and IN 25, 1989
3.3 3.lf 4.1 l l 5.0 5.2 f~ Ptllrll 5.3
MR. Consumers J. v AN Grand MR. D. SCARLETT Consumers J. G. DR. If M A.
J.S. S.A. MR. WATSON MR. DR. Economic MUNICIPAL AND DR. W. R. WATERS Power of Toronto of Toronto and
t No. West 2 3 14, 1989 lj West to 5 No. G-1 6 G-ll 8 9 0 Year ll 12 West and 13 14 15
No. 1 CRTC 7 8 19 of Dr. Waters 2! Power 23 L 24 25 dated March 6. 1989 26 27 Power 29 l' l West Power Ltd. 30 June 9-l l 31 32
Power to -Interest Rate Power to - 1 West Power of Revenues West Power - Im The Hood River Conservation A- Rate vs. B Power No. 33 5 to 1989 35 36 Costs Rates 38 re 39 to 40 1987 41 Power 44 Power 45 Rate 46 48
N o. Power )11 on the l ll Rate 49 50 51 from 53 Power 'J 54
1.0 INTRODUCTION West Power Inc. of Kansas Inc. are on tt1e New \VKP on - -WKP West power is to to customers a WKP when 2.0 APPLICATION WKP on I for a rate to 1, l989. recover turn on the is a shares as well is and Power the and nature not is customers % to on s was to a In the
. w 0 . w
4 As an illustration, the flow chart in Figure 3.1 provides an example of the typical process that could be adopted. FIGURE 3.1 System Development Process Problem Quality of 1 • Measured Inputs Service - • Complaints Stats Analysis and Criteria • Industry Project Comparison Selection I_ System Development Plan • Schedule • Cost • Priority + ~-------~1 I ' 1 Monitoring 1 I Program !
5 As an be The as soon as as 51 In l' 3, 9, the system further advised that the above stated on was is with in the of a Com comments t 4, 1' to
is l? resources, of the as on 146 ot t11e no seem to be 1' re-assess to ensure will be available to execute and 3.3 Exhibit l the 1987 Resource is an of and In accuracy o:t W becomes because of the costs options m Ltght ot the econom do not appear to have been be a of of
7 (b) to cannot be to the Act. In the A random 4, customers were * its resource to: Power or is be to the the customers. whether these two 1988
8 In l a In West to measure or assess it is the future? 11 The ity vary c WI<P a customers. are on ' of manner 3.5 The a stand new or I and ex~ be more cost ones. -· serve to 1987 ") of are quite is that WKP has but of to and more 3.l. of is on a of smaller a or
9 Comm this on 4.0 COST OF SERVICE The Water Fees l The to to than one ra at to on that the of of cost test year $ 17,342,000 2,245,000 l 12,000 over of 1 can is on too nature
lO to to should be 4.1 deferred the an treatment was and costs of kV that the to Work concurs if additional December 7, 1988 costs 3 rate is is not was not the that should to
is concerned the deferred is too low to over test year. Dr. Evans test to at about one on 10.5%. this rate and 4.2 The WKP resource is KP constant on an to meet WKP's are Low cost power from sources other than upon ect to nom of the In l989 test year, with a of 547 MW. 10 880 -184 account rate of cost of short-term to be the point than and 33) to rate to under the B.C. resource, or supply, is plants on The Canal to growing power. are meet WKP's not significant to of An is to .h is as Percent Percent l 35 0 -· 0 34 199 36 - 7 l - 29 100 547 100
!2 direct In its test bit 3, Tab is the understands that part models to customers 1 customers. To ensure DSM are important means ot an customer income p. the advised that the: load/resource and The be closely l to 1989, it is ability of of the total load is and accounted for, it is and
-0 "
4 Power at l, Tab 8. cause a $1,924,000. costs are $224,000. A $859,000. at power costs is Tab 1). Of iS U:tU!:ii::U and whee costs. If increased revenue from load from WKP in all of the meets so and of 1' l contract must or not cost load of 116 to by at a cost t costs over l is $362,000, is $7,03 3,000 l' the forecast in is $898,000 revenue of revenue firm Cominco surplus, then or from B.C. cost more per unit for contribution terms current on are taken
15 is because WKP with amounts new cost from B.C. and this in the an page 1007: may and unable to risk is some upon the with resources, and To the extent that risk in cost suppl The ind
16 To of assume the "worst case" 1989 at l.% in from is a 1% test shows over under resources and cost and from to its resource base. w Koch The now under or to the due to ent B.C. Hydro not to and The that if to reduce to a ties to lower BPA and others to add at the supply the
7 5 Power costs costs and it the the most recent question of power costs were 1987 Rate Resource states at as DSM has been d'"'-u"~'"' and by on 2: Study (Exhibit 13), at oage 4l the
8 The the of and the a sense of DSM to to DSM as an element to meet load ~ DSM WKP has not to an CLL\Jc;u are cost or ly
l9 the lirnited the DSM customers and an test t 4, Tab I, not w a cost no more, on a test is to ensure customers. cost that has is the context of its Volume 5, for than the co~. The be no set
"no-losers" test No-Losers To extent that to customers. kW .h does not For too are than of If 298), it same and the orogram (all are .57 per kW 35 per 92 per .h 52 m per kW.h ~~~oer .h ,;,;;:~~per Test is Too are a cost per t's test is costs the to pay B.C. Hydro supply DSM to
21 cost and the DSM cost 4.2.6.3 concern (T 50 and that CaUSe nAn-n<> rates to A lower energy bill than would otherwise be the case. These be on any must ensure, to costs test was one to cost of power, including a of the It cost sectors may be very the two sectors 887), in DSM absence a n DSM in two use and a cost participants ts to rates and if cost on rates of
22 notes to extent so customers can To customer addressed at the to customer base customers e customers customer we can assume DSM a is a of DSM Is cost in the should a broad of one or is to the and to t resources is of l 3ll9) the was of Applicant's customers as a means wholesale custorn ers contains to could to its
to found the ses the customers. 4.2.6 •. 5 sees no and resources meet as or In costs of a same manner as to of 91 a return on " ~, and ~a area as thin its resources assets used to the to water are at ining a period Applicant to treat all other rate base addition. Overhead be broken and purposes of was 4, l' 45). The
net It is the reduced l Test 3.2 is aware return on to Return on the at 4.2.6.7 The statement and and _ the and "net es The SOld at and cost 3 and a to a that are in j~i~ to is a must a s must be resources to customer
25 In the is rather 5.0 CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND RETURN l structure from the l found l The common be from as well as 2, 5l, an extract from common (Exhibit 4, Tab common 38.4 in 2 5 3. to move to a in a and a test, a common of of Intervenors took position that to , a 3.1% structures of other interest coverage ratios X). It the most recent plan
to not Return on a rate return on common of l 3, 1987. WKP bases te the return of 4.1 not and any structure Comm a common to to ensure as 14.1 %, an from a l % to 13.5 flow rate return on a comrnon of l 5% to l , but on it is content to ensure rate
of the common be deemed to be rates rate of return common d a and accounts and is of one over the as One new 1ssues of mon of market declines. costs it would be rate return on common the amount at • from 12.096 to 12.2 on the two and both a both it and rate of return Mr. Brook WKP recovers to also costs in a He costs at 30
0 0 0 H> 0 1-h
3 Matters A of the reason a than it now that it cannot return. It return return is not consumers as it revenues to customers. If It is at return to the that must it rate of return the ·-·' content rate return are two return is not to earn the rate its are not accurate and the It is not to is not for returns to of so s case.
6.0 RATE DESIGN A of was set out 6. l In at l' 15, for Area I rate were the are sets out a lower on for rates not
to to Rates of annual on will convert
convert is current
3 t to to treatment of class.
Test II of the of the season. rate.
,... 0
ra the line with costs so that and as set out not these current the In to in
as 7.0 OTHER MATTERS 7 .I Utili recover net excess
the of the costs as oooosec1 In over ts costs in 1 I'
. 00 0 0 ["!1 -() Ul 0 z
"'<;;\\ co ~ UTiliTIES COMMISSION c ~ A 0 ~,.)' C;;;q ORDER h '-> '.S col'll\ · " " ' ' NUMBER -.:::......;;:..;.....~ IN TilE ~1/\ rTFP OF til<" Utili tiC's Commission Act, S.l:l.C. ! 980, c. 60, as arnr~nded and IN THI' M/\TTFR OF an Application by West Kootenay Pow('r Ltd. l~f'FORE: J.D.V. Nt•wlands, Deputy Chairrnan and Chairman of the Division; W.M. Swanson, ().C., April 25, l9l\9 Corrunissionor; and W./\. !lest, Cnmrnissimwr WHFRFAS p11blic hearing pertaining to West Kootenay Power Ltd.'s ("WKP") Application dated NovembE'r n, 19l\l\ fnr a gt'neral rate increase proceeded beforp tile Commission at Rossland, B.C. from Febr11ary 28 through March R, 191\9: and WllFRFAS pursuant to Order No. <-; .. J07--8R WKP was granted an interim, rf'hmdilhle rat<~ innease of 6.7% effective January !, 19R9: and Wl!F'RF/\S the> Commission has consid~?red the r'\pplication and the evidence all forth in a Decision i'iSued concurrently with this Order. NOW THFRFFOHE thr' Commission hereby orders West Power Ltd, as follows: l. The I< ate Bast~ and !I.Pvenue Requirem(•nt for tile T.est Year endPd D<'<"Pmbc>r 31, 1989 are as set out in Schedules contained in the Decision. 1. Th" Commission nmfinns as firm, the interim rates in effect on ]anuary I, 191\9. '· The Commission will subject to tirrwly anrended Electric Tariff Hate which conform to terms of the Commission's April 2 'i, ! 989 Decision. 4. West Kootenay Power Ltd. will comply with the several directions incorpora tr?d in the Commission DATFD at the City of Vancouver, in the Province of Hritish Columbia, this of April, 1989. Dt,puty Chairman and Chairman of th<' Division 311!(39/crns
I
w
A. Overestimation of Energy by l% Lost Less: Underestimation of Energy by l% * Enercon's of $ 1 23.4
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.