? (Please identify the related states and whether the test is applied at the measure, program or portfolio level.) - xiv. How many states in the database...

AI summary Request IR-7 seeks information on how states measure Host Customer impacts (e.g., economic well-being, comfort, health) in BCA tests, the application level of these tests, alignment of NSPM with Ontario's IESO guide, and other documents used in DSM/DER BCA development. Questions focus on methodology, state practices, and regulatory alignment.

98036SBA (E1) IR 1 to 20 1 passage
Request IR-7:
Request IR-7: - Refer to Exhibit E-1, the Application, Table 2, page 4 of 38. For each listed state: - a) Please provide the specific state's stated policy objectives, legislation, or publicly adopted goals that align with Nova Scotia legi...

AI summary Request IR-7 seeks alignment of state policies with Nova Scotia legislation, requiring specific legislative references and a comparison of cost/benefit types in Nova Scotia's BCA against state cost-effectiveness testing frameworks.

98098IG (E1) IR 1 to 16 2 passages
12 Request IR-2:
12 Request IR-2: 13 Reference: E-1, Evidence, page 2 of 38. Including non-utility impacts reflects both best practice in benefit cost analysis test design, as well as recently enacted provincial legislation. While the relative weight of sp...

AI summary The text argues that including non-utility impacts in the cost-effectiveness framework is appropriate, citing best practices and provincial legislation. The decision to include such impacts should be based on their relevance to DSM activities in Nova Scotia, guided by policy priorities and legislative objectives.

- 28 (b) Please compare the new BCA test against the current TRC test for the 29 three examples provided in section 11 of E1's Evidence.
- 28 (b) Please compare the new BCA test against the current TRC test for the 29 three examples provided in section 11 of E1's Evidence. 1 2 (i) In the calculation provided, do the "non-energy impacts" outweigh the "energy-related" impacts...

AI summary The text requests a comparison between the new BCA test and the current TRC test using three examples from section 11 of E1's Evidence. It also asks how E1 proposes to track, price, and report non-energy benefits and non-utility system impacts from its DSM plans. The legislation mandates the Energy Board to consider environmental impacts, energy efficiency, and other fuel impacts, including sustainable development and economic benefits.

99112Email NSEB re: Extension approved for IG to provide hearing logistics 1 passage
T 902 424 1332 TF 1 833 809 0040 p. pp. 0-3
T 902 424 1332 TF 1 833 809 0040

AI summary Document relates to a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding involving Nova Scotia Power (NSP) and Demand Side Management (DSM) programs. Key entities include NSP, DSM, and King's Counsel (K.C.). No substantive content provided in the text beyond headings and an image reference.

99638Closing Submission - E1 14 passages
2. CONTEXT AND USE OF THE COST EFFECTIVENESS TEST IN DSM PLAN REVIEW p. p. 3
to apply the TRC test at the program level starting January 1, 2012. The approach was reconfirmed by the Board in its 2022 decision relating to the E1 2023-2025 DSM Plan Application: [3](#page-3-2) M03669, NSUARB Decision, Efficiency Nova...

AI summary The document discusses the application of the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test at the program level for DSM plans, reaffirmed by the NSUARB in 2022 (M10437). It argues that measure-level TRC testing is restrictive, potentially preventing proactive consideration of market developments and denying equitable access to DSM services. The 2022 legislative amendment under the Public Utilities Act shifted evaluation to the portfolio level.

3.1 OVERVIEW OF RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS p. pp. 5-6
3.1 OVERVIEW OF RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS E1 is the franchise holder, granted the exclusive right to supply Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NS Power) with reasonably available, cost-effective DSM pursuant to section 79A and following o...

AI summary This section outlines the statutory provisions relevant to demand-side management (DSM) in Nova Scotia, including the 2022 amendment to the Public Utilities Act and the 2024 Energy Reform Act . These amendments expanded E1's mandate and the Nova Scotia Energy Board's responsibilities to include sustainable development, climate goals, and the transition to an independent energy system operator.

Preamble p. p. 7
(b) the franchise holder granted a franchise pursuant to Section 79C of the Public Utilities Act; […] Thereby, these Acts together provide the Energy Board with the authority and direction to consider sustainable development and sustainabl...

AI summary The document outlines the legal framework empowering the Nova Scotia Energy Board to integrate climate and sustainability considerations into its decisions on demand-side management (DSM). This authority is rooted in statutory provisions such as the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act and the More Access to Energy Act, ensuring regulatory decisions align with provincial climate action objectives.

3.2 ALIGNMENT OF PROPOSED BCA WITH STATUTORY PROVISIONS p. pp. 7-9
3.2 ALIGNMENT OF PROPOSED BCA WITH STATUTORY PROVISIONS As is discussed further below, E1 asserts that its Proposed BCA aligns with the above-noted policy and legislative objectives of the province, by incorporating utility system impacts,...

AI summary E1 argues its Proposed BCA aligns with provincial policy and legislative objectives by incorporating utility system, fuel, GHG, and health impacts into cost-effectiveness testing. EFG followed NSPM guidelines, while Ms. Lane testified that existing policies, not direct legislation, justify including societal factors like resilience and GHG reduction in the BCA framework.

- against the TRC test which is currently used by the Board for cost-effectiveness testing.[18](#page-12-0) p. p. 11
- against the TRC test which is currently used by the Board for cost-effectiveness testing.[18](#page-12-0) Impact Category Sub-Category BCA Test TRC Test Utility System Electric Generation Transmission Distribution General All All Gas Onl...

AI summary The text discusses the comparison between the BCA test and the TRC test for cost-effectiveness, highlighting differences in impact categories and sub-categories, such as the inclusion of gas commodity costs, societal resilience, and public health impacts. The Proposed BCA does not reduce the utility system impact categories compared to the TRC test.

4.3 APPLICABLE DISCOUNT RATE p. pp. 17-18
s it then was) considered the matter of a deferral of DSM funds and whether such deferral would properly be included in the NS Power rate base. In its decision, the Board commented: [33](#page-18-1) The [Department of Energy] DOE raised th...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) questioned the inclusion of deferred DSM funds in NS Power's rate base, citing a 7.78% financing cost versus available 3% bank rates. The Board emphasized that DSM, administered by EfficiencyOne (E1), is not a utility capital asset, undermining the use of NS Power's WACC for DSM evaluations. The DOE advocated deferring DSM costs during budget setting, while the Board directed E1 to explore cheaper financing options under the PUA.

4.4 EVERGREEN PROCESS p. pp. 18-19
4.4 EVERGREEN PROCESS - E1's proposed evergreen process represents a foundational commitment to maintaining the integrity, - relevance, and adaptability of its Proposed BCA framework. This process ensures that the BCA test remains - aligne...

AI summary E1's evergreen process ensures the BCA framework remains aligned with evolving legislation, policy, and market conditions in Nova Scotia. It involves periodic reviews, stakeholder engagement, and collaboration with DSMAG to quantify non-energy impacts. E1 claims no opposition to the process.

5. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE AND HEARING RECORD p. pp. 20-21
as whether DSM activities reduce costs for NSPI customers, from a utility perspective)."[38](#page-21-1) In this application, E1 is proposing that the TRC test be replaced by the Proposed BCA test. EFG, Mr. Wyatt and Ms. Lane agree that th...

AI summary E1 proposes replacing the TRC test with a BCA test, supported by EFG, Wyatt, and Lane as aligned with NSPM and policy goals. SBA concerns were addressed via PCA, with Ms. Whitten supporting zero valuation for non-energy impacts. Ms. Lane initially advocated for lower proxy values but later acknowledged justification for proposed values.

6.1 INTRODUCTION p. pp. 23-25
6.1 INTRODUCTION - It is E1's position that the Proposed BCA satisfies the legislative requirements for cost-effectiveness testing, - including new or amended legislative requirements. More specifically, E1 submits that the Proposed BCA -...

AI summary E1 argues that their proposed BCA meets legislative requirements for cost-effectiveness testing, including portfolio-level DSM assessment and sustainable development considerations. They also claim Mr. Bowman's approach fails to satisfy statutory requirements.

6.3.1 E1'S PROPOSED BCA p. pp. 26-28
6.3.1 E1'S PROPOSED BCA In addressing this matter, it is appropriate to apply the rules of statutory interpretation and consider the relevant provisions "in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with...

AI summary E1's proposed BCA under the Public Utilities Act outlines statutory obligations for the NSUARB to evaluate DSM initiatives at the portfolio level. The Act requires NS Power to enter DSM purchase agreements with E1, which must be approved by the Board. The evaluation of cost-effectiveness is distinct from high-level portfolio assessments.

6.3.2 THE IG'S PROPOSED APPROACH p. pp. 29-34
ate in the circumstances, whereas I see you coming at it from the other perspective where your focus is on a much narrower net that casts a narrower range of options, but also using secondary tests or M12282, E-14, Evidence of Patrick Bowm...

AI summary E1 challenges the IG's proposed approach, arguing it misaligns with statutory requirements for cost-effective DSM evaluation at the portfolio level, not measure/program levels. The IG emphasizes utility-focused policy objectives, while E1 advocates for broader policy considerations. Legal references to subsection 79H(2) of the PUA are cited.

6.5 ENERGY REFORM ACT p. pp. 36-37
6.5 ENERGY REFORM ACT

AI summary The section introduces the Energy Reform Act, a legislative framework under consideration in Nova Scotia's regulatory proceedings. It sets the context for discussions involving energy policy, demand-side management, and regulatory oversight, though specific arguments or details are not elaborated in the provided text.

6.5.1 E1'S PROPOSED BCA p. p. 37
6.5.1 E1'S PROPOSED BCA Fourth, E1 submits that its Proposed BCA allows the Board to give appropriate consideration to the extent to which a cost-effectiveness test can support the goals (including sustainability goals) set out by the Legi...

AI summary E1 argues its proposed BCA aligns with legislative goals, unlike the IG's tests. The Energy Reform Act (2024) mandates cost-effectiveness considerations in Board decisions. Section 6(2) of the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act requires the Board to evaluate cost-effectiveness when approving rates or other matters.

1 (a) support competition and innovation in the provision of energy resources p. p. 37
Public Utilities Act , RSNS 1989, c 380, s 79L(5). 1 (a) support competition and innovation in the provision of energy resources 2 in the Province; 3 (b) support the development of a competitive electricity market; 4 (c) ensure the provisi...

AI summary The text references the Public Utilities Act and the More Access to Energy Act, emphasizing the Energy Board's authority over cost-effectiveness testing and DSM Plan applications. It highlights the need to consider Section 6(2) of the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act in these applications.

99640Closing Submission - IG 7 passages
1. THE BOARD CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR BROAD SOCIETAL IMPACTS, OR NON-ENERGY IMPACTS p. p. 0
1. THE BOARD CANNOT ACCOUNT FOR BROAD SOCIETAL IMPACTS, OR NON-ENERGY IMPACTS

AI summary The regulatory board acknowledges its inability to account for broad societal impacts or non-energy impacts in its proceedings, highlighting limitations in evaluating broader consequences beyond energy-related considerations.

Background and Principles of Statutory Interpretation p. pp. 0-2
Background and Principles of Statutory Interpretation This application arose out of the Board's direction to undertake a "thorough assessment of the relative merits of both the PAC test and a jurisdiction-specific test,["](#page-1-0) 2 as...

AI summary The Board directed an assessment of PAC test vs. jurisdiction-specific test for DSM. E1 engaged EFG and DSMAG, but omitted comparative analysis with PAC. Province amended PUA, and E1 argues these changes expanded the Board's jurisdiction over DSM, contrary to prior rulings limiting non-energy impact considerations.

Applicable Legislative Provisions for Cost Effectiveness Testing p. pp. 3-6
obligations set out in the PUA . As described by Mr. Bowman, E1 is effectively NSPI's "arms and legs"[10](#page-3-4) with respect to efficiency programming. What E1 does has a direct impact on NSPI. The Board has general supervision over E...

AI summary The document outlines obligations under the PUA for cost-effective DSM, emphasizing the Board's role in supervising E1, NSPI's implementation of DSM, and the requirement for programs to benefit customers. E1 is described as NSPI's operational arm for efficiency programs, with the Board ensuring compliance with PUA provisions on cost-effectiveness and customer interests.

The Board Still Cannot Account for Non-energy Benefits p. p. 8
The Board Still Cannot Account for Non-energy Benefits The Industrial Group recognizes that certain recent legislative amendments may impact the ongoing interpretation of the PUA provisions. However, the additional factors provide guidance...

AI summary The Industrial Group acknowledges recent legislative changes but argues they don't alter the PUA's focus on reducing electricity costs. E1's environmental goals must align with PUA provisions, not override them. The Board must adhere to statutory mandates, and non-energy benefits aren't within the legislative framework for cost-effectiveness evaluation.

Negative implications of Broad interpretation p. pp. 9-10
Negative implications of Broad interpretation When interpreting the PUA, this Board should recall Sullivan's third question: what are the consequences of adopting a proposed interpretation? Approving a broad ranging costeffectiveness test...

AI summary The document warns that a broad interpretation of the PUA's cost-effectiveness testing could undermine existing practices, expand E1's mandate beyond legislative intent, and misapply the social cost of carbon (SC-GHG) as a ratepayer tool. It emphasizes that SC-GHG, derived from federal guidelines, is intended for legislative cost-benefit analyses, not utility rate-making.

Host Customer Non-Energy Benefits p. p. 12
Host Customer Non-Energy Benefits The proposed BCA test suggests that the Board should weigh a number of unquantifiable proposed benefits, including customer pride, empowerment, economic well-being, comfort, amenity, and health and safety....

AI summary The proposed BCA test includes subjective non-energy benefits like customer pride and health, valued via proxy percentages of energy benefits. Critics argue these are vague and unsupported, conflicting with PUA's DSM definition. E1 clarified non-energy impacts, but the Industrial Group opposes proxy adders for intangible benefits. Synapse's consultant Courtney Lane raised concerns about proxy value arbitrariness.

Evidence of Patrick Bowman p. pp. 17-18
age-17-4) The NSPM acknowledges that a primary test should not be run in a vacuum, and outlines that secondary tests may enhance a regulator's understanding of impacts and programming.[64](#page-17-6) The Industrial Group recognizes the va...

AI summary The NSPM emphasizes the importance of secondary tests alongside primary tests for DSM cost-effectiveness. The Industrial Group supports a primary test and complementary secondary testing in the DSM Plan. E1 must justify non-cost-effective measures using primary test results, aligning with prior Board directives. Mr. Bowman highlights the need for PCT data to assess incentive scales.

99641Closing Submission - EE 4 passages
MEMBERSHIP IN THE DSMAG p. p. 2
MEMBERSHIP IN THE DSMAG Eastward has requested that E1 accept it as a member of the Demand Side Management Advisory Group ("DSMAG") but E1 has declined to do so, and instead has proposed that it engage Eastward through one-on-one meetings...

AI summary Eastward requested membership in the DSMAG, but E1 declined, citing a conflict of interest. Eastward argues no conflict exists and emphasizes alignment with E1 and DSMAG goals. The Nova Scotia Energy Board's mandate to support energy competition is highlighted as context for Eastward's desire to participate in integrated energy solutions.

And similarly. Bowman stated: p. p. 5
n. And if you consider the revenue they're going to get from selling that power, it's more than 13 million. So that would pass a PAC test and lower net cost to customers. It would pass 79I of the Act. We've run an electrification program,...

AI summary The text discusses revenue from power sales passing a PAC test and lowering customer costs, aligning with 79I of the Act. Electrification programs, while incurring costs, generate more revenue. Bowman argues E1 (EfficiencyOne) must consider broader cost savings beyond BCA metrics. Eastward highlights the value of Eastward's potential DSMAG involvement in advising E1's 2027-2031 plan.

RELIABILITY IMPACTS p. p. 10
RELIABILITY IMPACTS In its Rebuttal Evidence E1 stated that "NS Power's avoided cost of capacity implicitly includes reliability impacts through a planning reserve margin adjustment" 44 , and "If reliability differs between modelled scenar...

AI summary The document discusses reliability impacts in energy planning, noting that E1 claims avoided costs include reliability adjustments. Experts confirm adding capacity increases reserve margins and system impacts should be considered. EFG assumes ancillary service costs are embedded in avoided costs. Eastward argues reliability differences must be assessed explicitly, opposing deferral to future reviews and requesting NS Power to clarify ancillary service inclusion.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABLE PROSPERITY CONSIDERATIONS p. pp. 11-12
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABLE PROSPERITY CONSIDERATIONS Considerable weight has been given by E1 and EFG in this process to the recent addition of sustainable development and sustainable prosperity as a factor which the Board is...

AI summary E1 and EFG emphasized the Board's mandate under the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act to consider sustainable development and prosperity, defined via existing legislation like the Environment Act and Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act . These concepts require balancing economic growth, environmental stewardship, and social responsibility, with the Board's interpretation of 'appropriate consideration' remaining discretionary.

99642Closing Submission - ECEL 3 passages
Preamble
The Board's responsibility to consider sustainable development and sustainable prosperity under the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act is set out in clause 6(2)(d), which states: In approving or fixing rates, tolls, charges, tariffs, capital...

AI summary The document outlines the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act's requirement for the Board to consider sustainable development and prosperity when approving rates and other matters. It also notes that these terms are not defined in the Act, requiring interpretation. The Act was established by the Energy Reform (2024) Act, which also created the More Access to Energy Act and amended other statutes.

The Board's Jurisdiction to Take Non-energy Impacts into Account in Cost-effectiveness Testing for Demand-side Management Plans
The Board's Jurisdiction to Take Non-energy Impacts into Account in Cost-effectiveness Testing for Demand-side Management Plans The second issue concerns the Board's jurisdiction to take non-energy impacts into account in cost-effectivenes...

AI summary The document addresses whether the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) can consider non-energy impacts in cost-effectiveness testing for Demand-side Management (DSM) plans. It references the Energy Reform (2024) Act and the EfficiencyOne (Re) case, where the UARB previously ruled against considering non-energy impacts. ECEL supports EfficiencyOne's argument that the new Act expanded the Board's jurisdiction to include non-energy benefits in DSM cost-effectiveness analyses.

Conclusion
Conclusion EfficiencyOne's proposed new BCA test is an important opportunity for the Board to consider how its traditional regulatory practices may need to evolve to give meaning to the Board's new mandate to consider sustainable developme...

AI summary EfficiencyOne's proposed BCA test offers an opportunity for the Board to adapt its regulatory practices to incorporate sustainable development and prosperity. The Energy Reform (2024) Act mandates the Board to balance sustainable development with other factors like affordable energy rates. This proceeding sets a precedent for future decisions on sustainable energy regulation.

99643Closing Submission - NSPI 4 passages
INTRODUCTION p. p. 0
INTRODUCTION NS Power acknowledges the significant effort and collaboration that took place through the Demand Side Management Advisory Group (DSMAG) process to arrive at the proposal now before the Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB, Board) f...

AI summary NS Power submits a proposal for a new Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) Test, emphasizing cost-effective demand-side management (DSM) under section 79I of the Public Utilities Act. The submission outlines NS Power's and EfficiencyOne's (E1) positions, legal review, and recommendations to the Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB). The focus is on affordability and cost reduction obligations.

EFFICIENCYONE'S PROPOSAL p. pp. 0-2
EFFICIENCYONE'S PROPOSAL E1's DSM Plan is currently subject to the application of the Total Resource Cost ("TRC") Test, as the M03669 Board approved cost effectiveness test applied at the program level. The TRC Test compares benefits and c...

AI summary EfficiencyOne's DSM Plan uses the modified TRC Test post-M10473, which considers host costs but not benefits, creating imbalance. E1 proposes a jurisdiction-specific BCA including non-energy benefits, aligning with societal impact perspectives. Legislative changes reflecting Nova Scotia's policy goals are highlighted as critical for the new BCA framework.

LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND ANALYSIS p. pp. 2-4
LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND ANALYSIS Though there have been legislative changes in Nova Scotia, the Board's decision in M08888 issued April 15, 2020 holds. There, the Board found that it did not have the jurisdiction to consid...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Energy Board's 2020 decision (M08888) reaffirms its jurisdictional limits, emphasizing cost-effectiveness, safe service, and reasonable rates over non-energy benefits. Sections 79H and 79I of the PUA mandate NSP to implement cost-effective DSM programs, with cost-effectiveness defined to include E1's efficiency activities. Current legislation does not empower the Board to consider non-energy impacts except for greenhouse gas reduction through electrification.

The Energy and Regulatory Boards Act p. pp. 4-6
The Energy and Regulatory Boards Act Bill 404 also created the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act which was proclaimed on April 5, 2025. Section 6(2) states: In approving or fixing rates, tolls, charges, tariffs, capital applications and all...

AI summary Bill 404 established the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act (ERBA), requiring the Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB) to consider factors like competition, sustainability, and alignment with other legislation when approving energy-related matters. E1 argues that recent amendments (including MAEA and ERBA) expanded the Board's considerations, particularly for demand-side management (DSM), but failed to provide statutory analysis or contextualize proposed benefits.

99644Closing Submission - CA 5 passages
6 a. The Legislative Context for this Application p. p. 2
6 a. The Legislative Context for this Application 8 This Application occurs in the context of recent legislative amendments, which have impacted 9 energy regulation in Nova Scotia. 11 Specifically, the Energy Reform Act (2024) , c 2, Bill...

AI summary The legislative context includes the Energy Reform Act (2024) and related statutes, establishing the Energy Board and emphasizing sustainable development, competition, and energy efficiency. Amendments to the PUA require evaluating demand-side management at the portfolio level, including strategic electrification.

13 i. EfficiencyOne p. p. 4
tempts to establish the test that makes most sense for Nova Scotians based on Nova 8 Scotia policy is a consideration of whether the PAC test is the right test or not." Further, Mr. Neme 9 stated: 10 11 A. … It just became very clear from...

AI summary Mr. Neme argues that the PAC test is incompatible with Nova Scotia's policy objectives, as it excludes strategic electrification measures which are now legally required for EfficiencyOne. He highlights that the PAC test inherently rules out electrification, which adds grid costs without benefits, and emphasizes the need for a test aligned with provincial policy.

15 iv. Small Business Advocate p. p. 6
15 iv. Small Business Advocate 16 17 The Small Business Advocate filed evidence in this matter from Consultant Melissa Whitten of 18 Daymark Energy Advisors, Inc. In her evidence, Ms. Whitten presented concerns regarding E1's 19 proposed B...

AI summary The Small Business Advocate raised concerns about E1's proposed BCA test, citing difficulties in quantifying non-energy benefits like amenity, empowerment, and pride. Melissa Whitten of Daymark Energy Advisors supported the Partial Consensus Agreement's zero quantification for these benefits but expressed ongoing concerns about their inclusion in future proceedings.

Preamble p. pp. 12-13
e-12-3) Hydro-Québec v. Energy Board , 2024 QCCS 718. [ 43 ](#page-12-5) Association québécoise des consommateurs industriels d'électricité (AQCIE) c. Hydro-Québec , 2024 CarswellQue 3713. 1 the Nova Scotia Energy Board, was all largely su...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Energy Board supports E1's BCA test, though the Consumer Advocate notes not all parties agree. Mr. Bowman criticizes the test as 'excessively expansive,' citing uncommon societal-level DSM analysis in Canada. Ms. Whitten supports the amended non-energy benefits quantification in the Partial Consensus Agreement.

8 Conclusion p. p. 14
8 Conclusion 9 10 As noted throughout these submissions, the Consumer Advocate is a signatory to the terms of the 11 Partial Consensus Agreement reached in this matter by E1 and several of the Parties. The 12 Consumer Advocate submits the...

AI summary The Consumer Advocate supports the approval of the Partial Consensus Agreement between E1 and other parties, arguing it aligns with the Board's statutory mandate, jurisprudence, and evidence presented. The submission emphasizes consistency with legal frameworks and regulatory obligations.

99729Reply Submission - CA 1 passage
13 Reply Submissions of the Consumer Advocate p. pp. 0-1
13 Reply Submissions of the Consumer Advocate 14 15 Please accept these as the reply submissions on behalf of the Consumer Advocate regarding the 16 Application filed by EfficiencyOne ("E1") for approval of a New Benefit-Cost Analysis ("BC...

AI summary The Consumer Advocate's reply submissions challenge EfficiencyOne's proposed BCA test for Demand Side Management Plans, emphasizing legislative integration between the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act, More Access to Energy Act, and Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act. The Industrial Group disputes EfficiencyOne's interpretation of these statutes.

99730Reply Submission - IG 4 passages
Response to NSPI p. p. 0
Response to NSPI The Industrial Group is supportive of the analytical approach to legislative interpretation of the Public Utilities Act (" PUA ") outlined by NSPI. The new policy goals contained in the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act and...

AI summary The Industrial Group supports NSPI's legislative interpretation of the Public Utilities Act (PUA) and agrees that new policy goals from the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act and More Access to Energy Act should not override demand-side management (DSM) program requirements. Both parties align on the need to prioritize cost-effective programs over sustainability goals.

Response to E1 p. p. 1
Response to E1 Unsurprisingly, E1 takes a vastly different approach to statutory interpretation which has largely been addressed in the Industrial Group's initial submissions. Without repeating those, the Industrial Group will address some...

AI summary The Industrial Group addresses E1's differing statutory interpretation approach, focusing on critiques of Mr. Bowman's endorsement of PAC and DSM application review methods. References include prior submissions, diagrams, and cross-examination testimony confirming GHG inclusion in social cost of carbon calculations.

i. PAC is Not "Too Narrow" and Suite of Tests is not "Cumbersome" and "Complex" p. pp. 1-2
i. PAC is Not "Too Narrow" and Suite of Tests is not "Cumbersome" and "Complex" E1 claims the PAC test "is too narrow to serve as the main assessment for portfolio-level decisionmaking["](#page-2-0) 5 . The Industrial Group emphasizes that...

AI summary E1 argues the PAC test is too narrow and the proposed tests are complex, while the Industrial Group counters that PAC is foundational and targeted. E1 focuses on environmental goals, whereas PUA mandates cost reduction for NSPI customers. The combination of tests proposed by Mr. Bowman is deemed balanced and not overly burdensome.

ii. Misstatement of Approach to Evaluation of Strategic Electrification p. pp. 2-3
ii. Misstatement of Approach to Evaluation of Strategic Electrification While misstating the evidence of Mr. Bowman, E1 again pleads "complexity" to argue against the use of different tests to be applied to different resources. Its submiss...

AI summary E1 argues against using different cost-effectiveness tests for DSM resources, claiming complexity and misrepresenting Mr. Bowman's evidence. The Industrial Group supports Mr. Bowman's proposal to use the PAC test for all DSM, with adjustments for strategic electrification. Critics argue E1's uniform test fails to address electrification's unique benefits and costs, while the Proposed BCA overlooks utility revenue impacts and inadequate evaluation criteria.

99731Reply Submission - EE 1 passage
HYBRID HEATING p. pp. 2-3
HYBRID HEATING With respect to the significant issue of hybrid heating, E1 simply states that, "At the hearing, Ms. Thompson confirmed hybrid heating measures are currently being considered by E1 for the 2027- 2031 DSM Plan".[6](#page-3-2)...

AI summary The document discusses E1's consideration of hybrid heating in its 2027-2031 DSM Plan, with Eastward and the Industrial Group advocating for stronger focus on hybrid heating due to cost-effectiveness and policy alignment. E1's approach is criticized for prioritizing greenhouse gas reductions over electricity cost reductions and omitting key policy guidance from the Gas Distribution Act.

99732Reply Submission - E1 8 passages
2.1 LEGISLATIVE INTERPRETATION & JURISDICTIONAL LIMITS p. p. 4
nable prosperity results in requiring the Board to set aside sustainable development and sustainable prosperity considerations for all important DSM matters under PUA . The IG states: [10](#page-5-0) While the environmental goals articulat...

AI summary The IG argues that the Board must strictly adhere to the PUA without incorporating other policy goals like sustainable development, while E1 contends that the Board's authority under the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act allows consideration of broader policy objectives. The IG claims E1's mandate is limited to cost-effectiveness, whereas E1 asserts that excluding sustainable development contradicts legislative intent.

2.2 CRITIQUE OF HOST CUSTOMER NON-ENERGY IMPACTS AND SOCIETAL IMPACTS p. pp. 5-6
2.2 CRITIQUE OF HOST CUSTOMER NON-ENERGY IMPACTS AND SOCIETAL IMPACTS The IG critiques the inclusion of non-energy impacts and broad societal costs, which are characterized as vague, subjective, and unsupported by evidence. E1 disagrees. T...

AI summary The IG criticizes non-energy and societal impacts as vague and unsupported, while E1 argues they are backed by academic literature and regulatory precedent, citing multiple experts and noting Mr. Bowman's dissent. E1 emphasizes expert consensus and ongoing evidence development.

2.4 BROAD INTERPRETATION AND SOCIAL COST OF CARBON p. pp. 7-8
2.4 BROAD INTERPRETATION AND SOCIAL COST OF CARBON - The IG warns that adopting a broad societal test could have unintended consequences for other utilities, - potentially leading to inconsistent and unreasonable outcomes. Specifically, th...

AI summary The Industrial Group (IG) warns that using a broad societal test for evaluating E1's programming could lead to inconsistent outcomes, arguing the social cost of carbon (SCC) is not reflected in Nova Scotia energy prices. However, the text counters that SCC represents real societal costs affecting Nova Scotians, even if not directly priced.

6 3.7 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND PROSPERITY CONSIDERATIONS p. pp. 13-14
6 3.7 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND PROSPERITY CONSIDERATIONS - Eastward cautions against overemphasizing sustainable development and prosperity in benefit-cost tests, - advocating for a balanced approach that considers all legislative requi...

AI summary Eastward cautions against overemphasizing sustainable development in benefit-cost tests, advocating for balance. E1 argues its Proposed BCA test appropriately considers societal impacts as one factor. Eastward Energy warns against applying social cost of carbon to other matters. E1 emphasizes the Board's specific focus on approving the BCA test as a replacement for the TRC test in DSM Plan evaluations.

4. RESPONSE TO NS POWER p. pp. 14-15
4. RESPONSE TO NS POWER - NS Power's position regarding the Proposed BCA was first communicated to E1 and the DSMAG in its - Closing Submission. - The Closing Submission invites the Board to narrow Nova Scotia's DSM cost-effectiveness fram...

AI summary NS Power proposes revising the BCA framework to use its WACC and exclude certain benefits, conflicting with post-2022 legislation, the proceeding's record, and NSPM methodology. E1 argues for maintaining the current cost-effectiveness framework, including a 2% discount rate and portfolio-level screening under PUA.

4.1.2 WHY M08888 IS NO LONGER DETERMINATIVE p. pp. 15-18
4.1.2 WHY M08888 IS NO LONGER DETERMINATIVE Nova Scotia Power submits that "the Board's decision in M08888 issued April 15, 2020 holds".[38](#page-16-1) M08888, reviewed in the context of the legislative framework that existed at that time...

AI summary Nova Scotia Power argues that M08888 is no longer determinative due to legislative changes since 2020, including amendments to the PUA and new acts requiring consideration of non-energy factors like GHG reduction. The Board's previous jurisdictional limitations have been altered by these updates.

4.3 APPROPRIATE DISCOUNT RATE p. pp. 19-20
4.3 APPROPRIATE DISCOUNT RATE NS Power asserts that the WACC should be the discount rate for DSM cost-effectiveness screening. NS Power's reliance on WACC as the appropriate discount rate is both legally and conceptually flawed for several...

AI summary NS Power argues for using WACC as the discount rate for DSM cost-effectiveness screening, but opponents claim it is legally and conceptually flawed. They argue WACC misapplies NSPM principles, ignores sustainability and long-term GHG benefits, and undervalues DSM programs. A 2% social discount rate is recommended, aligning with federal guidance and legislative mandates.

5. REQUESTED BOARD ORDER p. pp. 20-21
5. REQUESTED BOARD ORDER Based the evidence and analysis before the Board in this matter, including as set out in these Reply Submissions, E1 respectfully requests the Board approve the Proposed BCA as supplemented by the PCA, specifically...

AI summary E1 requests the Board to approve the Proposed BCA supplemented by the PCA, including a 2% discount rate, proxy values for the 2027-2031 DSM Plan, and the evergreen process for future DSM applications. The request aligns with PUA 79H(2) and references prior submissions (M12282).

99735Reply submission - NSPI 2 passages
Preamble p. pp. 0-3
October 21, 2025 Crystal Henwood Clerk of the Board Nova Scotia Energy Board 1601 Lower Water Street, 3rd Floor Halifax, NS B3J 3S3 Re: M12282 Demand Side Management (DSM) Benefit Cost Analysis Test (BCAT) Rebuttal Submission Dear Ms. Henw...

AI summary Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NS Power) submits a rebuttal to EfficiencyOne's (E1) proposed Benefit Cost Analysis Test (BCAT) for Demand Side Management (DSM) Plans, emphasizing the need for consensus aligned with legislative intent and cost-effectiveness frameworks. NS Power argues the Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB) cannot consider host customer non-energy impacts or societal impacts post- Energy Reform Act (ERA) enactment, citing the Public Utilities Act (PUA) as the governing legislation.

CONCLUSION p. p. 6
CONCLUSION E1's proposed test leaves the Board with no transparent evidentiary pathway to assess whether the proposed non-energy benefits or their associated values are reasonable, reproducible, or consistent with statutory intentions. As...

AI summary E1's proposed test lacks transparency in assessing non-energy benefits, per NS Power's submission. NS Power emphasizes the need for revisions to align with legislative frameworks like the PUA and advocates for collaborative efforts to refine cost-effectiveness testing. The conclusion underscores the necessity of further alignment between statutory intentions and practical implementation.

100256Board Decision 19 passages
2.0 PROPOSED BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS TEST p. pp. 3-5
2.0 PROPOSED BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS TEST - [8] E1 is the holder of a franchise issued by the Minister of Energy to provide demand-side management activities to NS Power. Under the Public Utilities Act , E1 must develop a demand-side managem...

AI summary E1, a franchise holder under the Public Utilities Act, must develop demand-side management (DSM) plans for NS Power, structured in tiers (measure, program, portfolio). The NSUARB evaluates these plans using cost-effectiveness testing, ensuring measurable benefits for ratepayers and aligning with Nova Scotia's regulatory practices.

3.5 East Coast Environmental Law p. pp. 21-23
3.5 East Coast Environmental Law [56] East Coast Environmental Law (ECEL) is a party to the Consensus Agreement and supports E1's proposed new BCA test as amended by the contents of the agreement. It states in its closing submissions: … We...

AI summary East Coast Environmental Law (ECEL) supports E1's revised BCA test, emphasizing inclusion of carbon social costs in DSM evaluations. It argues that the Energy Reform (2024) Act expands the Board's environmental mandate, requiring alignment with sustainability goals under multiple acts. ECEL stresses that sustainable development and prosperity must be considered alongside affordability and reliability in energy regulation.

4.1 Demand-side Management Legislation and Policies in Nova Scotia p. p. 27
4.1 Demand-side Management Legislation and Policies in Nova Scotia

AI summary The section introduces demand-side management legislation and policies in Nova Scotia, referencing key entities and acronyms related to utility regulation and cost analysis frameworks.

4.1.1 Introduction p. p. 27
4.1.1 Introduction [69] The Public Utilities Act requires NS Power to engage E1 to undertake "costeffective demand-side management". The Board must approve these agreements and "determine the cost-effective demand-side management that must...

AI summary The NSUARB must determine the cost-effectiveness test for demand-side management under the Public Utilities Act, with parties disagreeing on whether non-energy impacts should be considered. Post-2020 jurisdictional changes and the 2024 Energy Reform Act split NSUARB into two boards, expanding the Energy Board's consideration scope. E1 argues the Board now has jurisdiction to include non-energy impacts, while some intervenors oppose this. The Board will assess statutory interpretation and decide on BCA approval if jurisdiction is confirmed.

4.1.2 Statutory Interpretation p. pp. 27-28
4.1.2 Statutory Interpretation [74] Well recognized principles applied by courts and tribunals throughout the country guide the Board when interpreting legislation. A majority of the Supreme Court of Canada summarized these principles in C...

AI summary The NSUARB applies statutory interpretation principles from the Supreme Court of Canada's Vavilov decision, assuming legislative intent aligns with these principles for administrative decisions.

4.1.3 Board Approval of Demand-side Management p. pp. 28-30
4.1.3 Board Approval of Demand-side Management [78] Before 2010, NS Power undertook its own demand-side management programs. In 2009, responding to growing concerns over the potential inherent conflict between selling electricity and takin...

AI summary Before 2010, NS Power managed its own demand-side programs. In 2009, the Legislature enacted the Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation Act, creating a not-for-profit to administer demand-side management and energy efficiency programs, funded by utility assessments. The NSUARB approved expenditures from the fund, effective January 2010.

4.1.4 The 2020 Non-energy Benefits Decision p. p. 33
- [85] While acknowledging that it had an over-arching public interest mandate in everything it does, the NSUARB noted its principal responsibilities in regulating utilities were to ensure safe and adequate service, just and reasonable rat...

AI summary The NSUARB emphasized its mandate to ensure safe service, just rates, and lowest long-term costs, excluding non-energy benefits. EfficiencyOne argued for broader customer interest consideration, citing 2009 ministerial comments, while the Industrial Group contended the Board's jurisdiction is limited by PUA's statutory definition of electricity efficiency activities.

4.1.5 Statutory Changes p. pp. 33-36
4.1.5 Statutory Changes [86] In the present case, E1 notes there have been significant statutory changes since the NSUARB's decision in 2020. E1 argues that changes to the Public Utilities Act and s. 6(2) of the Energy and Regulatory Board...

AI summary E1 highlights statutory changes to the Public Utilities Act and Energy and Regulatory Boards Act since 2020, requiring the NSUARB to evaluate non-energy impacts of demand-side management. The Act's definition of 'demand-side management' now includes strategic electrification, while affordability considerations were removed from evaluation criteria.

Sustainable prosperity long-term objective p. p. 36
Sustainable prosperity long-term objective - 5 (1) The long-term objective of the Government is to achieve sustainable prosperity. - (2) To achieve its objective of sustainable prosperity, the Government shall - (a) establish, adopt, suppo...

AI summary The Government of Nova Scotia aims to achieve sustainable prosperity through integrated environmental and economic goals, public awareness campaigns, clean economy growth, well-being initiatives, supportive regulation, and continuous improvement in social, environmental, and economic indicators.

4.1.6 The Meaning of "Cost-effective" under the Public Utilities Act p. p. 40
le s. 79V(1)(e) of the Public Utilities Act authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations defining any word or expression used but not defined in the statute, there are no such regulations. [100] The NSPM is a publication of the N...

AI summary The document discusses the interpretation of 'cost-effective' under the Public Utilities Act , referencing the NSPM's guidance on benefit-cost analysis (BCA). The NSUARB emphasizes that while BCA methodology is not controversial, parties disagree on relevant benefits and costs. Statutory amendments replaced 'electricity efficiency' with 'demand-side management' but retained cost-effectiveness requirements.

(2) A franchise p. p. 40
(2) A franchise (a) gives the franchise holder the exclusive right to supply Nova Scotia Power Incorporated with reasonably available, cost-effective demand-side management for the purpose of this Act; … - 79K (1) Nova Scotia Power Incorpo...

AI summary The franchise grants exclusive rights to Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI) for cost-effective demand-side management. NSPI must share customer data with franchise holders and cooperate with the IESO on integrated resource planning. Provisions emphasize cost-effectiveness and 'reasonably available' demand-side management, with E1 arguing for a broader benefits-costs test beyond utility impacts.

The current version is: p. p. 40
mandate to consider nonutility impacts in the assessment of cost-effectiveness and says that incorporating sustainability-focused factors into regulatory decision-making is now the law in Nova Scotia: As explained above, the Energy and Reg...

AI summary The Energy Reform Act and related legislation mandate the Energy Board to consider sustainability factors, including environmental stewardship and social responsibility, in regulatory decisions. This includes assessing the environmental impacts of demand-side management programs, promoting energy efficiency, and fostering green jobs.

[124] Eastward expressed similar comments in its reply submissions: p. p. 40
[124] Eastward expressed similar comments in its reply submissions: E1 has continued in its Closing Submissions to put considerable emphasis on the Board's requirement at section 6(2)(d) of the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act to give "app...

AI summary Eastward's reply submissions emphasize E1's focus on the Board's duty under the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act to prioritize sustainable development in DSM plans. E1 argues that the Board must explicitly address sustainable development, while East Coast Environmental Law notes this responsibility does not override other statutory considerations like affordable energy rates. NSPI aligns with E1's BCA approach, and E1 disputes the Industrial Group's interpretation of legislative changes.

4.1.6.1 Findings p. p. 52
osts. As noted already, strategic electrification may only be undertaken if, in addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it reduces electricity costs. This is explicitly stated in s. 79A(b)(iv). [130] While the NSUARB's 2020 decision...

AI summary The NSUARB examines legislative requirements for demand-side management, emphasizing cost reduction and alignment with sections 79A(b)(iv), 79I(1), and 79H(2) of the PUA. The Board agrees with the Industrial Group and NS Power that cost reduction remains central, rejecting broader interpretations of sustainable development overriding specific cost mandates. References to Matter M12171 highlight tensions between general and specific legislative provisions.

4.2.1 Findings p. pp. 57-60
4.2.1 Findings [151] E1 and its consultants purported to follow guidance in the NSPM in determining the proposed BCA test. However, a process that simply takes account of an inventory of energy and climate change policy goals and objective...

AI summary The Board rejects the proposed BCA test for DSM cost-effectiveness due to misalignment with the PUA's focus on reducing customer electricity costs. The TRC test is criticized for asymmetrical application. The Industrial Group supports the PAC test, which aligns with PUA's statutory requirements. The Board directs E1 to use PAC for future DSM plans.

4.4.1 Findings p. p. 64
4.4.1 Findings [166] There is no ambiguity in s. 79H(2): the Board must evaluate the proposed cost-effective demand-side management at the portfolio level. As noted previously in this decision, the Board agrees with E1 that there is a diff...

AI summary The NSUARB mandates evaluating cost-effective demand-side management (DSM) at the portfolio level, not individual measures. The Board allows alternative cost-effectiveness tests, including BCA, and requires E1 to justify measures failing primary tests. NS Power's WACC must be compared if a social discount rate is used in BCA. The Energy and Regulatory Boards Act (ERBA) permits justification based on factors under s. 6(2).

4.5 Discount Rate p. p. 65
ty savings, avoided generation, etc. is to use the same discount rate as is used for utility IRP, which is the WACC." Like EFG, Mr. Bowman added that E1 may provide discount rate sensitivity analyses. [179] In its rebuttal evidence, E1 sta...

AI summary The document discusses the use of discount rates in Nova Scotia's regulatory proceedings, with E1 advocating for a social discount rate (2%) to account for societal and intergenerational impacts, while EFG and others support using WACC. E1 argues WACC fails to reflect regulatory goals, and the Industrial Group questions the application of the social rate to non-GHG costs. E1 clarifies the social rate reflects time value of money for long-term considerations.

s. 7.1 about the discount rate to be used: p. p. 71
s. 7.1 about the discount rate to be used: The discount rate is the rate at which future costs and benefits are converted to their present equivalents. Discounting accounts for the fact that: - there is a time preference for current consum...

AI summary The document establishes that the discount rate for regulatory analyses should be based on the opportunity cost of capital (WACC), as per Treasury Board guidelines. It emphasizes alignment with NS Power's IRP and the Public Utilities Act, rejecting social discount rates except for specific long-term cases. The NSUARB mandates WACC for cost-effectiveness testing of DSM programs, citing NS Power's funding source and the need for comparable evaluations.

5.0 SUMMARY OF BOARD FINDINGS p. pp. 78-79
5.0 SUMMARY OF BOARD FINDINGS [217] The Board finds it does not have the authority to approve E1's proposed BCA because the Public Utilities Act restricts the Board's ability to consider non-energy and societal benefits in assessing the co...

AI summary The Board rejects E1's proposed BCA due to the Public Utilities Act's restrictions on non-energy benefits. E1 must use PAC test and NS Power's WACC for DSM plan assessments. Strategic electrification requires GHG reduction and cost savings. Eastward is added to DSMAG. Portfolio-level cost-effectiveness evaluations are mandated.

100257Board Order 2 passages
IN THE MATTER OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT
IN THE MATTER OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT - and - IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION by EFFICIENCYONE for approval of a New Benefit-Cost Analysis Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management Plans BEFORE : Stephen T. McGrath, K.C., Chair Steven...

AI summary EfficiencyOne seeks approval for a new benefit-cost analysis test to evaluate demand side management plans under the Public Utilities Act. The proceeding is before a panel including Stephen T. McGrath, Steven M. Murphy, and Darlene Willcott.

ORDER
ORDER EfficiencyOne (E1) applied to the Nova Scotia Energy Board on May 16, 2025, for approval of a New Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Test for Evaluating Demand Side Management (DSM) Plans. The Board issued its Decision on December 10, 2025....

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) sought approval for a new BCA test for DSM plans, but the Nova Scotia Energy Board rejected it, directing E1 to use the PAC test instead. The Board mandated NS Power's WACC as the discount rate, required strategic electrification to reduce emissions and costs, and included Eastward in the DSM advisory group. E1 must comply with the Public Utilities Act and provide specific data for DSM plan assessments.

Disclaimer: These summaries were generated by AI from the filings they describe. We take care to make them accurate, but errors are possible - and they aren't advice. Only the filings themselves are the record: if you're relying on something here, confirm it against the source documents or the Nova Scotia Energy Board's own record. Full disclaimer →