Compliance Filing
This decision arises from ATCO Electric Ltd.’s (“ATCO”) application for approval of its proposed disposition of its 2012 Transmission Deferral Account and Annual Filing for Adjustment Balances. In Decision 2014-283, which first dealt with these applications, the AUC directed ATCO to refile its 2012 transmission deferral application to reflect the findings in Decision 2014-283. This Decision addresses ATCO’s compliance filing.
The AUC noted that most of ATCO’s compliance submissions were not contested, nor were they subject to information requests. Therefore, the AUC only commented on directions it held were not adequately addressed, or that were contested by interveners.
Despite ATCO’s general compliance with the AUC’s directions, the AUC held that it was not persuaded that the updated 2012 capital addition amounts for the following projects, should be accepted at this time:
(a) Green Stocking Substation Project;
(b) Halkirk Wind Power Interconnection Project; and
(c) Enbridge Leismer Point of Delivery Project.
With respect to the Green Stocking Substation, the AUC determined that the addition to rate base from direct assigned projects would be no more than $45,718,997, subject to any additional information provided by ATCO in its compliance filing. ATCO submitted that the $45,718,997 figure shown in its reports at the time reflected categorization errors for contract labour and material costs that were later corrected. As part of its compliance filing, ATCO therefore requested that the AUC allow an addition of $50.5 million as the basis for the 2012 capital addition.
The AUC found that ATCO’s assertions were not supported by any information on the record that was not already available, and also failed to demonstrate that the full $50.5 million figure was incurred in 2012. The AUC therefore denied the requested increase to the 2012 capital addition.
The AUC also denied an increase to the 2012 capital addition amount for the Halkirk Wind Power Interconnection Project and for the Enbridge Leismer Point of Delivery Project on the same basis.
ATCO had requested an additional $0.4 million above the $20.6 million previously approved by the AUC for the Halkirk Wind Power Interconnection, and an additional $0.1 million above the $2.7 million approved by the AUC for the Enbridge Leismer Point of Delivery Project.
In Decision 2014-283, the AUC also directed ATCO to remove disallowed legal fees from its costs for Project 55585 – Northeast Loop. ATCO submitted that the total disallowed amount in its compliance filing was $558,000, and submitted that the remainder of the legal fees be approved by the AUC, as they were within the guidelines established in Decision 2014-283. In support of its refiling, ATCO provided redacted copies of invoices from Bennett Jones LLP, noting that the redactions were for confidential information, including rates and hours.
The Consumers’ Coalition of Alberta (“CCA”), argued that ATCO had included a total of $385,000 in legal costs that had not been previously approved by the AUC. The CCA argued that ATCO was effectively undertaking a review and variance application hidden within its compliance filing. The CCA requested that the AUC disallow these amounts and instruct ATCO to cease such practices. The CCA also requested that the unredacted invoices be placed on the record of the proceeding.
The AUC determined that ATCO’s submissions in redacting the documents were insufficient, as ATCO was required to file a motion with the AUC to seek confidential treatment of the information, which it failed to do. However, the AUC exercised its discretion to not order the production of the unredacted documents, since ATCO had provided the requisite information to keep the information confidential.
The AUC also disallowed the additional $385,000 in legal fees requested by ATCO, noting that its direction in Decision 2014-283 did not provide for the inclusion of any such amounts. Therefore the AUC directed ATCO to remove these legal fees in its second compliance filing.
With respect to deferral account reconciliations, ATCO provided an updated summary of the net refund to the AESO arising from the reconciliation of 2012 deferral accounts after taking into account ATCO’s proposed compliance with directions from Decision 2014-238, and the carrying costs for the current compliance filing. ATCO calculated the net refund amount to be approximately $31,291,000, assuming a settlement of the refund in June 2015.
The AUC accepted ATCO’s calculations. However, since the AUC as it had not accepted all of the components of the compliance filing, the AUC directed ATCO to refile its 2012 deferral account and filing for adjustments to reflect the findings in this decision prior to June 30, 2015. The AUC did note that ATCO should assume a decision to be issued in August 2015, since the contents of the second compliance filing would be non-contentious in nature.
