In Proceeding 28989, The Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) responds to information requests (IR’s) filed by intervenors and the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission or AUC) regarding its application to update its Rate Demand Opportunity Service (DOS). With these updates, the AESO aims to make the Rate DOS technology agnostic, simpler, and easier to administer.
ATCO Electric and Sustaintech have submitted Evidence and IRs in the proceeding on Sustaintech’s application for distribution exemption (ID 27633).
Readers will recall from a previous update that Sustainitech and ARC enterprises (together, SACO) are applying for a distribution exemption under the Hydro and Electric Energy Act (HEEA) which would allow a gas processing plant to supply energy to an adjacent site without qualifying as a distribution system.
ATCO electric intervened in the proceeding raising concerns about the application’s compatibility with the Electric Utilities Act (EUA), specifically the requirement that persons using electricity obtain that service from the distribution company in whose service area they are located (Sec, 101). ATCO subsequently submitted intervener evidence and responded to information requests.
ENMAX Energy Corporation (ENMAX Energy) provides regulated rate option (RRO) services in ENMAX Power Corporation’s service territory; however, the Commission must approve the RRO tariff through an energy price setting plan (EPSP). In Proceeding 27495, ENMAX Energy’s application proposes to continue its previous EPSP with several refinements. After examining the application and submitting information requests, the Utilities Consumer Advocate (UCA) argues against certain aspects of ENMAX Energy’s proposal.[1]
In Proceeding 27666, the Alberta Utility Commission (the Commission) issues its decision regarding the review and variance application of the Consumers’ Coalition of Alberta (CCA), arguing that their 40 percent cost claim disallowance was inconsistent, punitive, and punishing. However, the CCA did not persuade the Commission that there were errors in the initial decision. Therefore, the disallowance stands.[1]
In Proceeding 27777, the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) submits to the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) its 2023 Independent System Operator (ISO) Tariff Application. In its application, the AESO explains the increases to its revenue requirement forecast, proposes an overall increase to the ISO tariff and the maximum investment levels, and provides new Generating Unit Owner’s Contribution (GUOC) rates.
In Proceeding 26911, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) issues its decision regarding the proposed regional and bulk transmission rate design of the Alberta Electric System Operator (“AESO”). Alberta’s current regional and bulk transmission rate design recovers transmission costs through energy and coincident peak (“CP”) demand billing determinants. However, most intervenors agree that the associated CP charge overstates the cost of using the grid at peak times, allowing some customers to lower their bills by strategically reducing consumption. The AESO proposed a new rate design that lowers the influence of the CP charge and raises the energy charge to alleviate this issue.
In Proceeding 27388, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) issues its ruling on the issues list for determining the parameters of the third term of performance-based regulation (‘PBR3”).
In our previous article, we described how the Commission concluded that the first and second PBR terms had generally achieved their objectives and sought input on which parameters from the previous PBR terms should be included in PBR3.
The Commission received feedback from twelve participants who each submit a list of the potential issues they wanted to be addressed in this proceeding.
In Proceeding 27256, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) publishes its final Hydrogen Inquiry Report that details its considerations and recommendations for hydrogen blending in Alberta.
In proceeding 26616, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission) issues its decision regarding the cost-of-service review for both ATCO Gas (“ATCO”) and Apex Utilities Inc. (“Apex”) in preparation for the third term of performance-based regulation (“PBR3”).
Readers may remember our previous article summarizing ATCO and Apex’s cost-of-service rebasing application whereby both utilities realign their distribution facility owner costs and revenues in preparation for PBR3. The intervenors argued that the applicants had not demonstrated how they would share efficiencies with ratepayers, that efficiencies should be quantified, that the applicants’ cost escalators overstate actual costs, and that certain capital projects should be excluded from each applicant’s rate base. The applicants responded by stating their efficiencies would be shared through lower rates, that their escalators are based on reasonable factors, and that the capital projects under question are prudent and necessary.
In Proceeding 26911, the Alberta Electric System Operator (“AESO”) and the intervenors submit their arguments to the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) for and against the AESO’s proposed bulk and regional rate design and modernized demand opportunity service (“DOS”).