Regulatory Law Chambers logo

ENMAX Power Corporation 2018-2020 Transmission Owner General Tariff Application Compliance Filing to Decision 23699-D01-2020 (Corrigenda), AUC Decision 25738-D01-2020

Link to Decision Summarized

Revenue Requirements

In this decision, the AUC granted an application by ENMAX Power Corporation (“ENMAX”) for approval of its compliance filing to Decision 23966-D01-2020 (“Corrigenda”), ENMAX’s 2018-2020 transmission facility owner (“TFO”) general tariff application (“GTA”).


On July 17, 2020, ENMAX filed a compliance filing application with the AUC, pursuant to the AUC’s order in Decision 23966-D01-2020 (Corrigenda). ENMAX requested approval of its compliance with directions from Decision 23966-D01-2020 (Corrigenda) regarding AUC’s 2018-2020 transmission GTA.

ENMAX’s Compliance Filing

In its compliance filing ENMAX requested approval of transmission revenue requirements of $83.89 million for 2018, $91.02 million for 2019, and $96.59 million for 2020 and an expedited compliance filing process in accordance with Bulletin 2016-18.

ENMAX stated, that in this application it complied with AUC directions 1, 2, 4, and 5 from Decision 23966-D01-2020 (Corrigenda).


In Direction 3 the AUC directed ENMAX to seek approval for the costs associated with the Substation No. 1 project, and to file a business case in support of that project, in a future GTA, after a decision had been rendered in the facilities proceeding. The AUC directed ENMAX to include all material on the record of this proceeding that relates to the Substation No. 1 project as part of its filing for its next GTA.

The AUC noted the response by ENMAX stating its commitment to include all materials of this proceeding related to the Substation No. 1 project in its next GTA.

The AUC accepted that Direction 3 given in Decision 23966-D01-2020 (Corrigenda) will remain outstanding and will be addressed at the time of ENMAX’s next GTA.

The AUC was satisfied that ENMAX complied with the requirements Directions 1, 2, 4, and 5 in its compliance filing. The AUC was satisfied that for Direction 1, ENMAX would maintain the scope and language of its Major Storms and Natural Disasters deferral account as directed, and that for directions 2, 4 and 5, ENMAX reflected the required changes to its minimum filing requirement schedules and adjusted its revenue requirement amounts accordingly.

The AUC approved the revenue requirements for 2018-2020 as filed by ENMAX.

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...