Decision

ENMAX Energy’s 2023-2024 Energy Price Setting Plan Decision

ENMAX Energy Corporation (ENMAX Energy) provides regulated rate option (RRO) services in ENMAX Power Corporation’s service territory. The Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) approves the RRO tariff through an energy price setting plan (EPSP) which sets the monthly RRO rate parameters. In Proceeding 27495, the Commission issues its decision regarding ENMAX Energy’s 2023-2024 EPSP. Key issues in this proceeding include ENMAX Energy’s proposals to amend its Letter of Credit (LOC) rates and how it calculates its Natural Gas Exchange (NGX) Collateral Costs, as well as the recommendations of the Utilities Consumers Advocate (UCA) to exclude the net commodity risk compensation (CRC) from ENMAX Energy’s energy return margin calculations and to limit ENMAX Energy’s monthly monitoring costs.[1]



To view more of this post, please

Login Here

or contact us.

ATCO’s 2018-2023 Transmission Deferral Accounts Decision

In Proceeding 26573, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission) issued its decision regarding the 2018-2023 Transmission Deferral Accounts disposal of ATCO Electric Ltd. (ATCO). Central to this proceeding was ATCO’s Jasper Interconnection Project (the Jasper Project), in which it was found that ATCO sole-sourced one of its contracts at above-market rates. In making its decision to disallow over $7.6 million in cost recovery, the Commission considered the way ATCO prepared for and managed the Jasper Project and ATCO’s treatment of cancelled customer project costs. The Commission also directs a reduction associated with the sole-sourced contract, but the exact amount depends on ATCO calculating the value of the contract in its compliance filing.



To view more of this post, please

Login Here

or contact us.

The Commission’s Decision on the CCA’s Cost Claim Review and Variance Application

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]



To view more of this post, please

Login Here

or contact us.

The Commission’s Decision on ATCO and Apex’s 2023 Cost-of-Service Review

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”).

Background

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.



To view more of this post, please

Login Here

or contact us.

Decision on AltaLink’s Pipeline Electrical Interference Mitigation Program Review and Variance Request

In Proceeding 27238, AltaLink Management Ltd. (“AltaLink”) requested a review and variance of the decision the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) made regarding AltaLink’s forecast capital expenditures for its Pipeline Electrical Interference Mitigation Program.



To view more of this post, please

Login Here

or contact us.