The Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) has issued its decision in Phase 2 of Proceeding 29064, addressing the reopener of the 2018–2022 performance-based regulation (PBR2) plans for ATCO Electric Ltd. and ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd. (collectively, ATCO). This follows the Phase 1 Decision 28300-D01-2024, in which the Commission determined that ATCO’s PBR2 plans should be reopened due to excessive returns not supported by evidence of efficiency gains.
In proceeding 29255, the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) provides its final decision with respect to the negotiated settlement agreement (NSA) submitted by the Consumers Coalition of Alberta (CCA), the Utilities Consumer Advocate (UCA), and ENMAX Power Corporation (EPC or ENMAX) with respect to the 2026-2028 Transmission General Tariff Application (GTA) filed by ENMAX.
In proceeding 29006, ten participants submitted written arguments to the Alberta Utilities Commission (the Commission or AUC) following rounds of extensive information requests (IRs) and evidence. A virtual hearing for reply arguments is scheduled for April 23, 2025.
In Proceeding 29255, ENMAX Power Corporation (EPC or ENMAX) submitted a negotiated settlement agreement to the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) for its 2026-2028 Transmission General Tariff Application (GTA). The agreement was reached between EPC, the Consumers Coalition of Alberta (CCA), and the Utilities Consumer Advocate (UCA), with an invitation extended to the Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta (IPCAA). The settlement covered both monetary and non-monetary aspects.
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 27562, Direct Energy Regulated Services (“Direct Energy”) and the Utilities Consumer Advocate (“UCA”) present their arguments before the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) that address Direct Energy’s load forecasting methodology, seasonal multipliers, energy return margin (“ERM”), and the expiry date of its energy price setting plan (“EPSP”) application.
In proceeding 26617 the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) issues its decision regarding the cost-of-service negotiated settlements of ENMAX Power Corporation (“ENMAX”) and EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (“EPCOR”) in preparation for the next term of performance-based regulation (“PBR”).
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”).
In Proceeding 26911 the Alberta Electric System Operator (“AESO”) and several intervenors cross-examine each other’s evidence for and against the various bulk and regional rate design proposals before the Alberta Utilities Commission (the “Commission”).
Readers may remember our previous article describing the AESO’s rebuttal evidence for their bulk and regional rate design and modernized demand opportunity service application. The current rate design collects transmission costs through a mix of energy and peak demand billing determinants where a monthly coincident peak charge (“12-CP”) recovers two thirds of demand costs.
Argument and reply argument has been submitted in Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) proceeding 26616 on ATCO Gas North (ATCO) and Apex Utilities Inc. (Apex) cost-of-service rebasing in preparation for the next PBR term.