Topic:"Regulatory Oversight" in M12394

A. The Fair Return Standard 5 The principles surrounding the concept of a "fair return" for a regulated company (Fair Return 6 Standard) were established by the Supreme Court of Canada in Northwestern Utilities v. City of Edmonton (1929) S...

AI summary The Fair Return Standard, established by the Supreme Court of Canada in Northwestern Utilities v. City of Edmonton and reaffirmed in Ontario (Energy Board) v. Ontario Power Generation Inc. , ensures that regulated utilities can recover their operating and capital costs through rates, enabling them to earn a return equivalent to investments of comparable risk, thus encouraging continued investment and operational maintenance.

17 B. The Stand-Alone Principle 18 The Stand-Alone Principle provides that the utility must be regulated as if it were a stand-alone 19 entity, raising capital on the merits of its own business and financial characteristics. In this way, 2...

AI summary The Stand-Alone Principle requires utilities to be regulated as independent entities, ensuring they raise capital based on their own financial and risk profiles. This prevents cross-subsidization within corporate structures and ensures fair returns. NSPML, for example, must compete for capital with other subsidiaries like Tampa Electric Company, which has different return metrics.

2025 GDP Growth and Inflation Forecasts

AI summary The document presents 2025 GDP growth and inflation forecasts, supported by a visual representation in Figure 15. It discusses economic projections relevant to regulatory considerations in Nova Scotia.

NSPML Responses to Industrial Group Information Requests 1 Request IR-02: 2 3 Reference: Section 2.2 Other Considerations. 4 (a) Please elaborate on how the final 900 MW testing of the LIL and 5 alignment of operating practices and mainten...

AI summary NSPML responds to industrial group information requests regarding tariff impacts, multi-year assessments, and risk allocation. Responses refer to other NSEB requests and external articles discussing tariff uncertainty. NSPML outlines risk allocation in multi-year assessments, stating the company bears the risk of higher costs while customers bear the risk of lower costs up to the 9.25% earnings cap.

4 5 a) For clarity, the "commercial exercise" referenced in the Application refers to the 6 calculation and payment of an adjustment amount under Section 5.5(b) of the Joint 7 Operations Agreement (JOA), which is referred to as the "LTAMP...

AI summary The text discusses the 'commercial exercise' related to the calculation and payment of an adjustment amount under the Joint Operations Agreement (JOA), referred to as the 'LTAMP true-up'. It also outlines coordination between parties through the Joint Operations Committee and other informal mechanisms, and highlights NSPML's obligation to maintain the Maritime Link in the 'Required Condition'.

1 Table 1 Title Proposed FTEs in 2026 Position Description Administrative Assistant 1.00 Provide administrative support to ENL team members. CONA Student (one at each site) 0.66 Assist in operations planning to support maintenance of Marit...

AI summary The document outlines proposed full-time equivalent (FTE) positions and their descriptions for the Maritime Link assets, including roles in administration, contracting, procurement, engineering, and regulatory affairs. These positions are part of the planning and maintenance efforts for the Maritime Link project.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL Title Proposed FTEs in 2026 Position Description General Counsel & VP Business Development 1.00 Responsible for the regulatory process along with the associated commercial and legal matters including execution of key ML Pr...

AI summary The table outlines proposed full-time equivalent (FTE) positions and their descriptions for various roles within Nova Scotia Power Marketing Limited (NSPML), including legal, safety, engineering, and operational roles. NSPML has also responded to information requests from the Nova Scotia Energy Board.

Table 2 – Budgeted positions for 2025 and Actual for 2024 Title Proposed FTEs in 2025; Actual in 2024 Position Description Administrative Assistant 1.00 Provide administrative support to ENL team members. CONA Student (1 at each site for 6...

AI summary The document outlines budgeted positions for 2025 and actual figures for 2024, including roles such as Administrative Assistant, Contracts Supervisor, and Director of Regulatory Affairs & Governance. These positions support operations, procurement, finance, and regulatory processes related to the Maritime Link transmission project and ENLH.

" Facility Real Property Interests " means: - (a) any estate or right in, over, under or appurtenant to, real property recognized under Applicable Law, including the seabed, including ownership in fee simple, leasehold interests, easements...

AI summary The text defines key terms related to real property interests and financial matters in the context of the Maritime Link project. It outlines the scope of real property interests, financial matters, and Force Majeure events that may affect the project's operations and obligations.

ing " has the meaning set forth in Sectio[n 7.1(a)](#page-116-2) ; " Transfer Date " means the date on which the Transfer Closing is completed pursuant to Section [7.1(e)](#page-117-0) ; " Transmission Assets " means the Labrador-Island Li...

AI summary This document defines key terms related to transmission assets, agreements, and regulatory bodies, including the definition of 'Service Life,' 'Transfer Date,' 'Transmission Assets,' 'Transmission Operating Agreement,' 'UARB,' and others, with references to relevant sections and legal documents.

tive shall be free to take such action having regard to that Party's own interests, in its sole and absolute discretion. - (m) Subsequent Agreements Wherever a provision of this Agreement states that: - (i) Section [1.2(m)(i)](#page-89-2)...

AI summary This section outlines the procedures for handling disputes and subsequent agreements under the agreement. It specifies that parties must negotiate in good faith, and failure to reach an agreement may constitute a dispute, subject to resolution procedures, including arbitration.

1.4 Applicable Law and Submission to Jurisdiction This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of NL and the Federal laws of Canada applicable therein, but excluding all choice-of-law provisions. Subject to...

AI summary The agreement is governed by the laws of Newfoundland and Labrador and federal Canadian laws, with the exclusive jurisdiction of NL courts. Parties waive objections to venue and inconvenience of forum, except as specified in Article 17.

3.2 JOC Composition, Quorum, Duration and Procedures (a) Composition - The JOC shall at all times be comprised of four representatives appointed by Nalcor and two representatives appointed by Emera. Nalcor shall designate one of its repres...

AI summary This section outlines the composition, quorum, duration, and procedures of the Joint Operations Committee (JOC). The JOC consists of four representatives from Nalcor and two from Emera, with a quorum of two Nalcor and one Emera representative. The JOC's duration is tied to the Term, and it may establish sub-committees as needed.

o in the JOC Matter in the manner Approved by the JOC. If the JOC fails to reach consensus on a JOC Matter, the issues preventing consensus shall be resolved pursuant to Section [3.4](#page-94-0) .

AI summary This section outlines the responsibilities of the Manager and the Joint Operations Committee (JOC) in addressing JOC Matters. If the JOC cannot reach consensus, the issues must be resolved according to Section 3.4.

- (d) Non-Conforming Regulator Determination - If the Applicable Regulator makes a determination pursuant to Section [3.4(b)](#page-94-1) and a Party considers that the determination did not conform with the requirements of this Agreement,...

AI summary This section outlines the procedures for handling non-conforming regulator determinations, resolving JOC matters without consensus, and the allocation of costs in disputes. If a determination is non-conforming, the matter may be referred to arbitration. Unresolved JOC matters are decided by majority vote. Each party bears its own costs in dispute resolution unless a party is not substantially successful, in which case it also covers the other party's costs.

3.5 Meetings of JOC - (a) Regular Meetings The JOC shall meet not less frequently than annually during the Term in accordance with the schedule determined by the JOC, or at such more frequent intervals as the JOC may decide from time to ti...

AI summary This section outlines the procedures for meetings of the JOC, including the frequency of regular meetings, the process for calling meetings, and provisions for waiving or abridging notice periods in exceptional circumstances.

3.6 Resolution in Writing An original, facsimile copy or other electronic image copy of a resolution of the JOC signed by the chair and the vice-chair or their delegates shall be effective as if passed at a duly called meeting of the JOC.

AI summary This section outlines the requirements for a resolution in writing by the Joint Oversight Committee (JOC), specifying that an original, facsimile, or electronic image copy signed by the chair and vice-chair or their delegates is effective as if passed at a duly called meeting.

5.7 Taxes - (a) Payment of Taxes Each Party is separately responsible for, and shall in a timely manner discharge, its separate obligations in respect of the payment, withholding and remittance of all Taxes in accordance with Applicable La...

AI summary This section outlines the responsibilities of each party regarding the payment of taxes and governmental charges related to the Maritime Link. Emera and Nalcor have distinct obligations depending on the timing of tax accrual and the terms of Formal Agreements.

and interest in and to any O&M Contract, whether such O&M Contract is cancelled or not; - (vii) as directed by Nalcor, transfer to Nalcor by appropriate instruments of title, and deliver to such place as Nalcor may specify, all Special Ite...

AI summary The text outlines the responsibilities of Emera in transitioning O&M activities to Nalcor, including the transfer of contracts, delivery of Special Items, provision of information, and notification of legal proceedings involving O&M contractors.

17.2 Procedure for Inter-Party Claims - (a) Notice of Claims Subject to and without restricting the effect of any specific Notice requirement in this Agreement, a Party (the " Claiming Party ") intending to assert a Claim against the other...

AI summary This section outlines the procedure for inter-party claims under the agreement. The claiming party must notify the recipient party promptly of any claim, providing details and an estimated amount of losses. The recipient party has 20 business days to investigate the claim and may request additional information. If both parties agree on the validity and amount of the claim, the recipient party must pay the agreed amount; otherwise, the matter becomes a dispute.

1.1 Definitions In this Schedule, the definitions set forth in the Articles of Agreement apply and in addition thereto: " Appointment Date " has the meaning set forth in Section 6.4 ; " Arbitration Act " means the Arbitration Act (Newfound...

AI summary This section defines key terms used in the dispute resolution process under the Articles of Agreement, including arbitration, mediation, expert determination, and negotiation procedures, along with the roles of various parties and processes involved in resolving disputes.

2.1 Purpose and Sequence of Dispute Resolution The purpose of this Schedule is to set forth a framework and procedures to resolve any Disputes that may arise under the Agreement in an amicable manner, in private and confidential proceeding...

AI summary This section outlines a structured dispute resolution process under the Agreement, emphasizing negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and expert determination as sequential steps to resolve disputes privately and amicably, avoiding litigation where possible.

4.1 Request for Mediation - (a) If the Parties are unable to resolve a Dispute through the Negotiation Procedure, a Party (the " Requesting Party "), by Notice to the other Party given within five Business Days after expiry of the period s...

AI summary This section outlines the process for requesting mediation when parties are unable to resolve a dispute through negotiation. It specifies the requirements for the Mediation Notice, the qualifications for a mediator, and the circumstances under which mediation may terminate.

4.2 Appointment of Mediator Within 10 Business Days after receipt of the Mediation Response by the Requesting Party, the Parties shall attempt to appoint a Mediator to assist the parties in resolving the Dispute. The appointment shall be i...

AI summary The parties are required to appoint a mediator within 10 business days of receiving the mediation response to assist in resolving the dispute. The appointment must be in writing and signed by all parties and the mediator.

5.1 Submission to Binding Arbitration - (a) If the Parties are unable to resolve a General Dispute through the Negotiation Procedure or the Mediation Procedure, then following termination of the mediation, or, if no Mediation Notice is giv...

AI summary This section outlines the process for submitting a General Dispute to binding arbitration if the parties cannot resolve it through negotiation or mediation. It details the requirements for giving notice, consent, and the conditions under which arbitration is deemed to be agreed upon.

5.3 Appointment of Tribunal (a) Subject to Section 5.4 , the arbitration will be heard and determined by three Arbitrators. Each Party shall appoint an Arbitrator of its choice within 20 Business Days after delivery or deemed delivery of t...

AI summary Section 5.3 outlines the process for appointing a tribunal consisting of three arbitrators. Each party must appoint an arbitrator within 20 business days, and the two party-appointed arbitrators will then appoint a third arbitrator as chair. If they fail to agree, the Code’s Article 11 will govern the appointment.

5.4 Arbitration by Single Arbitrator The arbitration will be heard and determined by one Arbitrator where the Parties agree to arbitration by a single Arbitrator and jointly appoint the Arbitrator within 15 Business Days after the Consent...

AI summary This section outlines the process for arbitration by a single arbitrator in the event of agreement between the Parties. If no agreement is reached within 15 business days, the arbitration will proceed with three arbitrators as per Section 5.3.

6.2 Qualifications of Independent Expert Any Independent Expert appointed under this Section 6 shall be: - (a) independent of each of the Parties; - (b) of national or international standing; - (c) well qualified by education, technical tr...

AI summary This section outlines the qualifications required for an Independent Expert appointed under Section 6. The expert must be independent, of high standing, well-qualified, and impartial, with no conflicts of interest, including prior work for the Parties or their Affiliates, or equity interests in them.

6.9 Written Submissions and Responses - (a) Within the time specified at the Initial Meeting, but in any event not later than 20 Business Days after the Initial Meeting, each Party shall provide to the Independent Expert a written submissi...

AI summary Section 6.9 outlines the process for written submissions and responses by parties involved in a dispute, requiring each party to submit a written submission within 20 business days of the initial meeting and respond to the other party's submission within 20 business days of receipt. Failure to comply results in waiver of the right to submit or respond.

6.11 Method of Evaluation - (a) The Independent Expert's assessment shall include the method of evaluation elements set out in the Dispute Context. - (b) The Independent Expert's assessment, including its economic model, cash flows and ana...

AI summary The Independent Expert's assessment must include evaluation elements from the Dispute Context and will make its economic model, cash flows, and analysis available to the Parties.

ARTICLE 1 SCOPE OF APPLICATION - (1) This Code applies to commerc:ial arbitration, subject to any agreement in force between Canada and any other State or States. - (2) The provisions of this Code, except articles 8, 9, 35 and 36, apply on...

AI summary The Code applies to commercial arbitration in Canada, with exceptions for specific articles and conditions related to the place of arbitration and other laws of Parliament.

ARTICLE 3 RECEIPT OF WRm EN COMMUNICATIONS - (1) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties: - (a) any written communication is deemed to have been received if it is delivered to the addressee personally or if it is delivered at his place of b...

AI summary This article outlines the rules for determining when written communications are considered received in regulatory proceedings. It specifies that communications are deemed received upon personal delivery or delivery to the addressee's business, residence, or mailing address, and provides alternative methods if these cannot be determined.

ARTICLE4 WAIVER OF RIGHT TO OBJECT A pa rty w ho knows that any provision of this Code from which the parties may derogate or any req uirement under the arbitration agreement has not been complied with a nd yet proceeds with the arbitratio...

AI summary This article outlines the waiver of the right to object in arbitration proceedings, stating that a party who proceeds with arbitration despite knowing of non-compliance with provisions of the Code or arbitration agreement waives their right to object if they do not raise the issue promptly.

ARTICLE 9 ARBITRATION AGREEMENT AND INTERIM MEASURES BY COURT It is not incompatible with an arbitration agreement for a party to request, before or during arbitral proceedings, from a court an interim measure of protect ion and for a cour...

AI summary The text states that requesting interim measures from a court does not conflict with an existing arbitration agreement, and courts may grant such measures during arbitral proceedings.

ARTICLE 13 CHALLENGE PROCEDURE - (1) The parties are free to agree on a procedure for challenging an rb ato ~ subJect to the provisions of paragraph (3) of this article. - (2) Failing such agreement, a party who intends to challenge a n a...

AI summary This section outlines the procedure for challenging an arbitrator under Article 13. It allows parties to agree on a challenge process, otherwise a party must submit a written challenge within 15 days. If unsuccessful, the party may request a court or authority to decide on the challenge, with proceedings continuing during the review.

ARTICLE 19 DETERMINATION OF RU LES OF PROCEDURE - (1) Subject to the provisions of this Code, the parties are free to agree on the procedure to be followed by the arbitral tribunal in conduct ing the proceedings. - (2) Failing such agreeme...

AI summary This article outlines the rules of procedure for arbitration, stating that parties may agree on the process, and if not, the tribunal may conduct arbitration as it sees fit, including determining the admissibility and relevance of evidence.

ARTICLE 24 HEARINGS AND WRmEN PROCEEDINGS - (1) Subject to any contrary agreement by the parties, the arbitral tribunal shall decide whether to hold oral hearings for the presentation of evidence or for oral argument, or whether the procee...

AI summary This article outlines the procedures for hearings and written proceedings, including the tribunal's discretion to hold oral hearings or proceed based on documents, the requirement for advance notice of hearings, and the obligation to communicate all relevant information and expert reports to the parties involved.

ARTICLE 28 RULES APPLICABLE TO SUBSTANCE OF DISPUTE - (1) The arbitral tribunal shall decide the dispute in accordance with such rules of law as are chosen by the parties as applicable to the substance of the dispute. Any designation of th...

AI summary Article 28 outlines the legal framework for an arbitral tribunal to resolve disputes, specifying that it should apply the law chosen by the parties, or default conflict of laws rules if no choice is made. It also emphasizes the tribunal's obligation to adhere to contract terms and trade usages, and restricts ex aequo et bono decisions to cases where the parties explicitly authorize it.

APPLICATION FOR SETTING ASIDE AS EXCLUSIVE RECOURSE AGAINST ARBITRAL AWARD - (1) Recourse to a court against an arbitral award may be made only by an application for setting aside in accordance with paragraphs (2) and (3) of this article....

AI summary This text outlines the legal provisions for setting aside an arbitral award in Canada. It specifies that such an application can only be made under certain conditions, such as incapacity of a party, improper notice, or the award dealing with matters outside the scope of the arbitration agreement. Applications must be made within three months of receiving the award.

AK I ICLt :!!> RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT (1) An arbitral award, irrespective of the country in which it was made, shall be recognized as binding and, upon application in writing to the competent court~ shall be enforced subject to the pr...

AI summary This text outlines the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, emphasizing that awards are binding and enforceable upon application to a competent court, provided certain requirements are met, such as submitting authenticated copies and translations if necessary.

1.3 Applicable Law and Submission to Jurisdiction This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Federal laws of Canada applicable therein, but excluding a...

AI summary The agreement is governed by the laws of Newfoundland and Labrador and federal Canadian laws, excluding choice-of-law provisions. Both parties submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of Newfoundland and Labrador courts, with the right of appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and waive any objections to venue or inconvenience of forum.

tax, together with all interest, penalties, fines or additions imposed, assessed or collected with respect to any such amounts; " Term " has the meaning set forth in Sectio[n 9.1](#page-33-0) ; " third party " means any Person that does no...

AI summary The text defines various legal and regulatory terms used in the document, including 'Forgivable Event,' 'Term,' 'Third Party Claim,' 'Trade Secret,' 'Transmission System,' and 'UARB.' These terms are referenced in different sections of the document and are essential for understanding the legal and regulatory framework of the proceeding.

- (a) prior to the day-ahead confirmation of the relevant Energy delivery pursuant to the Scheduling Protocol, Nalcor shall advise NSPI of: (i) the specified quantities of Energy in respect of which Nalcor intends to postpone delivery, and...

AI summary This section outlines the process for rescheduling energy delivery between Nalcor and NSPI, including notification requirements, consultation, and the requirement to schedule redeliverable energy within 365 days of the original delivery date.

16.1 General - (a) Dispute Resolution Procedure - The Parties agree to resolve all Disputes pursuant to the dispute resolution procedure set out in Schedule 7 (the " Dispute Resolution Procedure "). - (b) Performance to Continue Article 16...

AI summary The section outlines a dispute resolution procedure, requiring parties to resolve disputes through Schedule 7. It emphasizes continued performance of obligations during dispute resolution and mandates that arbitrators or experts provide methodologies for resolving recurring disputes efficiently.

smitted or assigned in respect of the NBTUA and MEPCO TRA; and - (iv) upon communication of the modified Dispatch Plan to Emera pursuant to this Step 3(a) , the modified Dispatch Plan shall be accepted by Emera and confirmation of the sche...

AI summary The text outlines procedures for scheduling and dispatch plans under the NBTUA and MEPCO TRA, including the acceptance of modified Dispatch Plans by Emera and communication of scheduling details to Nalcor. It also discusses the election of a Backstop Remedy by Nalcor, requiring Emera to execute it if necessary.

on 5.2 shall be in addition to any other legal or equitable remedies to which the Non-Defaulting Party may be entitled. For the avoidance of doubt, and notwithstanding the references in this Master Agreement to "Early Termination Date" and...

AI summary This text discusses amendments to the Master Agreement under Article Five, focusing on Events of Default and Remedies. It outlines additional legal remedies, modifications to payment obligations, and the addition of new provisions related to default scenarios.

ARTICLE FOUR: REMEDIES FOR FAILURE TO DELIVER/RECEIVE Section 4.1 ("Seller Failure") is amended by inserting the words ", by Section 3.4," immediately prior to the words "or by Buyer's failure to perform" in the third line. Section 4.2 ("B...

AI summary This section amends Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of the document by inserting the phrase ', by Section 3.4,' to clarify the conditions under which remedies apply for failures to deliver or receive.

H and Nova Scotia Power Incorporated relating to the interconnected operations of NLH and Nova Scotia Power Incorporated, and includes any operational protocols implemented pursuant to that agreement; " Knowledge " means in the case of eit...

AI summary This section defines key terms related to legal and operational agreements between H and Nova Scotia Power Incorporated, including definitions for 'Knowledge,' 'Legal Proceedings,' 'Losses,' and terms related to the Maritime Link transmission facilities and associated agreements.

12.1 Nalcor Assignment Rights - (a) General - Nalcor shall not be entitled to assign all or any portion of its interest in this Agreement, any Claim or any other agreement relating to any of the foregoing (collectively, the " Nalcor Rights...

AI summary Section 12.1 outlines Nalcor's restrictions on assigning its rights under the agreement, requiring Emera's consent except for assignments to affiliates. It also specifies conditions for valid assignments and defines non-permitted assignments as void.

13.2 Procedure for Inter-Party Claims - (a) Notice of Claims - Subject to and without restricting the effect of any specific Notice requirement in this Agreement, a Party (the " Claiming Party ") intending to assert a Claim against the oth...

AI summary This section outlines the procedure for inter-party claims, including the requirement for prompt notice, the investigation process by the recipient party, and the resolution of disputes. It also specifies that this section does not apply to disputes related to invoices governed by Section 4.5.

To Emera: [ replace with NSPI contact information, if applicable ] Emera Inc. 1223 Lower Water Street Halifax, NS B3J 3S8 Attention: Corporate Secretary Fax: (902) 428-6112 with a copy to: NSP Maritime Link Incorporated 9 Austin St. St. Jo...

AI summary This text outlines the procedures for delivering notices to Emera Inc. and NSP Maritime Link Incorporated, specifying delivery methods, confirmation requirements, and how notice is deemed given based on delivery timing and business days.

5.14 Waiver of Sovereign Immunity A Party that now or hereafter has a right to claim sovereign immunity for itself or any of its assets hereby waives any such immunity to the fullest extent permitted by Applicable Law. This waiver includes...

AI summary This section waives sovereign immunity for parties involved in the agreement, allowing for dispute resolution proceedings and enforcement of decisions or settlements. The parties acknowledge their obligations are commercial, not governmental.

4.1 Request for Mediation - (a) If the Parties are unable to resolve a Dispute through the Negotiation Procedure, a Party (the " Requesting Party "), by Notice to the other Party given within five Business Days after expiry of the period s...

AI summary This section outlines the process for requesting mediation when parties are unable to resolve a dispute through negotiation. It specifies the requirements for the Mediation Notice, the qualifications for a mediator, and the circumstances under which mediation may terminate.

4.2 Appointment of Mediator Within 10 Business Days after receipt of the Mediation Response by the Requesting Party, the Parties shall attempt to appoint a Mediator to assist the parties in resolving the Dispute. The appointment shall be i...

AI summary The parties are required to appoint a mediator within 10 business days of receiving the mediation response to assist in resolving the dispute. The appointment must be in writing and signed by all parties and the mediator.

5.3 Appointment of Tribunal (a) Subject to Section 5.4 , the arbitration will be heard and determined by three Arbitrators. Each Party shall appoint an Arbitrator of its choice within 20 Business Days after delivery or deemed delivery of t...

AI summary Section 5.3 outlines the process for appointing a tribunal consisting of three arbitrators. Each party must appoint an arbitrator within 20 business days, and the two party-appointed arbitrators will then appoint a third arbitrator as chair. If they fail to agree, the Code’s Article 11 will govern the appointment.

5.4 Arbitration by Single Arbitrator The arbitration will be heard and determined by one Arbitrator where the Parties agree to arbitration by a single Arbitrator and jointly appoint the Arbitrator within 15 Business Days after the Consent...

AI summary This section outlines the process for arbitration by a single arbitrator in the event of agreement between the Parties. If no agreement is reached within 15 business days, the arbitration will proceed with three arbitrators as per Section 5.3.

6.2 Qualifications of Independent Expert Any Independent Expert appointed under this Section 6 shall be: - (a) independent of each of the Parties; - (b) of national or international standing; - (c) well qualified by education, technical tr...

AI summary This section outlines the qualifications required for an Independent Expert appointed under Section 6. The expert must be independent, of high standing, well-qualified, and impartial, with no conflicts of interest, including prior work for the Parties or their Affiliates, or equity interests in them.

6.9 Written Submissions and Responses - (a) Within the time specified at the Initial Meeting, but in any event not later than 20 Business Days after the Initial Meeting, each Party shall provide to the Independent Expert a written submissi...

AI summary Section 6.9 outlines the process for written submissions and responses by parties involved in a dispute, requiring each party to submit a written submission within 20 business days of the initial meeting and respond to the other party's submission within 20 business days of receipt. Failure to comply results in waiver of the right to submit or respond.

6.11 Method of Evaluation - (a) The Independent Expert's assessment shall include the method of evaluation elements set out in the Dispute Context. - (b) The Independent Expert's assessment, including its economic model, cash flows and ana...

AI summary The Independent Expert's assessment must include evaluation elements from the Dispute Context and will make its economic model, cash flows, and analysis available to the Parties.

ARTICLE 1 SCOPE OF APPLICATION - (1) This Code applies to commerc:ial arbitration, subject to any agreement in force between Canada and any other State or States. - (2) The provisions of this Code, except articles 8, 9, 35 and 36, apply on...

AI summary The Code applies to commercial arbitration in Canada, with exceptions for specific articles and conditions related to the place of arbitration and other laws of Parliament.

ARTICLES EXTENT OF COURT INTERVENTION In matters governed by this Code, no court shall intervene except where so provided in this Code.

AI summary The text states that in matters governed by the Code, court intervention is restricted and only permitted as specified within the Code itself.

ARTICLE 6 COURT OR OTHER AUTHORITY FOR CERTAIN FUNCTIONS OF ARBITRATION ASSISTANCE AND SUPERVISION The functions referred to in articles 11(3), 11(4), 13(3), 14, 16(3) and 34(2) shall be performed by the Federal Court or any superior, coun...

AI summary Article 6 assigns the responsibility of performing specific arbitration-related functions to the Federal Court or any superior, county, or district court, as outlined in various articles of the regulation.

ARTICLE 7 DEFINITION AND FORM OF ARBITRATION AGREEMENT - (1) "Arbitration gree nt'' is an agreement by the parties to submit to arbitration a ll or certain disputes which have arisen or which may arise between the m in respect of a defined...

AI summary Article 7 defines an arbitration agreement as a written agreement where parties agree to submit disputes to arbitration. It outlines the forms an arbitration agreement can take, including as a clause in a contract or as a separate agreement, and emphasizes that written agreements can include signed documents or electronic communications.

ARTICLE 9 ARBITRATION AGREEMENT AND INTERIM MEASURES BY COURT It is not incompatible with an arbitration agreement for a party to request, before or during arbitral proceedings, from a court an interim measure of protect ion and for a cour...

AI summary The text states that requesting interim measures from a court does not conflict with an existing arbitration agreement, and courts may grant such measures during arbitral proceedings.

ARTICLE 11 APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS - (1) No person shall be precluded by reason of his nationality from acting as an arbitrator, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. - (2) The parties are free to agree on a procedure of appointing th...

AI summary This article outlines the rules for the appointment of arbitrators in disputes. It allows parties to agree on the appointment procedure, and provides a fallback process if no agreement is reached, including court intervention. It also emphasizes the importance of independence and impartiality in arbitrator selection.

ARTICLE 18 EQUAL TREATMENT OF PARTIES The parties shall be treated with equality and each party shall be give n a full opportunity of presenting his case.

AI summary Article 18 ensures that all parties in a proceeding are treated equally and given a full opportunity to present their case.

ARTICLE 19 DETERMINATION OF RU LES OF PROCEDURE - (1) Subject to the provisions of this Code, the parties are free to agree on the procedure to be followed by the arbitral tribunal in conduct ing the proceedings. - (2) Failing such agreeme...

AI summary This article outlines the rules of procedure for arbitration, stating that parties may agree on the process, and if not, the tribunal may conduct arbitration as it sees fit, including determining the admissibility and relevance of evidence.

ARTICLE 20 PLACE OF ARBITRATION - (1) The parties are free to agree on the place of arbitration. Failing such agreement, the place of arbitration shall be determined by the arbitral tribunal having regard to the circumstances of the case,...

AI summary Article 20 outlines the rules for determining the place of arbitration, emphasizing the parties' right to agree on the location, and allowing the tribunal to choose a convenient location for proceedings if no agreement is reached.

ARTICLE 24 HEARINGS AND WRmEN PROCEEDINGS - (1) Subject to any contrary agreement by the parties, the arbitral tribunal shall decide whether to hold oral hearings for the presentation of evidence or for oral argument, or whether the procee...

AI summary This section outlines the procedures for hearings and written proceedings under Article 24, including the conditions for oral hearings, the requirement for advance notice, and the obligation to communicate all relevant information and expert reports to both parties.

irst Contingency Loss " means the largest capacity outage including any assigned tenminute reserve which would result from the loss of a single element from a state when all elements were in service; " Force Majeure " means an event, condi...

AI summary The text defines 'First Contingency Loss' and 'Force Majeure' in a regulatory context, outlining scenarios beyond a party's control that may impact performance obligations. These definitions include natural events, human actions, and disruptions affecting operations.

nt to ensure full operation of the ML during its Service Life; " Reference Day-Ahead Price " means the Day-Ahead Price (as that term is defined in the ISO-NE Tariff) in respect of the Pricing Node; " Regular Business Hours " means 8:30 a.m...

AI summary This text defines various terms related to the Maritime Link (ML) project, including regulatory approvals, reliability coordination, and definitions of key operations and processes. It highlights the importance of compliance with regulations, safety events, and agreements between Nalcor and Emera.

1.4 Applicable Law and Submission to Jurisdiction This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of NL and the Federal laws of Canada applicable therein, but excluding all choice-of-law provisions. Subject to...

AI summary The agreement is governed by the laws of Newfoundland and Labrador and federal Canadian laws, with the exclusive jurisdiction of NL courts for all matters related to the agreement, subject to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. Both parties waive any objections to venue or inconvenience of forum.

1.6 Inter-Relationship with Original ECA Effective as of the A&R Effective Date, this Agreement amends and restates the Original ECA in its entirety, it being understood and agreed that all liabilities and obligations under the Original EC...

AI summary This section outlines how the amended agreement relates to the original ECA, noting that existing liabilities and obligations under the original ECA prior to the A&R Effective Date remain in effect, with certain obligations defined in relation to Sanction being adjusted as per the new agreement.

10.1 Effect of Invoking Force Majeure and Notice - (a) If by reason of an event of Force Majeure, a Party is not reasonably able to fulfil an obligation, other than an obligation to pay or spend money, in accordance with the terms of this...

AI summary This section outlines the procedure for invoking force majeure under the agreement, including notification requirements, relief from obligations during force majeure events, and the responsibilities of the affected party to mitigate consequences and resume performance as soon as possible.

3. Regulation Service Within 120 days after the A&R Effective Date, the Parties will negotiate to enter into an agreement whereby Nalcor will provide Regulation Service with respect to the Nova Scotia Block to Emera for the Initial Term. T...

AI summary The text outlines the terms for the Regulation Service agreement between Nalcor and Emera, specifying the scope of service, conditions for capacity use, fee structures, and liability limitations. It also addresses the process for approval by the NL Public Utilities Board and the handling of disputes.

1.1 Definitions In this Schedule, the definitions set forth in the Articles of Agreement apply and in addition thereto: " Appointment Date " has the meaning set forth in Section 6.4 ; "Arbitration Act" means the Arbitration Act (Newfoundla...

AI summary This section defines key terms related to dispute resolution procedures, including arbitration, mediation, and expert determination, under the Articles of Agreement. It outlines the roles of parties, procedures, and legal references applicable to the process.

4.2 Appointment of Mediator Within 10 Business Days after receipt of the Mediation Response by the Requesting Party, the Parties shall attempt to appoint a Mediator to assist the parties in resolving the Dispute. The appointment shall be i...

AI summary The parties are required to appoint a mediator within 10 business days of receiving the mediation response to assist in resolving the dispute. The appointment must be in writing and signed by all parties and the mediator.

5.1 Submission to Binding Arbitration - (a) If the Parties are unable to resolve a General Dispute through the Negotiation Procedure or the Mediation Procedure, then following termination of the mediation, or, if no Mediation Notice is giv...

AI summary This section outlines the process for submitting a General Dispute to binding arbitration if the parties are unable to resolve it through negotiation or mediation. It specifies the procedures for giving notice, consent, and the conditions under which arbitration will proceed.

5.3 Appointment of Tribunal (a) Subject to Section 5.4 , the arbitration will be heard and determined by three Arbitrators. Each Party shall appoint an Arbitrator of its choice within 20 Business Days after delivery or deemed delivery of t...

AI summary Section 5.3 outlines the process for appointing a tribunal consisting of three arbitrators. Each party must appoint an arbitrator within 20 business days, and the two party-appointed arbitrators will then appoint a third arbitrator as chair. If they fail to agree, the Code’s Article 11 will govern the appointment.

6.11 Method of Evaluation - (a) The Independent Expert's assessment shall include the method of evaluation elements set out in the Dispute Context. - (b) The Independent Expert's assessment, including its economic model, cash flows and ana...

AI summary The Independent Expert's assessment must include evaluation elements from the Dispute Context and will make its economic model, cash flows, and analysis available to the Parties.

ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF INTERPRETATION For the purposes of this Code: - (a) "arbitration" means any arbitration whether or not administered by a permanent arbitral institution; - (b) "arbitral tribunal" means a sole arbitrator o...

AI summary This section defines key terms related to arbitration and dispute resolution under the Code, including 'arbitration,' 'arbitral tribunal,' and 'court.' It outlines the scope of party autonomy in determining certain issues and how provisions apply to claims and counterclaims.

ARTICLE 3 RECEIPT OF WRm EN COMMUNICATIONS - (1) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties: - (a) any written communication is deemed to have been received if it is delivered to the addressee personally or if it is delivered at his place of b...

AI summary This article outlines the rules for determining when written communications are considered received in regulatory proceedings. It specifies that communications are deemed received upon personal delivery or delivery to the addressee's business, residence, or mailing address, and provides alternative methods if these cannot be determined.

ARTICLE4 WAIVER OF RIGHT TO OBJECT A pa rty w ho knows that any provision of this Code from which the parties may derogate or any req uirement under the arbitration agreement has not been complied with a nd yet proceeds with the arbitratio...

AI summary This article outlines the waiver of the right to object in arbitration proceedings, stating that a party who proceeds with arbitration despite knowing of non-compliance with provisions of the Code or arbitration agreement waives their right to object if they do not raise the issue promptly.

ARTICLE 13 CHALLENGE PROCEDURE - (1) The parties are free to agree on a procedure for challenging an rb ato ~ subJect to the provisions of paragraph (3) of this article. - (2) Failing such agreement, a party who intends to challenge a n a...

AI summary This section outlines the procedure for challenging an arbitrator under Article 13. It allows parties to agree on a challenge process, otherwise a party must submit a written challenge within 15 days. If unsuccessful, the party may request a court or authority to decide on the challenge, with proceedings continuing during the review.

ARTIClE 18 EQUAL TREATMENT OF PARTIES The parties shall be treated with equality and each pa rty shall be give n a full opportunity of presenting his case. A&R Energy and Capacity Agreement Schedule 6 – Dispute Resolution Procedure Appendi...

AI summary Article 18 of the proceeding document outlines the principle of equal treatment of parties, ensuring each party has a full opportunity to present their case. It references a dispute resolution procedure involving A&R Energy and Capacity Agreement Schedule 6.

ARTICLE 23 STATEMENTS OF CLAIM AND DEFENCE - (1) Within the period of time agreed by the parties or determined by the arbitral tribuna l, the claimant shall state the facts supporting his claim, the points at issue and the relief or remedy...

AI summary This section outlines the procedures for submitting claims and defenses in an arbitration process, including timelines, required elements of statements, and the possibility of amendments during proceedings. It references a dispute resolution agreement and arbitration code.

ARTICLE 27 COURT ASSISTANCE IN TAKING EVIDENCE The arbitral tribunal or a party with the approval of the arbitral tribunal may request from a competent court of Canada assistance in taking evidence. The court may execute the request within...

AI summary This article outlines the process by which an arbitral tribunal or a party, with the tribunal's approval, can request assistance from a Canadian court in taking evidence. The court may provide this assistance within its jurisdiction and according to its rules on evidence collection.

ARTICLE 28 RULES APPLICABLE TO SUBSTANCE OF DISPUTE - (1) The arbitral tribunal shall decide the dispute in accordance with such rules of law as are chosen by the parties as applicable to the substance of the dispute. Any designation of th...

AI summary Article 28 outlines the legal framework for an arbitral tribunal to resolve disputes, specifying that it should apply the law chosen by the parties, or default conflict of laws rules if no choice is made. It also emphasizes the tribunal's obligation to adhere to contract terms and trade usages, and restricts ex aequo et bono decisions to cases where the parties explicitly authorize it.

APPLICATION FOR SETTING ASIDE AS EXCLUSIVE RECOURSE AGAINST ARBITRAL AWARD - (1) Recourse to a court against an arbitral award may be made only by an application for setting aside in accordance with paragraphs (2) and (3) of this article....

AI summary This text outlines the legal provisions for setting aside an arbitral award in Canada. It specifies that such an application can only be made under certain conditions, such as incapacity of a party, improper notice, or the award dealing with matters outside the scope of the arbitration agreement. Applications must be made within three months of receiving the award.

AK I ICLt :!!> RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT (1) An arbitral award, irrespective of the country in which it was made, shall be recognized as binding and, upon application in writing to the competent court~ shall be enforced subject to the pr...

AI summary This section outlines the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, specifying that they are binding and must be enforced upon application to the competent court, subject to the provisions of the article and article 36. It also requires the submission of authenticated original awards or certified copies, along with translations if necessary.

5.14 Waiver of Sovereign Immunity A Party that now or hereafter has a right to claim sovereign immunity for itself or any of its assets hereby waives any such immunity to the fullest extent permitted by Applicable Law. This waiver includes...

AI summary This section waives sovereign immunity for parties involved in the agreement, allowing for dispute resolution proceedings and enforcement of decisions or settlements. The parties acknowledge their obligations are commercial, not governmental.

NSPML Responses to Nova Scotia Energy Board Information Requests 1 Concentric agrees that many electric transmission companies recover their revenue 15 pressure on inflation from tariffs is reduced. In the escalation scenario, the Canadian...

AI summary The document outlines responses from Concentric to information requests from the Nova Scotia Energy Board, including references to country risk ratings and transmission market operations. Concentric notes a lack of updated data from The Economist but provides alternative data from Allianz. Questions are raised about competitive transmission markets and approved return on equity (ROE) rates for companies operating within them.

Response: (a) The empirical analysis and discussion in Appendix B of Dr. Cleary's evidence shows clearly that U.S. utilities possess greater risk than Canadian utilities, including NS Power. This is hardly surprising given that U.S. utilit...

AI summary Dr. Cleary's analysis highlights that U.S. utilities face greater risk than Canadian utilities like NS Power due to differences in ownership structures and regulatory environments. The Alberta Utilities Commission acknowledges significant differences in regulatory policy between the U.S. and Canada, which have increased regulatory risk for American utilities.

Request IR-8: - Reference: Page 33, lines 1-2. - To Dr. Cleary's knowledge has this pattern of "downward 'stickiness'" been explicitly addressed by any - utility regulator? If so, please provide references and citations.

AI summary The text asks Dr. Cleary if any utility regulator has explicitly addressed the pattern of 'downward stickiness' and requests references and citations if so.

page_23_Picture_1.jpeg) 1 Q. What is your conclusion concerning whether Dr. Cleary's ROE recommendation of 2 7.6% for NSPML meets the comparable investment test of the Fair Return Standard? 3 A. If the Board were to adopt Dr. Cleary's ROE...

AI summary The testimony argues that Dr. Cleary's recommended ROE of 7.6% for NSPML is too low compared to other North American utilities with similar risks, potentially deterring investment and signaling an unsupportive regulatory environment in Nova Scotia. It references a decision by the Ontario Energy Board regarding a similar recommendation.

DESIGNATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS - Community Rowing Inc., Board of Directors, 2015 2019 - Georgetown University, Alumni Admissions Interviewer, 1988 2020 - NASD General Securities Representative and Managing Principal (Series 7,...

AI summary The text outlines the professional affiliations and designations of an individual, including roles in organizations such as the National Petroleum Council, the American Petroleum Institute, and the International Association for Energy Economics, as well as certifications and educational programs completed.

ARTICLES AND PUBLICATIONS - "Advancing FERC's Methodology for Determining Allowed ROEs for Electric Transmission Companies," submitted to FERC on behalf of EEI, James Coyne, Joshua Nowak and Julie Lieberman, May, 2020. - "Regulator Rationa...

AI summary The text lists various articles and publications related to energy regulation, utility mergers, return on equity, and innovation in electricity and natural gas sectors, authored by individuals such as James Coyne, Julie Lieberman, and Robert Yardley. These works were submitted to regulatory bodies and industry associations.

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS - "The Market Risk Premium: An In-Depth Review", Society of Utility and Regulatory Financial Analysts 53rd Financial Forum, Richmond, VA, April 28,2022 - "Energy Sector in Transition", Ontario Energy Association, Toron...

AI summary The text lists a series of speaking engagements and presentations related to energy regulation, utility finance, and market trends. These engagements span topics such as utility business models, regulatory processes, investment implications, and energy sector transitions, reflecting expertise in utility regulation and financial analysis.

ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT Mr. Trogonoski has over 30 years of experience in financial and economic analysis, utility regulation, due diligence, business valuation, property taxation, and program administration. Mr. Trogonoski has assisted c...

AI summary Mr. Trogonoski has over 30 years of experience in financial and economic analysis, utility regulation, and program administration. He has provided expert testimony and reports on regulatory matters such as cost of capital, merger approval, and business and financial risk analysis in the U.S. and Canada. He previously worked at the Colorado Public Utilities Commission.

Colorado Public Utilities Commission (1999 – 2008) Supervisory Financial Analyst, Telecommunications and Energy (2004) Financial Analyst, Telecommunications, Energy and Water

AI summary The text provides a brief professional title and role related to the Colorado Public Utilities Commission from 1999 to 2008, indicating a supervisory financial analyst position in the telecommunications and energy sector.

REGULATORY COMMISSION EXPERIENCE • Supervised financial analysts and accountants in the energy and telecommunications units of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission from 2004 to 2008. In this capacity, he was responsible for the financi...

AI summary The individual supervised financial analysts and accountants at the Colorado Public Utilities Commission from 2004 to 2008, handling financial analysis, audits, and expert testimony in rate cases and regulatory proceedings. They led investigations into regulatory violations and administered a high-cost support mechanism for rural telecommunications.

1 Decision summary - 1. In this generic cost of capital (GCOC) decision, the Alberta Utilities Commission adopts a formulaic approach, utilizing the equity risk premium (ERP) methodology, to calculate the fair rate of return on equity (ROE...

AI summary The Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) adopts a formulaic approach using the equity risk premium (ERP) methodology to determine the fair rate of return on equity (ROE) for Alberta's electric and gas utilities in 2024 and beyond. The deemed equity ratios from the 2018 GCOC decision remain unchanged, and a mandatory five-year review of cost-of-capital parameters is instituted.

- 13. The outcome of the discussions during the technical conference was documented in appendixes A and B of the Commission's letter, dated October 24, 2022, 8 which captured the consensus among parties regarding the Commission's proposed...

AI summary The Commission documented the outcome of technical conference discussions, issued determinations on unresolved matters, and finalized an issues list for Stage 2 of the proceeding. The process included evidence submissions, information requests, rebuttals, and a virtual oral hearing, with the record closing on July 11, 2023.

3 Fair return standard 17. The legislation that governs the Commission requires that it fix just and reasonable rates for the utilities it regulates. 9 The Commission is guided in this task by well-developed case law on the meaning of just...

AI summary The document discusses the legal framework governing the fixing of just and reasonable rates for utilities, emphasizing the fair return standard. It references key legal cases, including Northwestern Utilities v Edmonton (City) , and relevant legislation such as the Public Utilities Act and Electric Utilities Act .

up>25 Decision 22570-D01-2018, paragraph 206. Alberta's regulatory framework has, to a significant extent, shielded Alberta utilities from much of the impact of these systematic risks. 26 - 36. The fact that a supportive regulatory environ...

AI summary The text discusses how Alberta's regulatory framework protected utilities from macroeconomic risks during the pandemic, leading to positive financial results. It mentions the 2018 GCOC decision and the need to consider changes in inflation, economic growth, and capital markets since then.

- 52. In 2004, the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (EUB), predecessor to the Commission, established a uniform (generic) ROE rate for all utilities and introduced a formulaic approach to determine subsequent ROE values. 52 This formulai...

AI summary The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board introduced a formulaic approach to setting the rate of return on equity (ROE) in 2004, which was used until 2008. Due to the 2008-2009 financial crisis, the Commission discontinued this approach in 2009 as it no longer reflected market conditions. From 2009 to 2020, the ROE and deemed equity ratios were determined through GCOC proceedings. From 2021 to 2023, the Commission maintained the ROE of 8.5% and deemed equity ratios due to data limitations from the pandemic.

6.2 Comparability of representative utilities - 99. In past GCOC proceedings, the Commission has frequently expressed concern with the wide range of conflicting evidence and polarized opinions on how it should approach setting a fair retur...

AI summary The Commission has historically faced challenges in determining a fair return on capital for utilities due to conflicting evidence and polarized opinions. In the 2018 GCOC proceeding, multiple proxy groups were proposed, leading to the implementation of a comparator group process to identify representative utilities. However, the weight assigned to specific utilities within the comparator group remains unresolved, with parties disagreeing on their true comparability to Alberta utilities.

jurisprudence, of a legal right to a reasonable opportunity to earn a fair return on their prudently invested capital. As leading credit rating agencies have noted on more than one occasion, utilities under the Commission's jurisdiction fa...

AI summary The text discusses how Alberta utilities benefit from a favorable regulatory environment that reduces risks and allows for cost flow-through to customers. It highlights their robust financial performance despite pandemic-related disruptions and notes the absence of evidence for difficulties in raising capital since the 2018 GCOC proceeding.

7.5 Overall assessment of business risk - 251. In this section of the decision, the Commission considers whether business risk factors impacting all the utilities, or a particular segment of the utilities, require the Commission to adjust...

AI summary The Commission evaluates business risk factors affecting utilities, including cybersecurity, decarbonization policies, and macroeconomic factors, and considers whether these justify adjusting deemed equity ratios. Utilities argue for higher equity ratios due to increased risks, while interveners suggest maintaining or reducing them. Stranded asset risks and a recent court decision are also discussed.

7.5.2 Regulatory risk - 257. The utilities claim that regulatory risks in Alberta have increased since 2018. Among the risks they have identified are lower deemed equity ratios and lower approved ROEs than those awarded in other North Amer...

AI summary The utilities argue that regulatory risks in Alberta have increased since 2018 due to lower equity ratios, ROEs, and a credit rating change. However, the Commission refutes these claims, noting that Alberta utilities have low earnings volatility and operate in a supportive regulatory framework that encourages efficiency and cost reduction, leading to returns above approved ROEs.

Key Principles The purpose of Stage 1 of the GCOC proceeding is to set a fair return for FEI and FBC. When determining the utilities' cost of capital, the Panel is guided by certain fundamental regulatory principles, including the Fair Ret...

AI summary Stage 1 of the GCOC proceeding aims to establish a fair return for FEI and FBC. The Fair Return Standard requires returns to be comparable to other investments of similar risk, maintain financial integrity, and attract capital on reasonable terms. The BCUC applies the standalone principle, and evidence supports the use of multiple models to estimate ROE.

A. James M. Coyne 4 My name is James M. Coyne, and I am employed by Concentric Energy Advisors, Inc. 5 ("Concentric") as a Senior Vice President. My business address is 293 Boston Post Road West, 6 Suite 500, Marlborough, MA 01752. 7 I am...

AI summary James M. Coyne is a Senior Vice President at Concentric Energy Advisors, Inc., providing expert testimony and advisory services on economics, finance, and public policy in the energy industry. He has testified before the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board and has authored papers and facilitated workshops on energy regulation and innovation.

B. John P. Trogonoski - 5 My name is John P. Trogonoski, and I am employed by Concentric as an Assistant Vice President. 6 My business address is 293 Boston Post Road West, Suite 500, Marlborough, MA 01752. - 7 I provide expert testimony b...

AI summary John P. Trogonoski is an expert witness in finance, economics, and public policy for utility regulatory agencies. He has testified over 30 times in U.S. and Canadian jurisdictions on topics like rate of return, revenue requirement, and rate design. He previously worked for the Colorado Public Utilities Commission.

5 D. Report Organization 6 The remainder of the report is organized as follows: Section II discusses the legal requirements 7 and regulatory precedents for the determination of a fair rate of return. Section III provides an 8 overview of e...

AI summary This section outlines the organization of the report, detailing the structure and content of subsequent sections, including legal requirements, market conditions, proxy group selection, estimation methods, capital structure assessment, and overall conclusions.

3 E. Integration of Canadian and U.S. Capital Markets 4 In a world of increasingly linked economies and capital markets, investors seek returns from a 5 global basket of investment options. Investors distinguish between risks on a country-...

AI summary This section discusses the integration of Canadian and U.S. capital markets, highlighting how investors assess country-specific risks using metrics like The Economist Intelligence Unit's country risk ratings, which rate Canada and the U.S. equally at AAA.

15 F. Capital Market Conclusions Interest rates on government and utility bonds have remained about the same as when the UARB approved the settlement in NSPI's previous GRA. This indicates that despite the uncertainties in the economy, the...

AI summary The document discusses the stability of interest rates on government and utility bonds since the UARB approved the settlement in NSPI's previous GRA. It highlights long-term challenges for the utility industry, including climate change, decarbonization, and grid modernization, as well as emerging load growth from electrification and data centers. Economic forecasts and modeling approaches such as CAPM, Risk Premium, and DCF are referenced.

SELECTION OF PROXY COMPANIES 3 Since ROE is a market-based concept and given that NSPI is not publicly-traded, it is necessary to 4 establish a group of companies that are both publicly-traded and comparable to the Company's 5 business and...

AI summary The document discusses the selection of proxy companies for Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) to estimate its return on equity (ROE). Since NSPI is not publicly-traded, comparable publicly-traded utility companies are used. Criteria include investment grade credit ratings, and certain companies like Emera Inc. and TC Energy were excluded due to their relationship with NSPI or differing risk profiles.

1 Figure 14: Canadian Proxy Group Company Ticker AltaGas Inc. ALA Canadian Utilities Limited CU Enbridge Inc. ENB Fortis Inc. FTS Hydro One Ltd. H - 2 The second proxy group is comprised of U.S. electric utility companies that would be con...

AI summary The text discusses the formation of a second proxy group consisting of U.S. electric utility companies comparable in risk to NSPI. The group was developed by screening 36 domestic companies classified as Electric Utilities by Value Line to identify those primarily engaged in regulated electric utility service.

METHODS FOR ESTIMATING THE RETURN ON EQUITY Analysts use multiple approaches to estimate the cost of common equity. The required ROE can be estimated using one or more analytical techniques that rely on market-based data to quantify invest...

AI summary The text discusses methods for estimating the return on equity (ROE), emphasizing the use of multiple analytical techniques to reflect investor expectations. It highlights the importance of informed judgment in assessing results and notes that other Canadian utility regulators also advocate for using multiple methodologies to determine a fair ROE.

3. Market Risk Premium ("MRP") Estimates of the MRP generally fall into two categories, ex-post (historical arithmetic average) and ex-ante (forward looking). The historical MRP is based on the arithmetic means of the equity market returns...

AI summary The document discusses the Market Risk Premium (MRP), distinguishing between ex-post and ex-ante estimates. It notes that historical MRP data for Canada and the U.S. are based on long-term government bond returns and equity market returns, and highlights the high correlation between the two countries' risk premiums due to economic integration.

B. Risk Analysis Concentric examines risk from two primary perspectives: (1) financial risk; and (2) business risk. Financial risk primarily relates to the risk associated with the way in which a company has financed its business, as evide...

AI summary Concentric evaluates risk for NSPI by analyzing financial and business risks, including comparisons to other utilities and the 2021 GRA filing. Financial risk relates to capital structure, while business risk includes operational and regulatory factors.

i. Political Risk NSPI is also subject to significant political risk, as evidenced by the legislation that was passed following the hearing in the previous GRA but prior to the UARB's order, when the Provincial government placed a cap on t...

AI summary NSPI faces significant political risk due to provincial legislation capping its authorized ROE and equity ratio, which has raised concerns among investors about cost recovery and ROE. This intervention is uncommon and increases NSPI's cost of capital, negatively impacting both customers and the utility.

20 3. Comparison to other Canadian Investor-Owned Electric Utilities Concentric also compared the business risk of NSPI to six other Canadian investor-owned electric utilities: ATCO Electric; FortisAlberta; FortisBC Electric; Hydro OneNetw...

AI summary The document compares the business risk of Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) to six other Canadian investor-owned electric utilities, considering factors such as regulated generation ownership, fuel and purchased power cost recovery, volume/demand risk, regulatory environment, and capital cost recovery.

5 d. Regulatory Environment 6 UBS ranks regulatory jurisdictions in the U.S. and Canada for purposes of determining whether 7 to apply valuation discounts or premiums to the utility stocks it covers. Specifically, UBS places 8 regulatory j...

AI summary Nova Scotia's regulatory environment is ranked in tier three by UBS, with low credit supportiveness according to S&P Global and DBRS Morningstar. The regulatory environment is considered less supportive of credit, with declines in ratings for Political Interference and Rate Freeze since 2020.

3 NSPI files a capital budget with the Board annually, which includes the Company's capital budget 4 for the upcoming year, as well as a five-year outlook. As part of that filing, the Board approves 5 certain capital expenditures for the c...

AI summary The document discusses capital budgeting processes for electric utilities in Canada, including pre-approval of capital expenditures and performance-based regulation (PBR) plans. It highlights differences in risk profiles among utilities, particularly NSPI, due to factors such as regulated generation assets, transition to renewables, and exposure to severe weather. The text also references the Concentric Report and questions whether changes in generation procurement affect NSPI's business risk.

1 2027. Absent approval of this proposal, NSPI has higher risk relative to the proxy groups 2 on this factor. why would this make NSP risk higher relative to other Utilities (check above)? 3 • The financial risk of NSPI is greater than tha...

AI summary Concentric concludes that increasing NSPI's deemed common equity ratio to 45.0 percent would be reasonable, aligning it with Newfoundland Power and reflecting its risk profile. However, NSPI prefers maintaining its current 40.0 percent ratio. A supportive regulatory environment is crucial for NSPI to access capital during its transition toward meeting environmental goals.

Regulatory and Rate-Setting Mechanisms LEI stated that as the perceived stability of future cash flows is a key consideration for investors, a regulated utility's ability to recover its capital and operating costs profoundly relies on avai...

AI summary LEI emphasized the importance of regulatory mechanisms in ensuring cost recovery for utilities, while Dr. Cleary supported retaining current risk assessment policies. Concentric suggested comparing Ontario's mechanisms to peer companies when assessing cost of equity. Nexus argued that Ontario's regulatory environment does not significantly reduce risk and warned against approving a lower ROE for electricity distributors due to systematic underearnings.

hat a significant risk to Enbridge Gas due to the energy transition is one of declining demand, while still being obligated to operate and maintain a safe and reliable natural gas distribution system. CCC agreed that the potential for decl...

AI summary The document discusses the risks Enbridge Gas faces due to declining demand from the energy transition, while still needing to maintain a safe and reliable natural gas distribution system. CCC and VECC highlight the potential for stranded assets and the need to balance risk assessments between gas utilities and electricity distributors. VECC suggests that if ROE or capital structure changes are made for Enbridge Gas, similar adjustments should be applied to electricity companies.

Regulatory and Rate-Setting Mechanisms OEB staff agreed with LEI and Dr. Cleary that any regulatory mechanism that can significantly impact the stability of future cash flows must be considered part of regulatory risks. OEB staff concluded...

AI summary The OEB staff, LEI, and Dr. Cleary agree that regulatory mechanisms significantly impacting cash flow stability are part of regulatory risk. The OEB's mechanisms since 2009 have moderately reduced utility risk. The OEA acknowledges this but cautions that business risk remains unchanged due to new risks like climate change. CCC and others emphasize that regulatory policies have substantially decreased risk and should influence the current ROE setting.

Other Risks and Regulatory and Rate-Setting Mechanisms Utilities have argued that in addition to energy transition, other risks are increasing such as cyber security, changes in sales volumes, extreme weather events, and changes in governm...

AI summary The OEB acknowledges increased risks for utilities due to factors such as cybersecurity and extreme weather, but argues that regulatory mechanisms have reduced utility risk since 2009. The OEB also notes that no generic adjustments are being made for Enbridge Gas or OPG in this proceeding, and will monitor trade tariffs and market conditions for potential future reviews.

Findings The OEB affirms that in setting this important component of the determination of the cost of capital for regulated utilities it adopts the requirements of the FRS, as set out in the 2009 Report. These requirements mandate a regula...

AI summary The OEB affirms the use of the FRS in determining the cost of capital for regulated utilities, setting a deemed ROE of 9.00% for 2025. It considers multiple methodologies, such as CAPM and DCF, but finds no single gold standard. The OEB chooses to assess the ROE against the FRS rather than averaging methodologies with known weaknesses.

derably above current levels of ROE for Ontario regulated utilities. [29](#page-37-0) Financial integrity and the ability to raise capital are not impaired by the current cost of capital framework. In the current proceeding, the OEB had th...

AI summary The document discusses the use of U.S. utility data in the 2009 Cost of Capital Framework, noting that Canadian investors prefer Canadian utilities. It highlights that the current ROE for Ontario utilities is above current levels and that financial integrity and capital-raising abilities are not impaired. The OEB emphasizes the differences between Canadian and U.S. utilities, including regulatory oversight and business structures.

concerned that Ontario equity thicknesses, by being lower across the board than their U.S. peers, do not meet the FRS, but acknowledged that an immediate move to parity with the U.S. would be abrupt. Concentric found that Ontario's regulat...

AI summary The report discusses concerns about Ontario's equity thicknesses being lower than U.S. peers, impacting the FRS. Concentric found that Ontario's utilities have similar financial risks to Canadian peers but higher than U.S. peers due to low deemed equity ratios. It recommended adjusting ROE and allowing utilities to retain or propose changes to their equity ratios.

Submissions OEB staff and several ratepayer groups submitted that no changes need to be made to the OEB's policy on capital structure in this proceeding and the default equity thickness should remain at 40% for electricity distributors and...

AI summary OEB staff and ratepayer groups argue that the default equity thickness of 40% should remain unchanged for electricity distributors and transmitters, as Concentric's case for increasing it to 45% was not persuasive. They also agree that OPG's equity ratio should be reviewed in a future proceeding. OEB staff emphasized that Ontario's equity ratios are in line with other provinces and that changes in risk have been reflected in ROE adjustments.

e OEB finds that the unfolding transition also presents opportunities for electricity utilities, particularly through increased demand for electricity and expanded investment in system infrastructure. For example, the growing electrificati...

AI summary The OEB finds that the energy transition presents opportunities for electricity utilities through increased demand and investment in infrastructure. It acknowledges that regulatory tools like DVAs have provided stability and that current ROE adjustments reflect incremental risk. The OEB does not support changing the capital structure or the 2009 Cost of Capital Framework.

Specific Items Monitored LEI stated that consistent with the OEB's existing policy, OEB staff should continue to monitor the cost of capital parameters and test their reasonableness in the context of prevailing macroeconomic conditions on...

AI summary The Office of the Energy Board (OEB) is advised to monitor cost of capital parameters quarterly and consider including credit ratings and capital injection details in annual reporting. LEI, Dr. Cleary, and Nexus support this approach, while Concentric argues against it, suggesting annual benchmarking of ROEs and macroeconomic factors instead.

Specific Items Monitored OEB staff agreed with LEI and Dr. Cleary that consistent with the OEB's existing policy, the OEB should continue to monitor the cost of capital parameters and test their reasonableness in the context of prevailing...

AI summary The OEB staff agrees with LEI and Dr. Cleary on the need to monitor cost of capital parameters annually but disagrees with quarterly reporting. Ratepayer groups and SEC support public disclosure of reports. The OEA and others debate the need for tracking debt and equity issuances and credit rating reports, with differing views on administrative burden and utility transparency.

Confirmation of Meeting the FRS OEB staff and some ratepayer groups agreed with LEI and Dr. Cleary that ongoing monitoring of the cost of capital parameters enables the OEB to confirm the FRS continues to be met between comprehensive revie...

AI summary OEB staff and ratepayer groups support ongoing monitoring of cost of capital parameters to ensure FRS compliance. OEB staff and OEA agree that periodic generic rate hearings are necessary to determine utility ROEs consistent with FRS.

Expert Report Proposals LEI and Concentric recommended that consistent with the OEB's existing policy, the OEB should commit to reviewing the cost of capital policy every five years. Nexus recommended that the OEB limit LEI's proposed annu...

AI summary The text discusses recommendations for reviewing the cost of capital policy by the OEB, with varying intervals proposed by different entities. LEI and Concentric suggest five-year reviews, while Nexus advocates for a three-year cycle. Dr. Cleary supports reviews every three to five years and suggests triggering a review if Canadian A-rated utility yield spreads exceed 2%.

Findings The term of the new Cost of Capital Framework is five years. On that basis, the next review is expected to conclude in 2030, with the depth and breadth expected to be similar to the current exercise. Most parties agreed with this...

AI summary The new Cost of Capital Framework has a five-year term, with a review expected by 2030. Most parties support this, though some suggest a three-year term due to energy transition challenges. The OEB will monitor market conditions and may initiate reviews sooner if needed, using tools like DVAs and performance incentives. Stakeholders are encouraged to hold sessions before filing for an amended cost of capital.

F. Mechanics of Implementation - 14.What on-going monitoring indicators to test the reasonableness of the results generated by its cost of capital methodology should the OEB consider, including the monitoring of market conditions? - 15.How...

AI summary The text outlines a series of questions regarding the ongoing monitoring and implementation of cost of capital methodologies by the Office of the Energy Board (OEB). It focuses on indicators for reasonableness, financial viability, timing of updates, review intervals, trigger mechanisms, and implementation methods for changes in cost of capital parameters.

Document: 323051 Evidence by Intervenors and Board Counsel Consultants (if any) Tuesday, October 7, 2025 Information Requests (IRs) to Intervenors and Board Counsel Consultants (if any) Tuesday, October 28, 2025 Filing of Letters of Commen...

AI summary The document outlines key dates and procedures for a regulatory proceeding, including evidence submission, information requests, public comments, and a hearing. It references the Board's Regulatory Rules, particularly Rule 7(3), which mandates document filings by 2:00 pm on due dates.

NOVA SCOTIA ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF the PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT and the MARITIME LINK ACT and the MARITIME LINK COST RECOVERY PROCESS REGULATIONS - and - IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION by NSP MARITIME LINK INCORPORATED for approval of...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Energy Board is considering an application by NSP Maritime Link Incorporated for approval of its 2026 revenue requirement and cost assessment under the Public Utilities Act, Maritime Link Act, and Maritime Link Cost Recovery Process Regulations.

NOVA SCOTIA ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF the PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT and the MARITIME LINK ACT and the MARITIME LINK COST RECOVERY PROCESS REGULATIONS - and - IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION by NSP MARITIME LINK INCORPORATED for approval of...

AI summary This document outlines a regulatory proceeding before the Nova Scotia Energy Board regarding the approval of NSP Maritime Link Incorporated's 2026 revenue requirement and cost assessment under the Public Utilities Act and Maritime Link Cost Recovery Process Regulations. Multiple parties, including intervenors and counsel, are involved in the proceeding.

alignment between NSPML and NLH." During the hearing, NSPML provided a further update, indicating that completion of the LTAMP could possibly slip into Q2 of 2025. [Emphasis added] [2024 NSUARB 199] - [24] In its 2025 NSPML cost assessment...

AI summary The NSUARB directed NSPML to file its LTAMP by June 30, 2025, but NSPML did not file it and instead submitted an 'Asset Management Outlook'. The Board requested clarification on whether this document was the LTAMP, and NSPML explained that it was a subset of its asset management plans, not the full LTAMP as defined in the Joint Operations Agreement.

material, particularly given the potential for dispute resolution if settlement is not reached. Accordingly, NSPML maintained that filing the LTAMP, even on a confidential basis, was not appropriate. [33] The NSUARB's direction in its 2025...

AI summary NSPML argued against filing the LTAMP on a confidential basis, but intervenors and the NSUARB emphasized that prior decisions expected the commercial LTAMP to be filed. NSPML's response was seen as unhelpful and lacking in clarity, with the confidentiality concern not raised early enough.

[62] Dr. Cleary recommended that NSPML should continue to have the same return on equity for rate setting purposes as NS Power. His assessment focused on the return required by NS Power. Based on his reading of NSPML's application and othe...

AI summary Dr. Cleary recommended that NSPML should have the same return on equity as NS Power, citing similar risk profiles and the impact of federally guaranteed debt. He also argued against using U.S. utilities as comparators for Canadian utilities due to higher risk and differences in regulatory environments. He noted a home-country bias among Canadian investors and the impact of recent U.S.-Canada economic and political developments.

NSPML's risk profile. The Industrial Group noted that Concentric's assessment of NSPML as having a high-risk profile was different than the evidence the NSUARB heard in 2013 from Foster & Associates. [135] The Industrial Group submitted th...

AI summary The Industrial Group challenges Concentric's assessment of NSPML's risk profile, arguing that NSPML's subsea cable is not uniquely riskier than assets operated by proxy companies and that its contract management is simpler than that of NS Power. The group also highlights the federal loan guarantee and statutory cost recovery as factors supporting a lower return on equity for NSPML.

5.5.1.5 Risk Adjustment [185] Although Concentric considered that NSPML's overall risk was greater than the transmission and distribution companies in its proxy group, the Board finds the assessment was somewhat superficial. Further, altho...

AI summary The Board found that Concentric's risk assessment for NSPML was superficial and not well-supported by evidence, particularly regarding the relative riskiness of NSPML's assets compared to those in its proxy group. The Board also noted that risks associated with the Maritime Link were well-managed and that NSPML's claims about high complexity in contract management were exaggerated.

NOVA SCOTIA ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF the PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT and the MARITIME LINK ACT and the MARITIME LINK COST RECOVERY PROCESS REGULATIONS - and - IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION by NSP MARITIME LINK INCORPORATED for approval of...

AI summary This document outlines a regulatory proceeding involving the approval of NSP Maritime Link Incorporated's 2026 revenue requirement and cost assessment under the Public Utilities Act and Maritime Link Cost Recovery Process Regulations.

Document: 323051 Evidence by Intervenors and Board Counsel Consultants (if any) Tuesday, October 7, 2025 Information Requests (IRs) to Intervenors and Board Counsel Consultants (if any) Tuesday, October 28, 2025 Filing of Letters of Commen...

AI summary The document outlines key dates and procedures for a regulatory proceeding, including submission deadlines for evidence, information requests, and public comments. It also notes the application of the Board's Regulatory Rules, particularly Rule 7(3), which specifies a 2:00 pm filing deadline for documents due on any date.

NOVA SCOTIA ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF: The Public Utilities Act, and the Maritime Link Act and the Maritime Link Cost Recovery Process Regulations - and - IN THE MATTER OF: An Application by NSP Maritime Link Incorporated for approval...

AI summary This document pertains to a regulatory proceeding involving the Public Utilities Act, the Maritime Link Act, and the Maritime Link Cost Recovery Process Regulations. It concerns an application by NSP Maritime Link Incorporated for approval of its 2026 revenue requirement and cost assessment.

COUNSEL Stewart McKelvey Suite 600 – 1741 Lower Water Street P.O. Box 997 Halifax, NS B3J 2X2 Fax (902) 420-1417 Attention: Nancy G. Rubin, K.C. Telephone (902) 420-3337 Email: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Attention...

AI summary This section of the document provides contact information for Stewart McKelvey, the legal counsel representing the Industrial Group in the proceeding. It lists the addresses, phone numbers, and email contacts for the lawyers involved, as well as the date and location of the filing.

IN THE MATTER OF the PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT and the MARITIME LINK ACT and the MARITIME LINK COST RECOVERY PROCESS REGULATIONS - and –

AI summary This document pertains to a regulatory proceeding under the Public Utilities Act and the Maritime Link Act, focusing on the Maritime Link Cost Recovery Process Regulations. It outlines the legal and regulatory context of the matter.

Request IR-26: - Page 23 - NSPML states: "Another complexity that separates NSPML from more traditional transmission - owner/operators is the responsibility for managing complex commercial agreements with - Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro...

AI summary The document requests NSPML to provide details on its responsibilities and risks related to managing complex commercial agreements with NLH, including the Joint Operations Agreement and others. It also asks for confirmation on risk mitigation, cost accounting, and performance of the Maritime Link project.

Request IR-31: - Page 28 - NSPML states: "In the 2025 Assessment Decision, the Board directed NSPML to file its Asset - Management Plan as part of its 2026 Assessment Application. Please see partially confidential - Attachment 2 for NSPML'...

AI summary The document outlines a regulatory inquiry (Request IR-31) regarding NSPML's submission of its Long-Term Asset Management Plan (LTAMP) as part of its 2026 Assessment Application. It questions whether the submitted 10-year Asset Management Outlook meets the definition of an LTAMP, the timeline for its preparation, and the costs incurred in its development.

Request IR-39: a) Please describe how the proxy group of North American T&D utilities aligns with NSPML's unique risk profile. - b) Please identify the utilities in the proxy group that manage "highly complex series of agreements" with oth...

AI summary The text includes a series of questions related to NSPML's risk profile, proxy group alignment, market risk premia, and the use of US Treasury yields in financial calculations. These inquiries focus on the alignment of risk profiles, agreement types, market risk premia application, and the rationale behind using US Treasury yields instead of Canadian bonds.

24 Request IR-6: 25 Reference: Page 20, Section 4.2.2 Canada's Outlook. - 26 Has your analysis of Canada's outlook changed since the date of your evidence in light of - 27 changing international dynamics and President Trump's recent cessat...

AI summary The document includes several requests for clarification and expansion on economic analyses, including Canada's outlook, regional economic differences, and utility regulation practices. It references specific pages and sections of a report and asks for explanations and citations.

December 1, 2025 [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Ms. Crystal Henwood Regulatory Affairs Clerk / Officer Nova Scotia Energy Board 1601 Lower Water Street, 3rd Floor Halifax NS B3J 3P6 Dear Ms. Henwood:...

AI summary The document outlines the witness panel for NSPML's 2026 Assessment Hearing, including key individuals involved in the proceeding. It is part of a regulatory process related to an assessment application.

NOVA SCOTIA ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF the PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT and the MARITIME LINK ACT and the MARITIME LINK COST RECOVERY PROCESS REGULATIONS - and - IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION by NSP MARITIME LINK INCORPORATED for approval of...

AI summary This document outlines a proceeding before the Nova Scotia Energy Board concerning the approval of NSP Maritime Link Incorporated's 2026 revenue requirement and cost assessment under the Public Utilities Act, Maritime Link Act, and Maritime Link Cost Recovery Process Regulations.

NOVA SCOTIA ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF the PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT and the MARITIME LINK ACT and the MARITIME LINK COST RECOVERY PROCESS REGULATIONS - and - IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION by NSP MARITIME LINK INCORPORATED for approval of...

AI summary This regulatory proceeding involves NSP Maritime Link Incorporated's application for approval of its 2026 revenue requirement and cost assessment under the Public Utilities Act and Maritime Link Cost Recovery Process Regulations. Various intervenors, including the Consumer Advocate, Small Business Advocate, Industrial Group, and Nova Scotia Power Inc., are participating in the proceeding.

4.1 Findings - [28] The significance of the LTAMP was reviewed by the NSUARB in its 2025 NSPML cost assessment decision: - [37] Beyond the LTAMP's importance to establishing expected NSPML capital needs, the LTAMP can also be used to estab...

AI summary The NSUARB reviewed the significance of the LTAMP in its 2025 NSPML cost assessment decision. The Board emphasized the importance of the LTAMP for establishing NSPML's capital needs and for multi-year cost assessments. NSPML responded to the CA's inquiry by explaining that single-year assessments continued due to uncertainties in operational matters, including the LTAMP. The Board's oversight role under the Public Utilities Act is highlighted, along with the need for certainty in operational and capital matters before considering multi-year assessments.

[62] Dr. Cleary recommended that NSPML should continue to have the same return on equity for rate setting purposes as NS Power. His assessment focused on the return required by NS Power. Based on his reading of NSPML's application and othe...

AI summary Dr. Cleary recommended that NSPML should have the same return on equity as NS Power, citing similar risk profiles and regulatory environments. He opposed using U.S. utilities as comparators, emphasizing higher risks in the U.S. market. He also highlighted the home-country bias of Canadian investors and the potential divergence in the U.S.-Canada economic relationship post-2024 election.