Topic:"Return On Equity" in M06733

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-1: 2 3 Please provide, for each of the last 10 years, NS Power's: 4 5 (a) Revenue requirement; 6 7 (b) Annual percentage return on equity and corresponding dollar amount; 8 9 (c) The allowed range of return; 1...

AI summary The document requests NS Power to provide financial data over the last 10 years, including revenue requirement, return on equity, allowed return range, and regulated common equity percentage of capitalization.

2016-2018 DSM Plan (NSUARB M06733) NSPI Responses to Multeese Information Requests 1 Request IR-19: 2 3 Further to the discussion of E1's proposed reserve fund in Section 9.0 of NSPI's evidence, 4 please identify any of the four external r...

AI summary NSPI outlines the factors considered in determining an appropriate return on equity, including risks such as regulatory, environmental, weather, and financial risks. These factors are detailed in NS Power's annual financial reports and are essential for maintaining financial integrity and attracting capital.

DISCOUNT RATES EAC argues that too much attention has been paid in the current hearings to the issue of "unit cost" as a decision criteria among programs and measures. Cost per megawatt hour is a poor focus because of its lens on first-yea...

AI summary EAC argues that focusing on unit cost (e.g., cost per megawatt hour) in DSM program evaluations is flawed as it prioritizes first-year savings over lifetime benefits. They advocate using net present value with a societal discount rate (e.g., 3% as used by Vermont’s PSB in 2012) rather than utility-specific rates for broader societal cost-effectiveness screening.

DATE FILED: July 15, 2015 Page 3 of 32 1 2.0 CONFLICT OF INTEREST 2 3 Both the CA and E1 have asserted that NS Power is in a conflict of interest position. 4 However, while both have made generalized statements of this nature, neither has...

AI summary The document discusses claims of a conflict of interest by NS Power in its DSM programming, with the CA and E1 asserting such a conflict without providing evidence. NS Power refutes these claims, explaining that its earnings are based on invested capital and allowed return on equity, not sales levels.

Potential financing alternatives and cost 413 Overview 414 Investments in energy efficiency produce savings that last many years after the initial investment. For 415 example, investments in electricity efficiency made in the 2016 to 2018...

AI summary The document discusses NSPI's approach to recovering costs from ratepayers for energy efficiency investments over time, aligning with long-term benefits. It explores whether EfficiencyOne can secure lower financing costs than NSPI's WACC (7.78% pre-tax, 6.49% after-tax). Grant Thornton conducted preliminary market research with potential lenders to assess financing options for EfficiencyOne's energy efficiency initiatives.

E1 is seeking long-term financing in the form of a committed term loan facility, with E1's annual principal and interest payment requirements being back-stopped with payments from NSPI to E1. Initially, E1 is looking to secure financing fo...

AI summary E1 is seeking long-term financing for energy efficiency investments through a committed term loan, with NSPI backing payments. The total investment for the first Supply Agreement (2016-2018) is estimated at $100M. E1 plans to finance subsequent instalments separately. Energy efficiency investments are expected to provide long-term benefits, and NSPI may recover costs over time aligned with benefits. E1 aims to secure financing at a lower cost than NSPI's WACC of approximately 7.78% (pre-tax) and 6.49% (after-tax).