In Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) proceeding 27015, the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) provides its compliance filing to a previous decision, wherein the AESO was directed to develop a set of criteria for initiating system transmission projects, as opposed to transmission upgrades initiated by distribution utilities.
In Alberta Utility Commission (AUC) proceedings 26615 and 26616, ATCO Electric Ltd. (ATCO Electric), ATCO Gas North (ATCO Gas), FortisAlberta Inc. (Fortis), and APEX Utilities Inc. (APEX) are in the process of submitting their 2023 Cost of Service (COS) applications to the AUC, which will realign their COS and revenue requirement for the anticipated third term of performance-based regulation (PBR).
Bill 86 passed through its first reading in the second session of the 30th Alberta Legislature. The stated objective of the bill is to clarify energy storage policy and regulation in the province.
The Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) replied to stakeholder comments received in response to Session 2 of their 2022 Budget Review Process (BRP).
In Proceeding 26505, ENMAX Energy Corporation (ENMAX) submitted an application to the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) for a COVID-19 Rate Adjustment by way of a deferral account. The Commission has issued a ruling on the application.
In Proceeding 26694, EPCOR Energy Alberta (EPCOR) responds to Information Requests (IR) from the Consumers Coalition of Alberta (CCA) and the Utilities Consumer Advocate (UCA) regarding its 2021-2022 Non-Energy Regulated Rate Tariff (RRT) Application (the Application) to the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission).
Proceeding 26615 follows ATCO Electric Ltd. (ATCO) and FortisAlberta Inc. (Fortis) in their 2023 cost-of-service (COS) applications. Of note is the new hybrid format being used to evaluate costs, where individual distribution facility owners (DFOs) have the discretion to construct broad or detailed cost categories as the see fit. DFOs are to streamline the categorization of routine costs and provide a higher degree of detail on complex issues as they assign categories.[1]
In Proceeding 26510, Capital Power Corporation (Capital Power) argues before the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) why FortisAlberta Inc.’s (Fortis) additional charges to Capital Power associated to the interconnection of the Strathmore Solar Project (the Strathmore Project) are unjustified.
In Proceeding 26668, EQUS REA Ltd. (EQUS) and FortisAlberta Ltd. (Fortis) argue before the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) whether exit charges imposed by Fortis on two consumers who want to make EQUS their service provider are justified.