Topic:"Tariff Design" in M04265

AVAILABILITY: Schedule NS is designed to allow the Company to offer, on an experimental basis through December 31, 1999, prices and/or tenns and conditions that meet unique customer needs. It is available only to individual customers who w...

AI summary Schedule NS is an experimental offering by the Company, available to individual customers with at least 5 MW of combined demand, allowing them to access prices and terms tailored to their needs. It is limited to 300 MW of participation and requires a confidential filing to demonstrate compliance with system return requirements.

APPLICATION PROVISIONS This rider is applicable to existing and new commercial and industrial customers with a monthly maximum demand of 5,000 KW or greater year-round who are served, or who qualify to be served, under Rate Schedules LP-5,...

AI summary This rider applies to commercial and industrial customers with a monthly maximum demand of 5,000 KW or greater, served under specific rate schedules. The company will not enter new interruptible service contracts if the total interruptible power exceeds 500 MW.

SPECIAL CONDITIONS (Continued) - 5. Contribution to Margin (CTM) Credit: This credit is limited to a combined total of 55 MW of load from all customers to which the CTM Credit is extended. It is applicable only to customers with a SIC Code...

AI summary The document outlines special conditions for a utility service schedule, including limits on the Contribution to Margin (CTM) Credit, rules for customers with recorded demands over 4,000 kW, revenue accounting components, seasonal definitions, and ineligibility for other discounts. The text includes references to a decision and filing by Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities Commission.

SPECIAL CONDITIONS (Continued) - 10. Billing: A Customer's bill is first calculated according to the total rates and conditions above. The following adjustments are made depending on the option applicable to the customer. - a. Bundled Serv...

AI summary The document outlines billing conditions for different customer service options, including bundled service, direct access, and hourly PX pricing. It details how bills are calculated, adjustments made, and the inclusion of various charges such as the Competition Transition Charge (CTC). The CTC payment method can be negotiated between marketers or brokers and customers.

\ Denotes a state that did not respond. Any information for these is as per the Commission's 1989 survey. KEY: (1) SC - Special Contract Tar - Tariff (2) Fix - Fixed Flex - Flexible (3) ECI - Enhance the Competitiveness of a Specific indus...

AI summary The text provides a key for interpreting data related to tariff structures, special contracts, and classifications for utility plant utilization. It includes abbreviations and categories used in regulatory proceedings related to utility pricing and industry-specific competitiveness.

I Implementation Timelines 2 3 Mr. Dominie states on Page 5 of his direct evidence that NSPI would not plan to 4 begin its experhnental TOU rate until after its new customer information system is 5 completed in 1997. While NSPI might be ab...

AI summary The document discusses NSPI's planned timeline for implementing a Time-of-Use (TOU) rate, noting that it would begin after the completion of a new customer information system in 1997. It also references Hydro-Quebec's experience with implementing a similar program and considers the timing of launching the TOU program during the winter months.

Lack of Cost Miti2ation Efforts - Q. BESIDES ITS PROPOSED EFFORT TO RETAIN LOADS AT LR RA TES, DID NSPI PROPOSE ANY EFFORTS TO MITIGATE COSTS CAUSED TO OTHER RATE PAYERS BY ITS REVENUE LOSSES? - A. No, it did not. Although NSPI did not pro...

AI summary NSPI did not propose any cost mitigation efforts to recover revenue losses from its LR rate proposal, assuming losses would be recovered from other customers. Suggestions include implementing a tariff provision to reduce sales to large customers during high off-system power purchase periods and selling power in U.S. markets with higher prices, such as NEPOOL and PJM.

NEED FOR A LOAD RETENTION RATE With natural gas becoming available in Nova Scotia over the next several years and with the advances that have been taking place in gas-fired generation technology in recent years, it will become feasible to...

AI summary NSPI argues that a load retention rate is needed to retain large customers who may leave to generate their own electricity, particularly as natural gas becomes more available. This rate would benefit both the customer and other NSPI customers. Utilities in Canada and the U.S. have used similar rates to retain customers and discourage self-generation. The Board agrees that NSPI has justified the need for this rate.

rding to Mr. Hamilton, the annual increase is int.ended to reflect the increased cost of operation and maintenance associated with a gas turbine due to wear and tear and required periodic maintenance. The SUS energy charge, referred to in...

AI summary The annual increase in costs reflects the operational and maintenance expenses of a gas turbine. The SUS energy charge is designed to simulate the fuel costs and efficiency of a theoretical cogeneration unit, calculated using a heat rate value and GSU's weighted average gas cost.

B. Technical lssut.s With respect to the technical aspects of the filing, staff witness Harold Hughes has recommended that the Commission make five specific modifications to Schedule SUS, each of which is opposed by GSU. The recommendation...

AI summary Staff witness Harold Hughes recommends five modifications to Schedule SUS, which are opposed by GSU. The recommendations include adjusting heat rate schedules, removing Schedule B rates, eliminating the sizing factor, adding a minimum demand requirement, and excluding customers with demand below 10 MW from Schedule SUS rates.

3. Sizing Factor [iii] Mr. Hughes has recommended that the sizing faaor concept incorporated within Schedule SUS be rejected on the basis that it does not produce a fair representation of how a cogenerator would operate. In Mr. Hughes' vie...

AI summary The document discusses the sizing factor in Schedule SUS, with Mr. Hughes arguing for its rejection due to operational inefficiencies at low loads, GSU opposing the change, and CSU supporting the current sizing factor. The examiner concludes that the current sizing factor is reasonable and prefers retaining it over significant restructuring.

4. Minimum Demand [iv) Mr. Hughes has recommended that - "a minimum demand should be set in the tariff to qualify for the SUS rate" based upon his belief that a cogencrator would not operate its cogencration facility when the cogencrator's...

AI summary Mr. Hughes recommends setting a minimum demand in the tariff to qualify for the SUS rate, based on the belief that a cogenerator would not operate below 75% of its rated capacity. However, the examiner does not support this proposal, preferring the sizing factor proposed by GSU over a fixed size surrogate unit.

accurately as might be possible, the examiner docs not recommend adoption of Mr. Hughes' recommendation that Schedule SUS not be offered to customers with demand requirements falling below l 0 MW. The primary reason for rejecting Mr. Hughe...

AI summary The examiner does not recommend adopting Mr. Hughes' suggestion to exclude Schedule SUS for customers with demand below 10 MW. The reasoning is that limiting Schedule SUS to above 10 MW demand would not address inaccuracies in rate bands for lower demand levels. Customers with low sizing factors may still fall into below 10 MW rate bands despite high demand, making the exclusion ineffective.