Topic:"Revenue Requirement" in M06733

4.1.1 Results of NS Power's 2014 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Process The Preferred Resource Plan from NS Power's 2014 IRP specified that the Candidate Resource Plan modelled by Synapse Engineering Economics included a level of DSM consi...

AI summary NS Power's 2014 IRP identified a Candidate Resource Plan (CRP) with Mid-DSM levels from ENSC's study as yielding the lowest revenue requirement. High-DSM scenarios, when end-effects were considered, provided long-term benefits with lower ongoing costs. ENS opted against Mid-DSM due to legislative and structural changes, aligning instead with government policy and the Public Utilities Act's deferral/amortization provisions.

4.1.2 Balance of Long-Term and Short-Term Considerations The IRP was an important starting point in the development of the 2016-2018 DSM Resource Plan because it provides a longer-term context within which to view short-term decisions requ...

AI summary The Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) provided a long-term context for the 2016-2018 Demand Side Management (DSM) Resource Plan. However, Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENS) notes that the Mid-Level DSM Scenario may lead to short-term rate increases due to a mismatch between DSM investment and rate recovery, particularly under an eight-year amortization term and a legislated cap on DSM amortization.

Draft , February 18, 2015, page 12. 14 Province of Nova Scotia, 2015 Electricity Review Report Draft , February 18, 2015, page 37. • The Plan provides for long-term affordability as it avoids the adverse consequences of investing in new ca...

AI summary The document emphasizes the importance of demand-side management (DSM) in ensuring long-term affordability of electricity by reducing revenue requirements and customer costs. It highlights that investing in DSM yields significant financial benefits, with each dollar invested yielding between $1.24 and $4.00 in benefits. Failure to invest in DSM results in higher costs for customers.

ENS Performance Thresholds: Dunsky's paper points out that, in almost all of these regions, the achievement of Performance Targets is the basis for awarding a financial bonus to the DSM Administrator. As an example, in its response to NSPI...

AI summary ENS seeks approval from the UARB to define success as achieving minimum Performance Thresholds of 90% of UARB-approved Performance Targets, rather than requiring precise achievement of targets. This is due to the challenges of aligning a three-year DSM plan with a four-year development cycle, and the recognition that hitting targets exactly may not be realistic.

- Legislative or regulatory risk, which includes the risk associated with the introduction of new acts or changes to existing acts leading to loss of energy savings potential within approved price structures. This would also include the in...

AI summary The text discusses various risks associated with energy efficiency programs, including legislative, technological, economic, and operational risks. It also outlines ENS's proposal to establish a reserve fund under the new DSM administration model, with contributions from surplus balances and a 50% limit on fund contributions.

1.2 Summary of Findings - 1. Since 2011, excluding 2015, Nova Scotia has invested in demand-side resources at or above the level (in real terms) proposed by ENS in the 2016-2018 Demand-Side Resource Plan. - 2. Demand-side resource investme...

AI summary Nova Scotia's demand-side resource investments since 2011 (excluding 2015) meet or exceed ENS's 2016-2018 plan. These investments yield over $200M in net benefits, enhance affordability, and reduce Nova Scotia Power's revenue requirements. DSM is highlighted as cost-effective, with the Province's plan emphasizing its role in improving electricity affordability and economic competitiveness.

r all ratepayers. The proposed level of investment in demand-side resources includes a comprehensive suite of DSM activities, and it supports continued broad services to a wide array of Nova Scotians. The investment level proposed by ENS f...

AI summary The document compares ENS's proposed 2016-2018 DSM investment levels with Nova Scotia Power's 2014 IRP plan, noting a $60M reduction. ENS's approach aims for lower short-term costs and higher long-term revenue, offering ratepayers greater net present value despite potential short-term cost challenges.

2.3 Relative Size of Demand-side Resource Investments in Nova Scotia [Figure 1](#page-194-1) includes the investment level proposed by ENS over the 2016-2018 period and approved for 2015, and presents a comparison of both historical demand...

AI summary This section discusses the relative size of demand-side resource investments in Nova Scotia, comparing proposed and approved investment levels over specific periods and showing their proportion of residential revenue requirements. The data indicates that demand-side investments account for 2.4% of average household electricity costs, with a gross monthly cost share of less than $3.45.

Figure 1. Residential Sector Demand-side Investment vs. All Other Sector Electricity Spending – 2011 to 2018 Year Residential Revenue Requirement (includes Customer Charge) ($ million) [ a ] Demand-side Plan Residential Investment with 50%...

AI summary Figure 1 compares residential sector demand-side investment with all other sector electricity spending from 2011 to 2018. It shows that demand-side investment constitutes a small percentage of residential revenue requirement, with the average cost share per customer remaining relatively stable over time.

Table 6: Target performance indicators in Hawaii Target performance indicators Metric Unit Energy Savings kWh/yr (cumul.ann.) Peak Demand Savings kW (cumul.ann.) Total Resource Benefit (TRB) $ NPV Market Transformation - Behavior Modificat...

AI summary Table 6 outlines target performance indicators in Hawaii, focusing on energy and peak demand savings, Total Resource Benefit (TRB), and market transformation metrics. TRB is defined as the net present value of savings, adjusted retroactively for changes in avoided cost forecasts, similar to practices in Massachusetts and Vermont. Lifetime savings are based on ex-ante estimates of energy measures' useful lives.

Common Areas Tenant Units - › CFLs › CFLs - › LED exit signs › LED nightlights - › Hot water tank wraps › Faucet aerators - › Low-flow showerheads › Hot water tank wraps - › LED lamps › LED lamps - › Pipe insulation › Low-flow showerheads/...

AI summary The document discusses energy efficiency measures in common areas of tenant units, including the use of LED lamps, low-flow showerheads, and pipe insulation. It outlines funding sources for RP&C, noting that savings from tenant unit installations are attributed to RP&C, while common-space savings are attributed to BES. RP&C aimed for 3.0 GWh of electricity savings and 0.7 MW of peak demand savings in 2014.

Filed: March 27, 2015 E1 (NSPI) IR-15 Page 1 of 1 2016-2018 Supply Agreement for EECA M06733 (E-ENS-R-15) E1 Responses to NSPI Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-16: 2 3 Reference: EfficiencyOne, Evidence - Page 51, Section...

AI summary E1 responds to NSPI's information request regarding the incorporation of ITCs into the 2016–2018 budget, revisions to figures if ITCs differ from budgeted results, and processes for crediting customers if ITCs are claimed. E1 confirms that ITCs have been incorporated into the budget.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-27: 2 3 Reference: EfficiencyOne, Evidence - Page 34, Lines 4-5: 4 5 E1 states that “maintaining current DSM levels has the additional benefit of providing 6 DSM-related rate stability over time.” 7 8 Please r...

AI summary The response to Request IR-27 explains that maintaining current DSM levels helps avoid future rate increases by reducing the need for costly capital expenditures. It references the UARB’s 2014 decision on the DSM Cost Recovery Rider and changes to the Public Utilities Act that embedded DSM costs into the overall energy charge.

ces in approved increases 4% 2015 approved 2015 not yet approved 3.4% 3% 2.8% 2.7% 2.6% 2.4% 2.4% 2.3% % Increase 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2% 1% 25% 75% 26% 74% 12% 88% 39% 61% 40% 60% 0% All organizations Industrial Financial Pure public Broader pu...

AI summary The text presents graphical data on approved and unapproved increases, including salary and compensation elements across different sectors and geographies. It references projections for Canada and the U.S. and includes a filing date and page number from an attachment.

3 Affordability of electricity service is of paramount concern to NS Power customers. This 4 is evident through NS Power engagements with our customers and stakeholders, both in 5 regulatory forums such as General Rate Applications and the...

AI summary NS Power emphasizes the affordability of electricity service for customers and highlights the impact of demand-side management (DSM) on rate pressure. The company notes that removing the energy efficiency charge from bills has left no dedicated funding for DSM, and additional DSM spending increases revenue requirements, thereby raising rates. NS Power seeks to balance DSM efforts with cost-effectiveness to avoid economic impacts on the province.

Figure 3.6: Ranking of CRPs low and low to a mid-investment level. In terms of a revenue requirement analysis, the Low DSM energy and capacity savings for the $22 million expenditure plan again demonstrates superior near term affordability...

AI summary The text discusses the affordability and cost-effectiveness of different Demand Side Management (DSM) expenditure levels in the context of the 2014 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). It highlights that the 'Low' DSM energy and capacity savings plan offers superior near-term affordability while remaining cost-effective beyond 2030.

1 Table 7. Summary of Scenario C (Company's Alternate Scenario) Impacts Cumulative Cost ($Millions) Peak Demand (MW) Cumulative (GWh) TRC Ratio Program Name E1 Case C % Diff. E1 Case C % Diff. E1 Case C % Diff. E1 Case C % Diff. RES‐Applia...

AI summary Table 7 presents the impacts of Scenario C, the company's alternate scenario, on various programs and enabling strategies. It shows cumulative costs, peak demand, and cumulative energy usage for different program categories, highlighting significant differences in cost and demand reductions compared to the baseline (E1). The TRC ratio also shows an increase in some cases.

MeasureLevel Results for Baseline E1 and Optimized Case D Scenarios Pro m T gra ype Sub ͲPro gra m Me asu re Mo del Bui ldin g T ype End Use Cat ego ry Sto ck T tme nt rea Dem and (kW ) Ene rgy (M Wh ) Tot l. Cos al I mp t ($ ) eba 47 Bus...

AI summary The table presents MeasureLevel results for Baseline E1 and Optimized Case D scenarios, comparing demand, energy, and total cost impact across different programs and building types. The data includes metrics such as demand in kW, energy in MWh, and total cost impact in dollars, with some entries showing percentage changes.

9 Year Revenue increase due to GRA ($) % increase due to GRA Revenue increase due to FAM (all components combined including: BCF, AA, BA) ($) % increase to FAM (all components combined including: BCF, AA, BA) Composite revenue increase ($)...

AI summary The table shows revenue increases from the GRA and FAM mechanisms from 2011 to 2015, including dollar amounts and percentage changes. The data highlights fluctuations in revenue contributions from these mechanisms over the years.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-27: 2 3 Please provide the demand and energy loss factors applied to the avoided generation 4 capacity and energy cost estimates. 5 6 (a) Please provide the basis of these demand and energy loss factors. 7 8 R...

AI summary The response to Request IR-27 explains that demand and energy loss factors are inherent in the calculation of avoided generation capacity and energy costs, which are based on the revenue requirement to meet energy and capacity requirements, including losses. Specific loss factors are not required.

2016-2018 DSM Plan (NSUARB M06733) NSPI Responses to Consumer Advocate Information Requests 1 Request IR-28: 2 3 Reference: Feb 2015 Presentation, page 5: 4 5 (a) For the period 2019 through 2039, please provide the annual revenue requirem...

AI summary The document outlines NSPI's responses to information requests regarding revenue requirements under various DSM scenarios, including the impact of Mersey Expansion Phases and FGD investment. It notes that optimized resource plans could not be completed on time and provides commentary on the Mersey project's capacity and RES energy contribution.

E1 Responses to NSPI Information Request (IR 35) Act ual Pro gra m Spe ndi ng inc lud ing ST Ful l H Act ual Pr ogr am Spe ndi wit h H ST ng Ad jus ted for IT Cs An l nua En erg y Sav ing s An l nua Dem and Red ion uct s Full HS T HS T a d...

AI summary This document provides a detailed table of actual program spending, energy savings, and demand savings from 2010 to 2018, including adjustments for HST and ITCs. The data reflects spending by Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) for demand-side management (DSM) programs and their impact on energy efficiency and demand reduction.

ELECTRONIC 2016-2018 DSM Plan CA IR-30 Attachment 6 Page 1 of 2 Derivation of Figure 3.7 Partial Revenue Requirements: Fuel and Purchased Power, Thermal and Hydro O&M, Capital for new resources in the plan, DSM program administrator costs,...

AI summary The text discusses the derivation of partial revenue requirements for the 2016-2018 DSM Plan, including costs related to fuel, purchased power, thermal and hydro operations and maintenance, capital for new resources, DSM program administration, and sustaining capital.

ELECTRONIC 2016-2018 DSM Plan CA IR-30 Attachment 7 Page 1 of 2 Derivation of Figure 3.8 Partial Revenue Requirements: Fuel and Purchased Power, Thermal and Hydro O&M, Capital for new resources in the plan, DSM program administrator costs,...

AI summary This section outlines the derivation of partial revenue requirements for the 2016-2018 DSM Plan, including fuel and purchased power, thermal and hydro operations and maintenance, capital for new resources, DSM program administrator costs, and sustaining capital.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Figure 3.7: Annual Percent Difference in Partial Revenue Requirements Compared to No DSM Plan.1 2 3 4 5 NS Power has not created a revised long term projection as a result of E1's 2016-2018 plan for 6 comparison. 1 NS Po...

AI summary NS Power did not revise its long-term projections in response to E1's 2016-2018 DSM plan. The document references a 2016-2018 DSM Plan (NSUARB M06733) and NSPI's responses to the Consumer Advocate's information requests, highlighting the absence of updated revenue requirement comparisons.

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.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-9: 2 3 Reference: NS Power's Evidence, Page 32, Figure 3.7 4 5 (a) Please confirm that CRP 1-1-FGD shows an increase in partial revenue 6 requirements beginning in 2023, as compared to a No-DSM scenario. 7 8 (...

AI summary The response confirms that the partial revenue requirements in CRP 1-1-FGD show an increase beginning in 2023 compared to a No-DSM scenario, but it clarifies that customer costs for DSM are not included in these requirements.

1 Response IR-20: 2 3 (a) The DSM plan which NS Power discusses in its evidence and included as Appendix B is 4 not intended to be a detailed alternative for approval. However, for the current contract 5 period, the Company's evidence show...

AI summary NS Power discusses a DSM plan in its evidence, noting that it is not intended as a detailed alternative for approval. The plan aligns with energy and demand savings from the 'Low' DSM case, with costs between $20 and $25 million. The NPV difference between the Low DSM and Mid DSM cases is analyzed, showing $151M in savings for the Mid DSM over 25 years.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-7: 2 - 3 Does the net present value of revenue requirements of any of the Candidate Resource Plans - 4 presented in Figure 3.6 on page 31 include customer costs of DSM? If so, please provide a - 5 version of F...

AI summary The response confirms that customer costs of DSM are included in the net present value of revenue requirements for Candidate Resource Plans (CRP) in Figure 3.6. A revised version of the figure excluding DSM customer costs is provided.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-8: 2 - 3 With respect to footnote 42 on page 31, please provide annual estimates for the period 2015 - 4 2020 of the percentage of NSPI's total revenue requirement that is excluded from the - 5 partial revenue...

AI summary The document contains a request (IR-8) asking for annual estimates from 2015 to 2020 regarding the percentage of NSPI's total revenue requirement excluded from partial revenue requirements in Figure 3.7. A response is provided, though the details are not included in the excerpt.

1 Annual Revenue Requirements for each of the Resource Plans shown in Figure 4.1 No DSM Plan CRP01-01-FGD-R01 Half-Low DSM Low DSM CRP2-17 FGD Base DSM CRP Mid DSM/FGD (Synapse Model) ($K) ($K) ($K) ($K) ($K) 2015 629,462 650,868 648,296 6...

AI summary The document presents annual revenue requirements for various demand-side management (DSM) plans from 2015 to 2039, including Net Present Value (NPV) and Planning and Study Present Values (PV). The data compares different DSM scenarios, such as 'No DSM Plan,' 'Half-Low DSM,' and 'Base DSM,' showing revenue requirements in thousands of dollars for each year.

2016-2018 DSM Plan (NSUARB M06733) NSPI Responses to Multeese Information Requests 1 Request IR-15: 11 the NSPI alternate DSM plan as presented in Section 5 of its evidence. 12 13 Response IR-17: 14 15 (a) As directed by the Board on Novem...

AI summary The text discusses NSPI's alternate DSM plan and the calculation of avoided costs using the DRR method, as directed by the Board. The analysis compares revenue requirements between a 'No DSM' plan and a plan incorporating DSM profiles from the Navigant Potential study used in the 2014 IRP. Costs are allocated to energy and capacity annually to determine avoided costs on a \/MWh and \/kW basis.

1 NS Power 2014 Integrated Resource Plan Final Report, NSUARB M05522, October 15, 2014, page 62. 1 The analysis of partial revenue requirements analyzes fuel and purchased power as well 2 as the associated variable O&M. It assumes other OM...

AI summary The analysis of partial revenue requirements considers fuel, purchased power, and variable O&M costs, assuming other OM&G costs are common across plans. The proposed DSM savings and spend profile is deemed to provide the best balance between short-term affordability and long-term cost effectiveness, with the economic crossover point for higher DSM options not occurring until 2034.

2 3 1 Figure 3.7: Annual Percent Difference in Partial Revenue Requirements Compared to No DSM Plan. 2 4

AI summary The figure illustrates the annual percent difference in partial revenue requirements compared to a scenario without a Demand Side Management (DSM) plan, highlighting the financial impact of implementing DSM initiatives.

1 Request IR-5: 4 p.55 of 64, with respect to such future costs, please provide: 5 6 (a) Detail of how NSPI covers future severance, pension and retirement obligations. 7 8 (b) The total revenue collected through rates, by NSPI, in the pas...

AI summary The document includes a request for details on how NSPI covers future pension, retirement, and capital obligations, as well as the revenue collected through rates related to these obligations. It also asks how NSPI's approach differs from E1's and what would happen if E1's franchise is terminated. A response outlines that future costs are accrued under GAAP and included in revenue requirements.

3.5.1 Program Development [56] El's 2016-2018 DSM Resource Plan, as modified by the Quantum Agreement, recommends DSM investments for the three year period of: - (1) $36.9 million in 2016, - (2) $37.8 million in 2017, - (3) $38.8 million i...

AI summary El's 2016-2018 DSM Resource Plan, modified by the Quantum Agreement, recommends a total of $113.5 million in DSM investments over three years. El justifies this plan by comparing it to the Mid-DSM level plan and notes that it is consistent with past expenditures and within the $53 million allocated for DSM in 2014, which was repurposed for 2015 fuel expenses.

4 Figure 1.2 - 2016 DSM Resource Plan Investment and Savings 2016 Investment ($ million) Lifetime Benefits ($ million)" Incremental Annual Net Energy Savings at Generator (GWh) Incremental Annual Net Demand Savings at Generator (MW) Total...

AI summary Figure 1.2 presents the 2016 DSM Resource Plan investment and savings, detailing program investments, lifetime benefits, and energy and demand savings across residential and non-residential sectors. It includes data on program costs, benefits, and savings metrics such as Total Resource Cost (TRC) and Program Administrator Cost (PAC).

ower Incorporated Direct Evidence, p. 15; Exhibit E-40, Direct Evidence from Drazen Consulting Group, Inc. on Behalf of the Industrial Group, pp.7-9. 24 Transcript, June 19, 2015, pp. 901. 25 Transcript, June 19, 2015, pp. 902-903. 26 Dire...

AI summary The document discusses the affordability of Demand Side Management (DSM) amid rising fuel costs and other rate pressures. Key factors include the amortization of NSPI's 2012 cost recovery mechanism, FAM AA/BA's role in offsetting DSM costs, unspent funds from E1, and the impact of the Province's Community Feed-in Tariff program on fuel costs. Balancing DSM with broader public policy goals is emphasized to ensure rate stability.

1 EfficiencyOne has factored in affordability to its Quantum Agreement investment level of 2 $113.5 million: 3 4 • It is $69 million, or 38 percent, less (over the three-year term) than the Mid-DSM level of 5 the IRP's Preferred Resource P...

AI summary EfficiencyOne's Quantum Agreement investment level of $113.5 million is significantly lower than previous DSM investment levels and aims to balance short and long-term affordability. It avoids new capacity additions until 2032 and ensures a balanced participation across sectors.

Exhibit 42. Direct Evidence of Paul Chernick. Page 38, lines 6-20. 1 customer inequities, and is not consistent with best practices in DSM program 2 design.54 3 4 … 5 6 NSPI discusses affordability almost entirely in terms of the amount of...

AI summary The text discusses concerns about the affordability of DSM programs, emphasizing that NSP's approach focuses on budget reduction rather than broader affordability indicators. It argues that the most important affordability indicator is the impact on electricity system costs, measured by the net present value of revenue requirements (PVRR), and supports using the PAC test to evaluate DSM resources.

7.0 UNDERTAKING U-9 In his response to U-9, Mr. Whalen identified the type of information which he thought should be required from NS Power in future DSM applications to assess rate impact factors during the three year contract period. 58...

AI summary The document discusses the need for NS Power to provide more detailed information in future DSM applications, particularly regarding rate impact factors. The Independent Governor and DOE have requested this, and a similar issue was raised in the 2015 ACE Plan proceeding. The Board agreed with NS Power that a five-year projection is sufficient for the revenue requirement model, emphasizing the need for simplification.

& lt;sup>61 NSPI ACE 2015, Decision, 2015-NSUARB-92 (M06514), pages 22-23, paras 87-89. 1 NS Power has no objection to providing information to assist the Board and stakeholders 2 in future DSM applications in the same manner as informatio...

AI summary NS Power opposes the adoption of Mr. Whalen's response to U-9, arguing that the level of detail requested would unnecessarily complicate the DSM application process. NS Power also requests the Board to approve a Non-Financial Settlement Agreement and reject the 2016-2018 DSM Plan filed by E1, proposing instead a revised plan with specific energy savings and investment targets.

In its Decision the Board noted this further reduction in investment could affect EfficiencyOne's ability to meet its energy and demand savings targets. The Board indicated in the event EfficiencyOne determined it required a downward adjus...

AI summary EfficiencyOne acknowledges challenges in meeting energy and demand savings targets due to reduced budget allocations approved by the Board. It has revised its DSM Resource Plan and is requesting permission to apply for reductions in savings targets if unable to meet them within the 90% compliance threshold. The changes to the Direct Installation program reflect operational updates rather than adjustments from the Board's decision.

52 The Parties acknowledge that any surplus realized by EfficiencyOne in delivering the 53 Performance Targets at the end of the Term shall be reported to the UARB and refunded to 54 NSPI unless EfficiencyOne is directed otherwise by the U...

AI summary The Parties agree that any surplus from EfficiencyOne meeting Performance Targets will be reported to the UARB and refunded to NSPI unless directed otherwise. A Balance Adjustment of $8,518,030 from 2014 is to be returned by EfficiencyOne, reducing the 2016 Contract Price payment to NSPI, with total payments over the Term capped at $93,631,970.