Regulatory Law Chambers logo

AltaGas Utilities Inc. 2019-2020 Unaccounted-For Gas Rider E and Rider H (AUC Decision 24763-D01-2019)

Link to decision summarized

Unaccounted-for Gas Riders


In this decision, the AUC approved AltaGas Utilities Inc. (“AltaGas”)’s rate Riders E and H as filed, effective November 1, 2019.

Background

Riders E and H aimed to recover amounts associated with unaccounted-for Gas (“UFG”). Rider E recovered the amount of UFG associated with producer transportation service, and rider H recovered the amount of UFG associated with processes of the Natural Gas Settlement System (“NGSS”).

Commission Findings

The AUC reviewed the calculations of the Rider E and Rider H to be effective beginning of November 1, 2019. The AUC was satisfied that AltaGas’s proposed UFG rate calculations were accurate and consistent with the methodology approved in previous decisions.

The AUC found the currently proposed amounts to be recovered through rate Riders E and H fell within the historical range for each of the rate riders, based on the five-year historical average calculation. However, the AUC noted that the five-year averages underlying the 2019-2020 Rider E and Rider H UFG amounts had increased this year after declining for four years in a row between 2015-2019. On this point, the AUC stated that while the AUC was satisfied with AltaGas’ explanations for the increase in UFG during 2018-2019, it continues to expect that UFG fluctuations and overall UFG percentages decrease over time as a result of AltaGas’ ongoing initiatives and expenditures to reduce UFG.

The AUC found that AltaGas had complied with the Commission’s direction in paragraph 37 of Decision 23740-D01-2018 to:

(a)      develop and provide a relative ranking of UFG causes;

(b)      quantify the causes of UFG, where possible;

(c)      describe the specific actions taken by AltaGas to reduce UFG fluctuations and UFG overall amounts;

(d)      provide reasons for any year-over-year increases/decreases in AltaGas’ UFG;

(e)      update the historical data set, which spans the period for the most recent ten years of monthly data to the most current month for the receipt and delivery volumes and UFG percentage losses or gains; and

(f)       provide a regional UFG breakdown and any explanation and insight gained from the regional analysis.

The AUC was satisfied that AltaGas’s calculations and proposed adjustments to Rider E and Rider H were reasonable.

Order

Rider E and H rate schedules were approved as filed. AltaGas’ rider E was approved at 1.10 percent and rider H at 1.11 percent, effective November 1, 2019.

Related Posts

Yatar v. TD Insurance Meloche Monnex, 2024 SCC 8

Yatar v. TD Insurance Meloche Monnex, 2024 SCC 8

Link to Decision Summarized Download Summary in PDF Administrative Law – Judicial Review v. Statutory Appeal Application Ummugulsum Yatar (“Ms. Yatar”) contested the denial of her insurance...