In proceeding 29064, ATCO Gas and ATCO electric (collectively referred to as ATCO) request to file fact evidence as part of the phase 2 PBR re-opener for the second-generation PBR (PBR2). The Commission issues a decision on this request and sets out the next process steps and dates for the proceeding.
In proceeding 29006 on the AESO Contribution in Aid of Construction Policy (CIAC), an Agreed Statement of Facts and Law has been prepared and agreed to by the parties. The purpose is to assist in identifying the issues that will be considered within the proceeding.
In proceeding 28750, AltaLink Management Ltd. (AltaLink) applied to the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) recover repair, replacement, and salvage expenses related to its transmission facilities that were destroyed in the 2023 spring wildfire and snow events that occurred after AltaLink filed its 2024-2025 general tariff application (GTA). AltaLink made a request to capitalize $18.5 million spent on repairing and replacing damaged assets and destroyed assets and to include $6.2 million in salvage expenditures in its GTA.[1]
In proceeding 29106, ATCO Electric and ATCO Gas (ATCO) apply for a review and variance on Decision 28300-D01-2024, in which the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) decided to reopen ATCO’s 2018-2022 performance-based regulation (PBR) to examine the reasonability of ATCO’s 2021 and 2022 rates of return.
In proceeding 28300, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) hears arguments for and against whether the plan for the second term of performance-based regulation (PBR2) of ATCO Gas and ATCO Electric (ATCO) was flawed; and if so, whether it is reasonable to re-open the plan. In proceeding 20414, the Commission set out a reopener provision allowing for the review of PBR plans if a utility’s return on equity (ROE) is 300 basis points above or below the approved ROE for two consecutive years, or if it is above or below 500 points in a single year. ATCO exceeded the 300-basis point threshold for 2021 and the 500-basis point threshold for 2022, triggering this current proceeding.[1]
In proceeding 28320, the Alberta Utilities Commission issues its decision regarding the reconsideration of the Z factor adjustment for the assets of ATCO Electric Ltd. (ATCO) which were destroyed in the 2016 Wood Buffalo fire. In Decision 21609-D01-2019, the Commission originally denied ATCO recovery of the net book value of the destroyed assets and ATCO was directed to remove the assets from its rate base. ATCO appealed the decision in ATCO Electric Ltd v Alberta Utilities Commission. The Alberta Court of Appeal (the Court) upheld ATCO’s appeal and then turned the initial decision back over to the Commission for reconsideration.
In proceeding 28585, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) publishes its calculation of the 2024 return on equity (ROE) after having approved the parameter values required to implement the new ROE formula. The Commission’s proposed 2024 ROE, based on the formula, is 9.28 percent.
In proceeding 28319, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) issues its decision regarding the micro-generation dispute between ATCO Electric Ltd. (ATCO) and a farm. In June of 2023, the farm submitted a micro-generation application to ATCO and ATCO rejected the application on the basis that the generating capacity was too large relative to load. The crux of the disagreement was whether one year of history (ATCO’s position) or five years of history (the farm’s position) was sufficient to predict future load.
In Proceeding 27388, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) sets the parameters of the third term of performance-based regulation (PBR3) in Alberta, which w ill be applied to the four following electric distribution utilities: ATCO Electric Ltd., FortisAlberta Inc. (Fortis), ENMAX Power Corporation, and EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (EPCOR); and the following two natural gas distribution utilities, ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd. and Apex Utilities Inc. In sum, PBR3 builds upon PBR2 but makes some key changes in how benefits and efficiencies are respectively provided and quantified going forward with the addition of an efficiency sharing mechanism and the removal of the efficiency carryover mechanism.
In proceeding 27658, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) issues its decision on whether it remains reasonable for electric distribution utilities to invest in new residential customer connections up to a prescribed maximum investment level (MIL). Additionally, the Commission issues its decision on whether MILs related to street lighting installed in developments should be paid to the municipality within which the development was constructed or to the developer. Ultimately the Commission concludes the continuation of MILs, albeit under four new governing principles, and it decides that MILs should be paid to the municipalities in which a new development is constructed.[1]