Hydro One Networks Stakeholder Session Principles for Defining and Allocating Cost to Density-Based Sub-Classes May 25, 2009 John Todd

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Minnesota Department of Education Metadata Registry Case Study Date: October 31 st, 2008 Dan McCreary President Dan McCreary & Associates
Advertisements

Gender Perspectives in Introduction to Tariffs Gender Module #5 ITU Workshops on Sustainability in Telecommunication Through Gender & Social Equality.
Introduction The pressure on all types of operators to implement cost- based pricing, especially for interconnect services, is growing I will deal with.
Pinellas by Design: A Blueprint for Updating the Countywide Plan Pinellas Planning Council May 18, 2011.
EMIG Electricity Market Investment Group Presentation to the Ontario Energy Board February 17, 2004.
CE Electric UK – Potential developments in long-term charging arrangements and IDNO charging methodologies 1 April 9, 2008 Potential developments in long-term.
DISPUTES & INVESTIGATIONS ECONOMICS FINANCIAL ADVISORY MANAGEMENT CONSULTING Early Lessons Learned from DOE-EPRI Framework Experience Melissa Chan MA DPU.
2006 LIEN and AHAC Conference Low-Income Energy Plan for Peterborough City and County (John Todd, ERA) May 26, 2006.
Logistics Network Configuration
ACC Workshop Regarding Notice of Inquiry on Natural Gas Infrastructure September 10, 2003.
Electricity Distributors Association The Voice of Ontario’s Electricity Distributors OEB Consultation on the Electricity Distribution Sector February 17,
“Investment in Transmission” Economics of Electricity Markets – IDEI Toulouse, 2-3 June 2005 Jon Carlton – Director of Network Strategy.
2011 Contribution Policy AESO Tariff Applications October 17 th, 2011.
Compare and Contrast ELCC Methodologies Across CPUC Proceedings
M ICHIGAN P UBLIC S ERVICE C OMMISSION Cost of Service Ratemaking Michigan Public Service Commission Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs.
T HE W ORLD B ANK C ARBON F INANCE U NIT Extension of simplified modalities for demonstration of additionality to EE and RE projects.
1 THE RATE CASE PROCESS A Blend of Science and Superstition Presentation to the Mongolian Energy Regulatory Board By Burl Haar Executive Secretary Minnesota.
“Study on Other States’ Regulatory Oversight of Waste and Material Handling Activities Relative to Recycling Centers, Transfer Stations, and Green Material.
An Overview of Our Regulatory Proposal
August 2004 Hickory by Choice Linking Land Use and Air Quality Planning.
Rate Design June 23, 2015 Laurie Reid. 2 Overview 1.A little bit of physics 2.The Ratemaking Process 3.Generally Accepted Ratemaking Principles 4.What’s.
America’s Water Upmanu Lall water.columbia.edu.
Cost of Service Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) presented by Nick Phillips Brubaker.
Rate and Revenue Considerations When Starting an Energy Efficiency Program APPA’s National Conference June 13 th, 2009 Salt Lake City, Utah Mark Beauchamp,
Navigating SB 375: CEQA Streamlining and SB 743 Transportation Analysis 2014 San Joaquin Valley Fall Policy Conference.
McGranaghan US Session 2 Block 4 Question 12 Barcelona May Statistical Framework for Establishing Target Reliability Levels and Classifying.
WP2 Quality of Life Indicators Charles University of Prague Ludek Sykora.
Distributed Generation Benefits and Planning Challenges CREPC/SPSC Resource Planners’ Forum October 3, 2012 Arne Olson.
Statnett ”Impact of legal and organizational structures”: ECOM+ and Norwegian regulation Costs as reported in the financial repoerts are the basis. An.
WSNTG Annual Conference September 2006 Water Services National Training Group 10 th Annual Conference 7 th September 2006.
SAMANVITHA RAMAYANAM 18 TH FEBRUARY 2010 CPE 691 LAYERED APPLICATION.
1 Delivery Mechanisms and Scoping Joint Response Team - DWAF, SALGA, NT and dplg Using Section 78.
Rate Design: Options for addressing NEM impacts Utah NEM Workgroup 4 1 July 8, 2015 Melissa Whited Synapse Energy Economics.
The Hybrid Cost Proxy Model: Portugal Edition D. Mark Kennet William W. Sharkey Instituto das Comunicações de Portugal November, 2000.
1 Cost of Service A Tariff Overview A presentation by Eskom April 2010.
CORNERSTONES TO MANAGING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY. WHY SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENTS? Customer Perceptions---Fantasy? Customer Expectations---Reality Customer.
Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. NARUC Staff Subcommittee on Accounting and Finance New Orleans, LA April 2, 2008.
Cost of Service Based Water and Wastewater Rates City of Lawrence, Kansas February 11, 2004 J. Rowe McKinley Keith D. Barber.
Internet Policy Day 3 - Workshop Session No. 5 The impact of telecomms regulation Prepared for CTO by Link Centre, Witwatersrand University, South Africa.
Energy Efficiency Action Plan Kathleen Hogan Director, Climate Protection Partnerships Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency NARUC Winter Meetings.
Evaluation of Wood Smoke Quantification and Attribution RTF PAC October 17, 2014.
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION BALANCED RATES RULEMAKING R California Water Association’s Restatement of Goals and Objectives for the.
NASUCA Annual Meeting Austin, Texas November 10, 2015 Scott J. Rubin, Attorney + Consultant 333 Oak Lane + Bloomsburg, PA Office: (570)
1 NAUSCA Summer Meeting Boston June 30, 3009 David W. Hadley Vice President State Regulatory Relations Midwest ISO.
2010 NASUCA Mid-Year Meeting NASUCA 2010 Mid-Year Conference Presented by: Lee Smith Senior Economist and Managing Consultant Presented to: June ,
Pricing Strategy.  Focus on the value of your product / service delivers  Value = perceived benefits Price Know your competitor Reward staff for sales.
Identifying, Evaluating and Prioritising Urban Adaptation Measures.
California Energy Action Plan December 7, 2004 Energy Report: 2004 and 2005 Overview December 7, 2004.
Ocean/ENVIR 260 Autumn 2010Lecture 16© 2010 University of Washington 1 Ocean/Envir 260 Lecture #16: Population Growth in the Puget Sound Ecosystem.
Presentation by Qulliq Energy Corporation 1. Presentation Overview  Corporate Overview  General Rate Application  Who Participates in a GRA?  Phase.
Genesisenergy.co.nz Commerce Commission Electricity Lines Business (ELB) Regulation Information Disclosure Genesis Energy 17 March 2005.
Los Angeles County Community Choice Aggregation Regional CCA Task Force Meeting October 28, 2015.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE MEETING 2 – TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 12/12/2013.
STAMFORD CAPACITY AND LIMITS TO GROWTH STUDY SOUTH KESTEVEN DISTRICT COUNCIL FINAL REPORT PRESENTATION PRESENTERS: UNA McGAUGHRIN JESSE HONEY 14 TH DECEMBER.
Identifying drivers of expenditure. Reasons for spending money 2 Effective regulation requires an understanding of why a business spends money Many different.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Joint IEPR Workshop on Climate Adaptation and Resiliency for the Energy Sector Energy Sector Climate Resilience CRAIG ZAMUDA,
2009 IEW Conference - Venice Transmission Network Unbundling and Grid Investments: Evidence from the UCTE Countries Paolo Nardi CERTeT – Università Bocconi.
FERC Docket No. EL PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Paper Hearing Regarding 7 th Circuit Remand.
New Customer Contributions for the Water Sector: Workshop 4 August 2004.
Alternative Ratemaking Methodologies Docket No. M
Hydro One Networks Stakeholder Session Principles for Defining and Allocating Cost to Density-Based Sub-Classes May 25, 2009 John Todd
Density/Cost Allocation Study
2000 CAS RATEMAKING SEMINAR
Upstream Reinforcement Costs
Quantifying Scale and Pattern Lecture 7 February 15, 2005
Resource Adequacy Demand Forecast Coincidence Adjustments
2015 UNS Rate Case – DG Trends in Action
Are Tiered Conservation Rates Valid?
Comparing the Degree of Urbanization to the US Census Bureau’s Urbanized Areas, Urban Clusters, and Rural Areas Michael Ratcliffe, Michael Commons, and.
LTP Finance Working Group Workshop
Presentation transcript:

Hydro One Networks Stakeholder Session Principles for Defining and Allocating Cost to Density-Based Sub-Classes May 25, 2009 John Todd

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates2 Outline 1.Principles and Precedents Examples of density-based classes Customer class definition principles General ratemaking principles 2.Defining Density-Based Classes Status Quo Alternative: Granular density-based classes Implications 3.Cost Allocation Options Status Quo Alternative: Granular density-based costs Implications 4.Conclusions

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates3 Examples of Density-Based Classes Canada: CRTC, High Cost of Serving Areas Low-density, remote communities Competitive discipline ineffective Price regulation necessary, subsidization justified Manitoba: Manitoba Hydro (1980s) Various usage and regional rates California: CPUC, Urban/Rural Zones (1950s) The Staffs approach gives consideration to the number of customers, the location of the customers, the number of customers per mile of distribution pole line, area growth pattern, and the history of rates. (San Diego Gas & Electric, Decision No , Oct 1958)

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates4 Customer Classification Principles Standard Ratemaking Texts Bonbright, Kahn, Phillips are silent on principles and methods for identifying customer classes. Goodman: As one commission has noted, ideally each customer class … should be based on distinct usage or cost patterns, not on type of building or nature of business. (p. 1017) Density as a Source of Economies of Scale: The impact of the level of traffic, i.e., density on capacity costs per unit of costs is recognized as a source of economies of scale. (Goodman, p. 417; Kahn, p. 125).

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates5 Relevant Bonbright Principles Bonbright et al (1988): 10 Attributes of a Sound Rate Structure. Most relevant are: 4. Static efficiency of the rate classes and rate blocks.. 6. Fairness of the specific rates in the apportionment of total costs of service … 7. Avoidance of undue discrimination … OEB identified three rate design principle in Rate Design Review: Full Cost Recovery Principle Fairness Principle Efficiency Principle

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates6 Conclusions on Principles (1) The literature and precedents provide no guidance regarding the principles that should be used in addressing the issue of establishing density-based rates. The central question appears to be: Are urban and rural customers equals or unequals? Based on usage, they are equals Based on cost, they are unequals Should cost differences due to density of customers (economies of scale/intensity of use) be reflected in rates?

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates7 Conclusions on Principles (2) The rationales for density based rates include: Competitive issues: In telecom competitors can cherry-pick service areas Electricity customers served by LDCs with different mix of urban/rural may have their own competitive concerns Rate comparison issues: Benchmarking may need to consider cost drivers such as density where LDCs have significantly different mix of customer densities Neighbouring customers served by different LDCs compare rates which may reflect different customer mix (and intra- class cross-subsidies) Fairness Principle: Unequals treated unequally

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates8 Defining Density-based Classes (1) Option #1: Areas based on average density Historic HONI approach Urban Density Zone has 3,000 or more customers Based on average LDC size at the time (with 312 LDCs) Should this be updated to new average size? Why? Line density of 60 residential customers/km or more There is no apparent cost basis for this threshold Is there a more meaningful break point Urban areas generally extended from a dense core to a logical boundary that met minimum threshold Presumably some UR areas include a mix of urban and rural customers that is consistent with the urban definition

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates9 Defining Density-based Classes (2) Option #2: Classify customers based on granular density Principle: Ensure equals treated equally where equals are defined as customers requiring similar distribution infrastructure Use small geographic areas as basis for determining density Classify areas/customers based on the granular density Result would be a more intuitive and consistent urban:rural split This approach would focus on small concentration of customers (perhaps at the transformer level) This approach may ignore the distance to the backbone of grid (which may be important to the cost of serving specific customers) Conceptually, an alternative granular approach would be to define areas based on the network configuration (may be inconsistent with postage stamp principle)

Google Maps: Blind River 5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates10

1/2/2014Elenchus Research Associates11 Implications of Redefining Classes Rural or Remote Rate Protection (RRRP) The customers benefiting and magnitude of subsidy may change Total value of the RRRP may change Service Quality indicators (SQI) Different SQIs apply in urban and rural areas SQI standards may have to be reviewed if composition of urban and rural regions is changed (e.g., response time; reliability; SAIDI; SAIFI) Significant effort (costs) will be required 5/25/200911Elenchus Research Associates

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates12 Cost Allocation Options Option #1: Areas based on average density Current CA Methodology using weighting factors (presented at the previous stakeholder session) Option #2: Classify customers based on granular density 1.Use plant records for distribution plant serving groups of customers (directly allocate to the sub-classes) 2.Use regression analysis to estimate cost of wires/poles/ transformers to serve different customer classes 3.Sample actual capital and O&M costs incurred to serve customers in typical urban and rural areas 4.Use engineering analysis to determine cost differentials

5/25/2009Elenchus Research Associates13 The Significance of Cost Factors There are many factors that affect the cost of serving specific groups of customers: Density of customers using a feeder Overhead vs. underground Rock/soil conditions Congestion in urban centres Factors affecting the urban/rural differential: Rural higher: Storm damage; brushing: travel time; DS under-utilization; etc. Urban higher: Congestion; undergrounding; SCADA; etc.

1/2/2014Elenchus Research Associates14 Conclusions 1.The current HONI approach to defining density-based classes, allocating costs and setting rates is pragmatic rather than principled. 2.A more granular approach to identifying urban and rural customers would improve fairness, would have little impact on efficiency, and might compromise rate stability & simplicity. 3.Adopting a more rigorous cost-based approach to allocating density-based cost will be challenging. 5/25/200914Elenchus Research Associates

DRAFT 1/2/2014Elenchus Research Associates15 Questions 1.Are there any other principles that should be addressed in the ERA Report? 2.Are there other issues that are relevant to the OEBs consideration of the matter: Are density-based rates equitable? What is the appropriate way to define density- based rate classes (e.g., UR; R1; R2)? What is the appropriate way to allocate costs to density-based rate classes? 3.If the cost (rate) differential increases, should the urban-to-rural cross- subsidy (RRRP) be increased? 5/25/200915Elenchus Research Associates