Decision Town of Millet. Franchise Agreement with FortisAlberta Inc. and Amendment to Municipal Franchise Fee Rider.
|
|
- Garey Carr
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Decision Franchise Agreement with FortisAlberta Inc. and June 19, 2013
2 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision : Franchise Agreement with FortisAlberta Inc. and Application No Proceeding ID No June 19, 2013 Published by The Alberta Utilities Commission Fifth Avenue Place, Fourth Floor, 425 First Street S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 3L8 Telephone: Fax: Website:
3 The Alberta Utilities Commission Calgary, Alberta Decision Franchise Agreement with FortisAlberta Inc. and Application No Proceeding ID No Introduction 1. On February 4, 2013, the Alberta Utilities Commission (the AUC or the Commission) received an application from the (Millet) and FortisAlberta Inc. (Fortis) requesting approval to renew their electric distribution franchise agreement (franchise agreement) for a period of 12 years with an option for an extension to 20 years. Fortis also applied for a decision approving an amendment to the Municipal Franchise Fee Rider which collects franchise fees from customers in Millet. The renewed franchise agreement is attached as Appendix 1 to this decision and is based on a standard agreement which was approved by the AUC in Decision The AUC published the notice of application on the AUC website on February 4, 2013, and in the Pipestone Flyer on February 15, If anyone had concerns or objections they were directed to file a submission with the AUC by March 4, The AUC received an objection from Mr. Vern Bretin on March 4, 2013 regarding the franchise application. 3. On March 14, 2013, the Commission sought the following additional information and clarification from Mr. Bretin regarding his objection: If you are objecting to the agreement, please describe how the Commission s decision on the franchise renewal may directly and adversely affect your rights. Further, if you are asking the Commission to do anything more than consider the proposed changes in your letter, please advise what other actions you would like the Commission to take. 4. The Commission received additional information and clarification regarding Mr. Bretin s objection from Mr. M. B. Niven, QC of Carscallen LLP on March 28, Mr. Niven stated that they were the solicitors for Array Energy Corp. (Array), a generator of solar energy in Alberta. Mr. Niven indicated that the renewal of the franchise agreement would impact Array s interests, specifically, he stated that certain language in the franchise agreement was not favorable to Array s proposal to provide solar generation to Millet. 5. By letter dated April 17, 2013, the Commission established a process schedule that included additional or supplementing submissions from Array, followed by a reply submission from Fortis on behalf of itself and Millet. On May 3, 2013, Mr. Niven, on behalf of Mr. Bretin and Array filed a copy of Array s proposal to Millet to provide a solar generation system for the town. Fortis replied to Array s submissions on May 10, On May 16, 2013, Mr. Bretin filed with the Commission a letter to the editor of the Daily Freeman newspaper relating to Fortis 1 Decision : Millet of Hinton New Franchise Agreement Template and Franchise Agreement with FortisAlberta Inc., Application No , Proceeding ID No. 1946, September 28,
4 business in New York state. Mr. Bretin did not explain how the contents of the letter related to his concerns about the franchise agreement. 6. In reaching the determinations set out within this decision, The Commission has considered all relevant materials comprising the record of this proceeding.. Accordingly, references in this decision to specific parts of the record are intended to assist the reader in understanding the Commission s reasoning in relation to a particular matter and should not be taken as an indication that the Commission did not consider all relevant portions of the record with respect to this matter. 7. The Commission considers that the record for this application closed on May 10, Positions of the parties 8. Mr. Bretin and Array argued that if the franchise agreement was renewed for 12 years with the possibility of an extension to 20 years, this would directly and adversely affect Array s ability to pursue its proposal to provide solar generation to Millet. In addition they submitted that Millet would be deprived of the opportunity to purchase generation at a reduced price from the solar generation facility proposed by Array. 9. Specifically, Mr. Bretin and Array argued that the language and restrictions contained in sections 4, 5, 11 and 17 of the standard franchise agreement were not favorable to the distribution of renewable energy through the infrastructure of Fortis. The Commission has included excerpts from the franchise agreement with the positions of the parties in the sections that follow. 2.1 Section 4 grant of franchise 4) GRANT OF FRANCHISE a) Subject to subparagraph b) below, and to the terms and conditions hereof, the Municipality hereby grants to the Company the exclusive right within the Municipal Service Area: i) to provide Electric Distribution Service; ii) iii) to Construct, Operate, and Maintain the electric distribution system, as defined in the EUA, within the Municipal Service Area; and to use designated portions of roads, rights-of-way, and other lands owned, controlled or managed by the Municipality necessary to provide Electric Distribution Service or to Construct, Operate and Maintain the Distribution System, including the necessary removal, trimming of trees, shrubs or bushes or any parts thereof. This grant shall not preclude the Municipality from providing wire services to municipally owned facilities where standalone generation is provided on site or immediately adjacent sites excepting road allowances. Such services are to be provided by the Municipality directly and not by any other third party wire services provider. 2
5 Subject to Article 12 of this Agreement, in the event that a third party (including a Rural Electrification Association (REA)) owns, operates or controls any electrical distribution facilities or lighting within the Municipal Service Area at any time during the Term of this Agreement, the Municipality agrees that it will support the Company s efforts, as is reasonable, to purchase such electrical distribution facilities or, to the extent that it has the authority to do so, the Municipality shall otherwise require such third party to sell such facilities to the Company. Where the Municipality supports the Company s efforts to purchase such electrical distribution facilities or, to the extent that it has the authority to do so, otherwise requires a third party to sell its facilities to the Company, the Company shall be responsible for all reasonable fees, costs and disbursements of external legal counsel incurred by the Municipality in expending such good faith efforts. 10. Mr. Bretin and Array argued that this section would preclude Array from providing wire service generation to municipal facilities due to the narrow wording of where such generation can be situated. As solar generation requires certain topographical conditions, providing such generation on site or immediately adjacent is not always practical. 11. Fortis indicated that Section 24(1) of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act, RSA 2000, c. H-16, restricts the ability to distribute electric energy in the Province of Alberta. Further Array cannot use Fortis electric distribution facilities or bypass the distribution tariff for its project as described in its proposal 12. Fortis noted that sections 101(1) and 101(3) of the Electric Utilities Act, SA 2003, c. E-51, state: 101(1) A person wishing to obtain electricity for use on property must make arrangements for the purchase of electric distribution service from the owner of the electric distribution system in whose service area the property is located. (3) No person other than the owner of an electric distribution system may provide electric distribution service on the electric distribution system of that owner. 13. Fortis considered that Array s proposed business arrangement may not comply with the laws of Alberta. 14. Additionally, in accordance with the Electric Utilities Act, a distribution generator (DG) customer that wishes to generate and export into the Alberta Interconnected Electric System would be required to interconnect with Fortis distribution system as per Article 12 of Fortis customer terms and conditions of electric distribution service, as approved by the Commission. Also, a DG customer must sell and buy electricity through the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), which would require the generator of energy to become a market participant of the Alberta Power Pool and abide by the market rules as set by the AESO. 3
6 2.2 Section 5 franchise fee 5) FRANCHISE FEE.. e) Payment of Franchise Fee The Company shall pay the franchise fee amount, billed to each Consumer, to the Municipality on a monthly basis, within forty-five (45) days after billing each retailer. 15. Mr. Bretin and Array argued that Section 5 failed to provide a mechanism for the transfer of any part of the franchise fee to generators providing renewal energy to Millet which, would remove any economic incentive to Array to construct and operate a solar facility. 16. Fortis stated that the franchise fee is determined and managed by the municipality and not by Fortis. Fortis submitted that the municipality has this right through the Municipal Government Act, RSA 2000, c. M-26, and Fortis has no part in directing how those funds are used. Fortis noted in this respect that, Section 61(2) of the Municipal Government Act states that A municipality may charge fees, tolls and charges for the use of its property, including property under the direction, control and management of the municipality. 2.3 Section 11 street lighting 11) STREET LIGHTING a) Investment Option Rate The Company agrees to provide and maintain an investment option rate for street lighting within the Municipal Service Area to the level of service and standards specified in the appropriate rate for investment option street lighting. This Commission approved rate includes an allowance for the replacement of street lighting. The Company will provide Company standard and non-standard street lighting under the investment option rate for street lighting. The Company will maintain an inventory of its standard street lighting as listed in its street lighting catalogue. The Company will use reasonable commercial efforts, based on prudent electrical utility practices, to carry stock of such inventory for a reasonable period of time. 17. Mr. Bretin and Array submitted that Section 11 of the franchise agreement fails to account for new energy saving technology insofar as Millet is required to operate street-lighting contained in Fortis street lighting catalogue. They submitted that the process for requesting nonconventional street lighting is arduous and the wording of the section provides unfettered discretion to Fortis to refuse to install any street lighting systems that do not conform to Fortis minimum specifications. Mr. Bretin and Array observed that novel energy-savings technology may not necessarily meet Fortis s specifications. Mr. Bretin and Array considered that this section created an inflexibility that unduly restrains the adoption of novel energy saving technology. 18. Fortis stated that it offers energy-saving options for streetlights and recently has been offering LED technology for streetlights. It noted that there is an agreement in place if the 4
7 municipality wants to proceed with the installation of streetlights not offered through FortisAlberta s street lighting catalogue. 2.4 Section 17 joint use of distribution system. b) Third Party Use and Notice The Company agrees that should any third party, including other utilities, desire to jointly use the Company s poles, conduits or trenches or related parts of the Distribution System, the Company shall not grant the third party joint use except in accordance with this Article, unless otherwise directed by any governmental authority or court of law having jurisdiction. The Company agrees that the following procedure shall be used in granting permission to third parties desiring joint use of the Distribution System: i) first, the third party shall be directed to approach the Company to initially request conditional approval from the Company to use that part of the Distribution System it seeks to use; ii) iii) second, upon receiving written conditional approval from the Company, the third party shall be directed to approach the Municipality to obtain its written approval to jointly use that part of the Distribution System on any Municipal Property or right-of-way; and third, upon receiving written conditional approval from the Municipality, the third party shall be directed to obtain final written approval from the Company to jointly use that part of the Distribution System. Providing the Company has not precluded the Municipality s ability to obtain compensation or has entered restrictive agreements with any third parties using any Municipal Property, the Municipality agrees that the procedure outlined above shall apply only to agreements made after January 1, Mr. Bretin and Array submitted that Section 17 of the franchise agreement was unduly restrictive and grants Fortis unfettered discretion to simply reject third-party usage of the distribution system through an arduous approval process that favours Fortis interests rather than the municipality and potential third parties interests. They argued that the language of this section should be expanded to ensure that some measure of transparency is injected into their approval process in addition to allowing some recourse to an adjudicative body to determine the reasonableness of Fortis decision to allow or disallow third-party usage of its distribution system. 20. Fortis argued that the agreement as filed did not provide any barrier to Array for generation sale and distribution of its proposed energy. Rather, it is consistent with the electricity legislative framework and market within Alberta. Array s proposal is inconsistent with the laws of Alberta and its claims are thus entirely without merit. 5
8 21. Fortis submitted that the submissions of Mr. Bretin and Array incorrectly interpret the language found in the franchise agreement and concluded that the approval of that agreement would not have any bearing on Array s business proposal to Millet. 3 Commission findings 22. Section 45 of the Municipal Government Act requires that municipalities receive Commission approval prior to entering into, renewing or amending an individual electric franchise agreement with a person to provide a utility service in the municipality. In granting approval, the Commission must determine whether the proposed agreement is necessary and proper for the public convenience, and properly serves the public interest, as set out in Section 139 of the Electric Utilities Act. 23. The Commission has considered the objections of Mr. Bretin and Array in light of its obligations under Section 139 of the Electric Utilities Act and, for the reasons that follow, has decided to dismiss their objections and approve the franchise agreement. 3.1 The objections of Mr. Bretin and Array 24. As the Commission understands it, Array and Mr. Bretin propose to generate electric energy through a new solar facility and then sell that electric energy directly to the Town of Millet using the distribution facilities owned by Fortis, with any excess electricity being sold to the Alberta grid Mr. Bretin and Array summarized their concerns about the franchise agreement by concluding that its approval would bind the municipality to traditional generation for up to 20 years. Having reviewed their submissions, the Commission understands that Mr. Bretin and Array s primary concern with the franchise agreement is that if approved, it would prevent them from pursuing their proposal with Millet because the terms of that agreement, specifically sections 4(a), 17 are unduly restrictive and/or provide Fortis with too much discretion. They also expressed concern that Section 5 of the franchise agreement provides no mechanism for Millet to transfer any part of the franchise fee to generators. Mr. Bretin and Array are also concerned that the franchise agreement may preclude the use of energy saving street lighting because of the restrictive language used in Section 11 of the franchise agreement. 26. The Commission finds that Mr. Bretin and Array s objections relating to sections 4(a), 5 and 17 of the franchise agreement and the impacts of those sections on their business proposal must be dismissed because that proposal appears to be inconsistent with the laws of Alberta relating to the generation, sale and distribution of electric energy. Specifically, if the proposal was implemented in the manner described by Mr. Bretin and Array, it is the Commission s view it would likely contravene Section 24 of the Hydro and Electric Energy Act and sections 18 and 101 of the Electric Utilities Act. 27. The Commission also finds that approval of the franchise agreement will not impair the development of renewable energy generation of the type described in Array s proposal to Millet. The laws of Alberta allow parties such as Array to seek approval for the construction and operation of power plants including solar power plants. Those laws allow Array to seek approval 2 Exhibit
9 to interconnect a power plant to the Alberta interconnected electric system and to exchange the electricity generated by the power plant through the power pool. Further, under the laws of Alberta, Array can enter into an energy price arrangement with Millet for electricity generated by its proposed facility. Accordingly, the Commission does not accept that approval of the proposed franchise agreement would preclude Array from pursuing its proposed project as long as it was developed and implemented in accordance with the laws of Alberta. 28. Having regard to Mr. Bretin s and Array s concerns about Section 11 of the franchise agreement, the Commission finds that this section provides sufficient flexibility for the future use of energy saving technology for street lights. The Commission notes in this respect Fortis May 10, 2013, letter in which it confirmed the availability of energy saving street light options, including LED technology. 29. Based on these findings, the Commission is of the view that the franchise agreement between Millet and Fortis does not impact Array s rights or abilities to establish a solar generation facility. On this basis, the Commission dismisses Array s objections, However should Array establish itself as a retailer to provide electricity from solar generation, Millet would be free to enter into any contractual relationship for supply of energy from Array, so long as Array abides by market rules facilitated through the power pool. 3.2 Franchise agreement 30. The municipality determines the level of the franchise fee, which is the consideration paid by the utility for the exclusive right to provide electric service to customers within the municipality. The municipality may also collect linear property taxes from the utility. Franchise fees and linear property taxes are a cost of Fortis doing business in the municipality, and these costs are recovered from electricity customers in the municipality. 31. The Commission observes that Millet completed second reading of Bylaw No , which authorized it to execute a new franchise agreement with Fortis to provide distribution service within Millet. 32. In the franchise agreement, Millet proposed to increase the franchise fee to per cent from per cent of the delivery revenue received by Fortis. In addition to the collection of the franchise fee, Millet has also opted to continue the receipt of linear property taxes from Fortis. With the franchise fee and linear property taxes combined, the monthly cost for an average residential customer is forecast to increase by $0.88 to $5.87 from $ The term of the franchise agreement is 12 years, for a potential maximum term of 20 years. In accordance with Section 45 of the Municipal Government Act, a council may grant exclusive right to provide a utility service in all or part of the municipality with a term not exceeding 20 years. The Commission finds that the term of this agreement is in accordance with the legislated time frame. 34. The franchise fee can be changed once annually at the sole discretion of Millet to a maximum of 20 per cent in accordance with articles 5(b) and 5(c) of the franchise agreement. The Commission agrees with these provisions, which were approved in the standard agreement in Decision
10 35. Having regard to the foregoing, pursuant to Section 45 of the Municipal Government Act, Section 106 of the Public Utilities Act, RSA 2000 and Section 139 of the Electric Utilities Act, the Commission approves the franchise agreement and finds the right granted by Millet to Fortis to be necessary and proper for the public convenience and properly serves the public interest. 36. The Commission also approves the continued collection of linear property taxes as part of the franchise agreement pursuant to Section 353 of the Municipal Government Act. The linear property tax rate for Millet is 1.41 per cent. 3.3 Riders 37. Franchise fees and linear property taxes are collected through Fortis Municipal Franchise Fee Rider and Rider A-1 respectively. Fortis submitted a Municipal Franchise Fee Rider schedule showing a new franchise fee of per cent effective January 1, 2014, attached as Appendix 2 to this decision. 38. The linear property tax rate for Millet changes on an annual basis. The linear property tax rate of 1.41 per cent was acknowledged by Commission letter dated April 23, 2013, in Application No In accordance with Section 125 of the Electric Utilities Act, and based on the approval of the franchise agreement in this decision, the Commission approves Fortis Municipal Franchise Fee Rider and finds the amounts to be just and reasonable. 4 Order 40. It is hereby ordered that: (i) (ii) (iii) A copy of Bylaw No shall be filed with the AUC after third reading along with a copy of the executed franchise agreement with a commencement date of January 1, The new franchise fee for Millet as indicated on the Municipal Franchise Fee Rider schedule attached as Appendix 2 to this decision becomes effective after the execution of the franchise agreement, but not before January 1, Any changes in the level of the franchise fee pursuant to the provisions in Article 5(b) of the franchise agreement are required to be filed with the AUC for acknowledgement on or before the date that the rate comes into effect, including an updated Municipal Franchise Fee Rider schedule. 8
11 (iv) Prior to implementing any change in the franchise fee, customers shall be notified of the change in the franchise fee through the publication of a notice in the newspaper having the widest circulation in Millet at least 45 days prior to the implementation of the revised franchise fee. A copy of the notice shall be filed with the AUC. Dated on June 19, The Alberta Utilities Commission (original signed by) Neil Jamieson Commission Member 9
12
13 Appendix 1 franchise agreement with FortisAlberta Inc. (return to text) Appendix 1 - Franchise agreement (consists of 37 pages 11
14 Appendix 2 Municipal Franchise Fee Rider with respect to the (return to text) Appendix 2 - Municipal Franchise Fe (consists of 3 pages) 12
15 Page 1 of 37
16 Page 2 of 37
17 Page 3 of 37
18 Page 4 of 37
19 Page 5 of 37
20 Page 6 of 37
21 Page 7 of 37
22 Page 8 of 37
23 Page 9 of 37
24 Page 10 of 37
25 Page 11 of 37
26 Page 12 of 37
27 Page 13 of 37
28 Page 14 of 37
29 Page 15 of 37
30 Page 16 of 37
31 Page 17 of 37
32 Page 18 of 37
33 Page 19 of 37
34 Page 20 of 37
35 Page 21 of 37
36 Page 22 of 37
37 Page 23 of 37
38 Page 24 of 37
39 Page 25 of 37
40 Page 26 of 37
41 Page 27 of 37
42 Page 28 of 37
43 Page 29 of 37
44 Page 30 of 37
45 Page 31 of 37
46 Page 32 of 37
47 Page 33 of 37
48 Page 34 of 37
49 Page 35 of 37
50 Page 36 of 37
51 Page 37 of 37
52 Appendix 2 - Municipal Franchise Fee Rider Page 1 of 3 FortisAlberta Inc DT Rates Filing Rider Schedules Page 1 MUNICIPAL FRANCHISE FEE RIDERS Availability Price Adjustment Effective for all consumption, estimated or actual, on and after the first of the month following Commission approval, the following franchise fee riders apply to all FortisAlberta distribution tariffs, except riders and rebates, in each municipality. A percentage surcharge per the table below will be added to the gross distribution tariff, excluding any riders or charges that relate to pool price deferral account amounts, calculated for each site within each municipality and will be billed to the applicable retailer. FortisAlberta will pay to each municipality each month, in accordance with the franchise agreements between FortisAlberta and the municipalities, the franchise fee revenue collected from the retailers. Municipal Franchise Fee Riders Municipality Percentage Surcharge Effective Acme 3% 2002/02/01 Airdrie 10% 2013/01/01 Alix 17% 2011/01/01 Amisk 0% 2002/11/01 Athabasca 6% 2013/01/01 Barnwell 0% 2002/03/01 Banff 4% 2012/01/01 Barons 0% 2002/03/01 Barrhead 5% 2003/02/01 Bashaw 3% 2011/01/01 Bassano 11.4% 2013/01/01 Bawlf *pending 3% 2013/04/01 Beaumont 5% 2009/01/01 Beiseker 0% 2002/04/01 Bentley 10% 2013/01/01 Bittern Lake 5% 2003/05/01 Black Diamond 10% 2007/01/01 Blackfalds 20% 2010/03/01 Bon Accord 20% 2010/07/01 Bow Island 7% 2013/01/01 Bowden 12.55% 2007/01/01 Boyle 3% 2002/08/01 Breton 20% 2012/01/01 Brooks 12.63% 2004/01/01 Bruderheim 0% 2004/02/01 Municipality Percentage Surcharge Effective Calmar 20% 2007/01/01 Camrose 6% 2012/01/01 Canmore 8% 2005/02/01 Carmangay 0% 2002/02/01 Caroline 3% 2003/02/01 Carstairs 5% 2008/01/01 Champion 15% 2011/03/01 Chauvin 9% 2013/01/01 Chestermere 0% 2006/06/01 Chipman 0% 2007/03/01 Claresholm 2% 2003/02/01 Clive 9% 2012/01/01 Clyde 11% 2013/01/01 Coaldale 9% 2008/01/01 Coalhurst 7% 2004/01/01 Cochrane 15% 2006/01/01 Coutts 3% 2004/01/01 Cowley 5% 2011/01/01 Cremona 10% 2009/01/01 Crossfield 0% 2002/04/01 Crowsnest Pass 14% 2012/01/01 Czar 5% 2003/07/01 Daysland 5% 2008/01/01 Devon 13% 2013/01/01 Didsbury 12.5% 2012/01/01
53 Appendix 2 - Municipal Franchise Fee Rider Page 2 of 3 FortisAlberta Inc DT Rates Filing Rider Schedules MUNICIPAL FRANCHISE FEE RIDERS Municipality Percentage Surcharge Effective Drayton Valley 8% 2008/03/01 Duchess 12% 2010/01/01 Eckville 10% 2004/01/01 Edberg 6% 2010/01/01 Edgerton 12% 2012/01/01 Edson 5% 2006/01/01 Ferintosh 6% 2009/01/01 Foremost 3% 2014/01/01 Fort Saskatchewan 0% 2003/06/01 Gibbons 10% 2013/01/01 Glenwood 0% 2002/04/01 Granum 5.5% 2013/01/01 Hardisty 5% 2011/01/01 Hay Lakes 5% 2007/08/01 High River 20% 2005/10/01 Hill Spring 0% 2002/05/01 Hinton 10.7% 2012/01/01 Holden 3.5% 2008/01/01 Hughenden 0% 2002/12/01 Hussar 3% 2003/05/01 Innisfail 8% 2013/01/01 Irma 7% 2013/01/01 Irricana 0% 2002/01/01 Island Lake 0% 2006/05/01 Killam 6% 2013/01/01 Lacombe 6.2% 2004/01/01 Lamont 5% 2002/09/01 Leduc 16% 2004/07/01 Legal 0% 2002/10/01 Lomond 0% 2002/05/01 Longview 15% 2008/01/01 Lougheed 5% 2011/01/01 Magrath 8% 2010/01/01 Mayerthorpe 4% 2004/01/01 Page 2 Effective: the first of the month following Commission approval for consumption from the first of the month following Commission approval Municipality Percentage Surcharge Effective Milk River 10% 2013/01/01 Millet 12% 2014/01/01 Milo 10% 2010/04/01 Morinville 20% 2006/01/01 Nakamun Park 0% 2003/03/01 Nanton 5% 2013/01/01 New Norway 6% 2009/01/01 Nobleford 0% 2004/11/01 Okotoks 8.5% 2013/01/01 Olds 8.59% 2011/01/01 Onoway 7.5% 2013/01/01 Penhold 19% 2006/01/01 Picture Butte 8% 2009/01/01 Pincher Creek 8% 2009/01/01 Provost 20% 2012/01/01 Raymond 6% 2005/01/01 Redwater 0% 2003/05/01 Rimbey 7% 2004/01/01 Rocky Mtn House 7.5% 2013/01/01 Rosemary 6% 2011/01/01 Ryley 0% 2004/01/01 Seba Beach 0% 2003/07/01 Sedgewick 6% 2012/01/01 Silver Sands 3% 2008/02/01 South Baptiste 0% 2005/05/01 South View 0% 2008/02/01 Spruce Grove 14.25% 2006/01/01 St. Albert 0% 2002/05/01 Standard 0% 2002/12/01 Stavely 3% 2003/02/01 Stirling 5% 2008/01/01 Stony Plain 20% 2013/01/01 Strathmore 10% 2013/01/01 Strome 8% 2003/04/01 FortisAlberta s Retailer Terms and Conditions of Distribution Tariff Services provide for other charges, including an arrears charge of 1.5% per month.
54 Appendix 2 - Municipal Franchise Fee Rider Page 3 of 3 FortisAlberta Inc DT Rates Filing Rider Schedules MUNICIPAL FRANCHISE FEE RIDERS Municipality Percentage Surcharge Effective Sundre 5% 2013/01/01 Sunrise Beach 0% 2008/08/01 Sunset Point 0% 2003/03/01 Sylvan Lake 10% 2004/01/01 Taber 20% 2004/01/01 Thorsby 10% 2010/01/01 Tilley 7.5% 2011/01/01 Tofield 5% 2002/10/01 Turner Valley 10% 2009/01/01 Vauxhall 0% 2004/09/04 Page 3 Effective: the first of the month following Commission approval for consumption from the first of the month following Commission approval Municipality Percentage Surcharge Effective Vulcan 20% 2011/01/01 Viking 8% 2013/01/01 Wabamun 0% 2002/10/01 Wainwright 3% 2002/04/01 Warburg 10% 2009/01/01 Warner 0% 2002/04/01 Westlock 12% 2013/01/01 Wetaskiwin 10% 2009/01/01 Whitecourt 3.5% 2013/01/01 FortisAlberta s Retailer Terms and Conditions of Distribution Tariff Services provide for other charges, including an arrears charge of 1.5% per month.
FortisAlberta Inc. Municipal Franchise Fee Amendment for 12 Municipalities January 1, 2018 Proceeding 23152
November 30, 2017 Disposition 23152-D01-2017 320 17 Ave. S.W. Calgary, Alta. T2S 2V1 Attention: Mr. Miles Stroh Director of Regulatory cipal Franchise Fee Amendment for 12 cipalities January 1, 2018 Proceeding
More informationFortisAlberta Inc. Municipal Franchise Fee Amendments for Two Municipalities - July 1, 2018 Proceeding 23583
May 28, 2018 Disposition 23583-D01-2018 Miles Stroh Director, Regulatory 320 17 Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alta. T2S 2V1 Dear Mr. Stroh: cipal Franchise Fee Amendments for Two cipalities - July 1, 2018 Proceeding
More informationDecision Town of Innisfail. Franchise Agreement with ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd. and Amendment to Rider A.
Decision 2012-300 Franchise Agreement with ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd. and Amendment to Rider A November 9, 2012 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 2012-300: Franchise Agreement with ATCO Gas and
More information2018/2019 Maximum Municipal Library Board Operating Grants
Acadia No. 34, M.D. of $ 6,660 Acme $ 8,503 Airdrie $ 343,223 Alberta Beach $ 8,503 Alix $ 8,503 Alliance $ 6,660 Amisk $ 6,660 Andrew $ 6,660 Arrowwood $ 6,660 Athabasca $ 16,650 Athabasca County $ 42,524
More informationPublic Library Statistics 2005
Public Library Statistics 2005 Prepared by Alberta Municipal Affairs and Housing Public Library Services Libraries, Community and Voluntary Services Branch 803 Standard Life Centre 10405 Jasper Avenue
More information2018 Education Property Tax Requisition
City City of Airdrie $21,967,649 $23,028,294 5% $5,890,528 $6,272,086 6% $27,858,177 $29,300,379 5% City of Brooks $2,700,638 $2,700,447 0% $1,299,341 $1,322,633 2% $3,999,979 $4,023,080 1% City of Calgary
More information2017 Education Property Tax Requisition
City City of Airdrie $20,164,602 $21,967,649 9% $5,520,036 $5,890,528 7% $25,684,638 $27,858,177 8% City of Brooks $2,641,422 $2,700,638 2% $1,308,806 $1,299,341-1% $3,950,228 $3,999,979 1% City of Calgary
More informationATCO GAS AND PIPELINES LTD. ATCO GAS NORTH RATE SCHEDULES. January 1, 2019
Page 1 of 13 ATCO GAS AND PIPELINES LTD. ATCO GAS NORTH RATE SCHEDULES January 1, 2019 Page 2 of 13 January 1, 2019 Conditions RATE SCHEDULES INDEX General Conditions... 3 Riders Rider "A" Municipal Franchise
More informationDecision ATCO Gas North. Amendment to Rider B with respect to the Hamlet of Entwistle. December 24, 2009
Decision 2009-286 ATCO Gas North Amendment to Rider B with respect to the Hamlet of Entwistle December 24, 2009 ALBERTA UTILITIES COMMISSION Decision 2009-286: ATCO Gas North Amendment to Rider B with
More informationOLDMAN RIVER REGIONAL SERVICES COMMISSION REGULATION
Province of Alberta MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT OLDMAN RIVER REGIONAL SERVICES COMMISSION REGULATION Alberta Regulation 303/2003 With amendments up to and including Alberta Regulation 63/2014 Office Consolidation
More informationResearch November 2014
Research November 2014 Alberta Municipal Spending Report, 2014 5th Edition: Trends in Spending, Zack Moline, Public Policy and Entrepreneurship Intern Municipal spending in Alberta has increased at an
More informationCANADA-ALBERTA AGREEMENT ON THE TRANSFER OF FEDERAL GAS TAX REVENUES UNDER THE NEW DEAL FOR CITIES AND COMMUNITIES
CANADA-ALBERTA AGREEMENT ON THE TRANSFER OF FEDERAL GAS TAX REVENUES UNDER THE NEW DEAL FOR CITIES AND COMMUNITIES 2005 2015 This Agreement made as of May 14, 2005 BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY IN RIGHT OF CANADA,
More informationResearch October 2017
Research October 2017 Alberta Municipal Watch Report 8th Edition: Trends in, Gavin Kaisaris, Policy Analyst Andrew Sennyah, Public Policy and Entrepreneurship Intern From 2005 to 2015, operating spending
More informationEntrepreneurs Deserve Property Tax Fairness
Research September 2017 Entrepreneurs Deserve Property Tax Fairness Andrew Yule, Public Policy and Entrepreneurship Intern Gavin Kaisaris, Policy Analyst The Canadian Federation of Independent Business
More informationDecision D FortisAlberta Inc.
Decision 23063-D01-2018 Light-Emitting Diode Lighting Conversion Maintenance Multiplier Filing January 30, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23063-D01-2018 Light-Emitting Diode Lighting Conversion
More informationRule 029: Applications for Municipal Franchise Agreements and Associated Franchise Fee Rate Riders. 2
February 28, 2019 Disposition 24366-D01-2019 AltaGas Utilities Inc. 5509 45 St. Leduc, Alta. T9E 6T6 Attention: Mr. Irv Richelhoff Supervisor, Business Development AltaGas Utilities Inc. and Summer the
More information4. The proposed franchise fee of 25 per cent, as shown on Rate Rider A schedule, attached as Appendix 2, maintains the current franchise fee.
August 18, 2015 Disposition 20730-D01-2015 AltaGas Utilities Inc. 5509-45 Street Leduc, Alberta T9E 6T6 Attention: Mr. Irv Richelhoff AltaGas Utilities Inc. and the Franchise Agreement and Rate Rider A
More informationHow the Current Slowdown is Affecting Alberta s Municipalities September Update
ECONOMIC COMMENTARY How the Current Slowdown is Affecting Alberta s Municipalities September Update Highlights: The current economic recession has resulted in rapidly rising unemployment and a surge in
More informationApproved Operating and Capital Budget January 2, 2007
BUDGET 2007 Approved Operating and Capital Budget January 2, 2007 Budget and Business Plans Council approved policy in August of 2003 requiring that administration prepare three-year business plans as
More informationLangdon Waterworks Limited
Decision 20372-D01-2015 May 14, 2015 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 20372-D01-2015 Proceeding 20372 May 14, 2015 Published by the: Alberta Utilities Commission Fifth Avenue Place, Fourth Floor,
More informationGenerated for: COCHRANE. Financial Indicator Graphs
Generated for: 215 Financial Indicator Graphs Introduction The financial indicator graphs are intended to serve as a tool that may assist council and administration with operational decisions. The comparative
More informationSchedule A Respondents. Capital Region Southwest. Cardston County. Chinook's Edge School Division No. 73
Schedule A Respondents Alberta Beach Alberta Capital Region Wastewater Commission Alberta Municipal Health and Safety Association Alberta Recreation & Parks Association Alberta School Boards Association
More informationDecision D FortisAlberta Inc. Light-Emitting Diode Lighting Conversion Maintenance Multiplier for the City of St.
Decision 21754-D01-2016 Light-Emitting Diode Lighting Conversion Maintenance Multiplier for the City of St. Albert August 11, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21754-D01-2016 Light-Emitting Diode
More informationGenerated for: ROCKY MOUNTAIN HOUSE
Generated for: Introduction The financial indicator graphs are intended to serve as a tool that may assist council and administration with operational decisions. The comparative measures may be useful
More informationDecision D FortisAlberta Inc. Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Lighting Conversion Maintenance Multiplier Filing for 30 Customers in 2018
Decision 23730-D01-2018 Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Lighting Conversion Maintenance Multiplier Filing for 30 Customers in 2018 September 7, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23730-D01-2018 Light-Emitting
More informationGenerated for: OKOTOKS. Financial Indicator Graphs
Generated for: 2015 Financial Indicator Graphs Introduction The financial indicator graphs are intended to serve as a tool that may assist council and administration with operational decisions. The comparative
More informationENMAX Power Corporation
Decision 22756-D01-2017 Tax Agreement with The City of Calgary September 7, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22756-D01-2017 Tax Agreement with The City of Calgary Proceeding 22756 September 7,
More informationGovernance Department
Governance Department 1 P a g e Service Area: Governance 2018 2021 Governance Roll-up 2018 2018 2019 2019 2020 2021 2017 Approved Q2 Approved Proposed Proposed Proposed Actual Budget Forecast Budget Budget
More informationDecision CU Water Limited. Disposition of Assets. April 30, 2010
Decision 2010-192 Disposition of Assets April 30, 2010 ALBERTA UTILITIES COMMISSION Decision 2010-192: Disposition of Assets Application No. 1606042 Proceeding ID. 569 April 30, 2010 Published by Alberta
More informationFamily and Community Support Services Association of Alberta 2015 ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS
FCSSAA ANNUAL REPORT 2015 Annual Report 2015 1 Family and Community Support Services Association of Alberta 2015 ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 FCSS ASSOCIATION Message from the President...
More informationResearch September 2015
Research September 2015 Alberta Municipal Spending Report, 2015 6th Edition: Trends in Spending, 2003-2013 Ashley Stedman, Public Policy and Entrepreneurship Intern Municipal spending in Alberta has increased
More informationAlberta Electric System Operator
Decision 23065-D01-2017 Alberta Electric System Operator 2018 Independent System Operator Tariff Update November 28, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23065-D01-2017 Alberta Electric System Operator
More informationTown of Drayton Valley
Town of Drayton Valley Water and Sewer Rate Review: Public Presentation March 13 th, 2017 Agenda Introduction Water Current Water Rates & Issues Updated Rate Strategy Customer Impacts Sewer Current Sewer
More informationFinancial Indicator Graphs for the Year Ended December 31, 2009
Financial Indicator Graphs for the Year Ended December 31, 29 Prepared by Financial Advisory Services Local Government Services Division Municipal Affairs 1 29 Financial Indicator Graphs The financial
More informationAlberta Utilities Commission
Decision 22091-D01-2017 Commission-Initiated Proceeding to Review the Terms and November 9, 2017 Decision 22091-D01-2017 Commission-Initiated Proceeding to Review the Terms and Proceeding 22091 Application
More informationAlberta Electric System Operator, AltaLink Management Ltd. and ENMAX Power Corporation. Foothills Area Transmission Development
Decision 2013-087 Alberta Electric System Operator, AltaLink Management Ltd. and ENMAX Power Corporation Foothills Area Transmission Development March 12, 2013 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision
More informationFinancial Indicator Graphs for the Year Ended December 31, Prepared by Financial Advisory Services Local Government Services Division
Financial Indicator Graphs for the Year Ended December 31, 28 Prepared by Financial Advisory Services Local Government Services Division 1 Introduction The financial indicator graphs have been prepared
More informationDecision D ATCO Electric Ltd. Amounts to be Paid Into and Out of Balancing Pool for Chinchaga Power Plant Sale
Decision 21833-D01-2016 Amounts to be Paid Into and Out of Balancing Pool for Chinchaga Power Plant Sale December 20, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21833-D01-2016 Proceeding 21833 December
More informationASSIGNED PIPELINE, TERMINAL, AND CLEANING PLANT CODES. Pipeline Terminal Legal Pipeline Code Code Description
Alberta Diluent Terminal ABTM0131560 11-05-053-23W4 Altex New Lashburn Terminal SKTM0013727 05-18-048-25W3 Apache Amigo Pipeline ABPL0000085 Bodo Pipeline ABPL0000019 Pengrowth Bodo Terminal ABTM0123408
More informationExtractive Sector Transparency Measures Act Report
Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act Report Reporting Year From: 01/01/2016 To: 12/31/2016 Reporting Entity Name Harvest Operations Corp. Reporting Entity ESTMA Identification Number E954157 Subsidiary
More informationBUDGET. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT business attraction business support small business and entrepreneur programs
BUDGET ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT business attraction business support small business and entrepreneur programs A thriving and vibrant community relies on a strong economic base to support the many services
More informationWest Wetaskiwin Rural Electrification Association Ltd.
Decision 22067-D01-2016 West Wetaskiwin Rural Electrification Association Ltd. Varied Code of Conduct Regulation Compliance Plan December 21, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22067-D01-2016 West
More informationDecision D Rebasing for the PBR Plans for Alberta Electric and Gas Distribution Utilities. First Compliance Proceeding
Decision 22394-D01-2018 Rebasing for the 2018-2022 PBR Plans for February 5, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22394-D01-2018 Rebasing for the 2018-2022 PBR Plans for Proceeding 22394 February
More informationThe Crown volumes at the following pipelines, terminals and custom treaters will now be managed by Shell Trading Canada:
300, 801-6 Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2P3W2 Canada Telephone: 403-297-5470 Fax: 403-297-5443 Email: Brendan.gray@gov.ab.ca April 9, 2018 TO: ALL BATTERY OPERATORS The Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission
More informationDecision D FortisAlberta Inc Performance-Based Regulation Capital Tracker True-Up. January 11, 2018
Decision 22741-D01-2018 FortisAlberta Inc. 2016 Performance-Based Regulation Capital Tracker True-Up January 11, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22741-D01-2018 FortisAlberta Inc. 2016 Performance-Based
More informationLangdon Waterworks Limited
Decision 2014-240 August 19, 2014 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 2014-240: Application No. 1610617 Proceeding No. 3258 August 19, 2014 Published by The Alberta Utilities Commission Fifth Avenue
More informationAltaLink Management Ltd.
Decision 21368-D01-2016 Advance Funding Request from the Cooking Lake Opposition Group Advance Funding Award March 14, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21368-D01-2016: Advance Funding Request
More informationAcciona Wind Energy Canada, Inc.
Decision 2013-439 Acciona Wind Energy Canada, Inc. New Dayton Wind Power Project Facility & Substation Costs Award December 11, 2013 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 2013-439: Acciona Wind Energy
More informationSHELL TRADING CANADA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SCHEDULING THE FOLLOWING PIPELINES
CROWN S AGENT PIPELINE ALLOCATION LIST EFFECTIVE PRODUCTION MONTH MAY 2018 UPDATED APRIL 9, 2018 SHELL TRADING CANADA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SCHEDULING THE FOLLOWING PIPELINES Bellshill Blending Terminal ABTM0080756
More informationAltaLink Investment Management Ltd. And SNC Lavalin Transmission Ltd. et al.
Decision 3529-D01-2015 AltaLink Investment Management Ltd. And SNC Lavalin Transmission Ltd. et al. Proposed Sale of AltaLink, L.P Transmission Assets and Business to Mid-American (Alberta) Canada Costs
More informationEnbridge Battle Sands 594S Substation Connection Needs Identification Document
APPENDIX C AESO PIP Enbridge Battle Sands 594S Substation Connection Needs Identification Document 1.0 Participant Involvement Program (PIP) From June to October 2015, the AESO conducted a Participant
More informationAltaGas Utilities Inc.
Decision 23898-D01-2018 2019 Annual Performance-Based Regulation Rate Adjustment Filing December 20, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23898-D01-2018 2019 Annual Performance-Based Regulation Rate
More informationThe University of Calgary
Decision 23147-D01-2018 Application for an Order Permitting the Sharing of Records Not Available to the Public Between the University of Calgary and URICA Energy Real Time Ltd. January 30, 2018 Alberta
More informationIf the pipeline approves a Form A revision a Form B should be sent to the Crown Agent as identified on the attached pipeline allocation list.
300, 801-6 Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2P3W2 Canada Telephone: 403-297-5470 Fax: 403-297-5468 Email: cindy.maclaren@gov.ab.ca April 16, 2015 TO: ALL BATTERY OPERATORS The Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission
More informationMayerthorpe and District Rural Electrification Association Ltd.
Decision 22692-D01-2018 Mayerthorpe and District Rural Electrification Association Ltd. Varied Code of Conduct Regulation Compliance Plan January 31, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22692-D01-2018
More informationDecision FortisAlberta Inc Phase II Distribution Tariff. January 27, 2014
Decision 2014-018 FortisAlberta Inc. 2012-2014 Phase II Distribution Tariff January 27, 2014 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 2014-018: FortisAlberta Inc. 2012-2014 Phase II Distribution Tariff
More informationLivingstone Landowners Guild
Decision 20846-D01-2016 Livingstone Landowners Guild Application for Review of Decision 2009-126 Needs Identification Document Application Southern Alberta Transmission System Reinforcement as amended
More informationTransCanada Energy Ltd.
Decision 22302-D01-2017 Request for Permitting the Sharing of Records Not Available to the Public Between and Pembina Pipeline Corporation May 26, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22302-D01-2017
More informationMackenzie Rural Electrification Association Ltd.
Decision 21983-D01-2016 Varied Code of Conduct Regulation Compliance Plan December 14, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21983-D01-2016 Varied Code of Conduct Regulation Compliance Plan Proceeding
More informationSTANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AGENDA REPORT
STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AGENDA REPORT Subject: ELECTRICITY & NATURAL GAS FRANCHISE FEES Recommendation(s): Administration recommends that the Standing Committee on Finance pass one of the following
More informationAudited Financial Statements For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016
FORTISALBERTA INC. Audited Financial Statements MANAGEMENT S REPORT The accompanying 2017 Financial Statements of FortisAlberta Inc. (the Corporation ) have been prepared by management, who are responsible
More informationATCO Electric Ltd. Stage 2 Review of Decision D ATCO Electric Ltd Transmission General Tariff Application
Decision 22483-D01-2017 Stage 2 Review of Decision 20272-D01-2016 2015-2017 Transmission General Tariff Application December 6, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22483-D01-2017 Stage 2 Review
More informationDecision D FortisAlberta Inc PBR Capital Tracker True-Up and PBR Capital Tracker Forecast
Decision 20497-D01-2016 FortisAlberta Inc. 2014 PBR Capital Tracker True-Up and 2016-2017 PBR Capital Tracker Forecast February 20, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 20497-D01-2016 FortisAlberta
More informationENMAX Energy Corporation
Decision 23006-D01-2018 Regulated Rate Option - Energy Price Setting Plan Monthly Filings for Acknowledgment 2017 Quarter 3 February 7, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23006-D01-2018: Regulated
More informationAltaGas Utilities Inc.
Decision 2013-465 2014 Annual PBR Rate Adjustment Filing December 23, 2013 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 2013-465: 2014 Annual PBR Rate Adjustment Filing Application No. 1609923 Proceeding
More informationFinancial Statements For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014
FORTISALBERTA INC. Financial Statements MANAGEMENT S REPORT The accompanying annual financial statements of FortisAlberta Inc. (the Corporation ) have been prepared by management, who are responsible for
More informationATCO Electric and ATCO Pipelines. Application for ATCO Electric and ATCO Pipelines License Fees
Decision 21571-D01-2016 and ATCO Pipelines 2015-2016 License Fees August 17, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21571-D01-2016 and ATCO Pipelines 2015-2016 License Fees Proceeding 21571 August
More informationDecision D ATCO Electric Ltd. Compliance Filing to Decision D Capital Tracker True-Up
Decision 23454-D01-2018 ATCO Electric Ltd. Compliance Filing to Decision 22788-D01-2018 2016 Capital Tracker True-Up May 4, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23454-D01-2018 ATCO Electric Ltd.
More informationDecision ATCO Electric Ltd. February 1, 2013 Interim Tariff. January 18, 2013
Decision 2013-015 February 1, 2013 Interim Tariff January 18, 2013 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 2013-015: February 1, 2013 Interim Tariff Application No. 1609127 Proceeding ID No. 2305 January
More informationAlberta Electric System Operator 2017 ISO Tariff Update
Alberta Electric System Operator 2017 ISO Tariff Update Date: October 20, 2016 Prepared by: Alberta Electric System Operator Prepared for: Alberta Utilities Commission Classification: Public Table of Contents
More informationAltaLink Management Ltd.
Decision 22025-D03-2017 Red Deer Area Transmission Development Amendment Application June 8, 2017 Decision 22025-D03-2017 Red Deer Area Transmission Development Amendment Application Proceeding 22025 Applications
More informationGenerated for: BARRHEAD. Financial Indicator Graphs
Generated for: 215 Financial Indicator Graphs Introduction The financial indicator graphs are intended to serve as a tool that may assist council and administration with operational decisions. The comparative
More informationWEST INTER LAKE DISTRICT REGIONAL WATER SERVICES COMMISSION REGULATION
Province of Alberta MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT WEST INTER LAKE DISTRICT REGIONAL WATER SERVICES COMMISSION REGULATION Alberta Regulation 156/2008 With amendments up to and including Alberta Regulation 4/2018
More informationAUC Proceeding ISO Tariff Application Consultation. AESO / Distribution Facility Owner (DFO) Customer Contribution Issue March 5, 2018
AUC Proceeding 22942 2018 ISO Tariff Application Consultation AESO / Distribution Facility Owner (DFO) Customer Contribution Issue March 5, 2018 Views from a DFO perspective Rider I is not a new issue;
More informationDecision D Generic Cost of Capital. Costs Award
Decision 21856-D01-2016 Costs Award December 2, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21856-D01-2016 Costs Award Proceeding 21856 December 2, 2016 Published by Alberta Utilities Commission Fifth Avenue
More informationAltaLink Management Ltd. ATCO Electric Ltd.
Decision 2012-139 May 22, 2012 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 2012-139: and Application Nos. 1607971 and 1608183 Proceeding ID No. 1623 May 22, 2012 Published by The Alberta Utilities Commission
More informationDecision D Alberta PowerLine L.P. Tariff Application. January 23, 2018
Decision 23161-D01-2018 Alberta PowerLine L.P. Tariff Application January 23, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23161-D01-2018 Alberta PowerLine L.P. Tariff Application Proceeding 23161 January
More informationSECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 SECTION 2: INTRODUCTION 8 SECTION 3: METHODOLOGY 10
REGIONAL TRANSIT COST SHARING FORMULA REPORT REPORT CONTENTS SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 SECTION 2: INTRODUCTION 8 SECTION 3: METHODOLOGY 10 3.1 Working Committee 10 3.2 Project Approach 11 3.3 Best
More informationDecision ATCO Gas General Rate Application Phase I Compliance Filing to Decision Part B.
Decision 2006-083 2005-2007 General Rate Application Phase I Compliance Filing to Decision 2006-004 August 11, 2006 ALBERTA ENERGY AND UTILITIES BOARD Decision 2006-083: 2005-2007 General Rate Application
More informationAltaGas Utilities Inc.
Decision 23623-D01-2018 AltaGas Utilities Inc. 2017 Capital Tracker True-Up Application December 18, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23623-D01-2018 AltaGas Utilities Inc. 2017 Capital Tracker
More informationUnaudited Interim Financial Statements For the three months ended March 31, 2017
FORTISALBERTA INC. Unaudited Interim Financial Statements For the three months ended March 31, 2017 FORTISALBERTA INC. BALANCE SHEETS (UNAUDITED) As at (all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars) March
More informationCanadian Hydro Developers, Inc.
Decision 2005-070 Request for Review and Variance of Decision Contained in EUB Letter Dated April 14, 2003 Respecting the Price Payable for Power from the Belly River, St. Mary and Waterton Hydroelectric
More informationShell Canada Limited and Canadian Natural Resources Limited
Decision 22614-D01-2017 Albian Oil Sands Industrial Complex and June 28, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22614-D01-2017 Albian Oil Sands Industrial Complex and Proceeding 22614 Applications
More informationENMAX Energy Corporation
Decision 22054-D01-2017 Regulated Rate Option Tariff Terms and Conditions Amendment Application April 12, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22054-D01-2017 Regulated Rate Option Tariff Terms and
More informationAirdrie Airdrie Community Health Centre Airdrie - Urgent Care Space Renovation $ 450,000 $ - $ 32,436 $ 417,564
Airdrie Airdrie Community Health Centre Airdrie - Urgent Care Space Renovation $ 450,000 $ - $ 32,436 $ 417,564 Airdrie Airdrie Provincial Building Mental Health Space Renovation $ 110,000 $ - $ 103,773
More informationFORTISALBERTA INC. MANAGEMENT S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
FORTISALBERTA INC. MANAGEMENT S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS April 30, 2018 The following ( MD&A ) of FortisAlberta Inc. (the Corporation ) should be read in conjunction with the following: (i) the unaudited
More informationAltaLink Management Ltd. & EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc.
Decision 2013-280 AltaLink Management Ltd. & EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. Heartland Transmission Project Amendment Structure T176 Repositioning Costs Award July 29, 2013 The Alberta Utilities
More informationWINE & CHEESE (following the meeting) approximately 8:00 p.m.
3105 16 th Avenue North Lethbridge, Alberta T1H 5E8 OLDMAN RIVER REGIONAL SERVICES COMMISSION Phone: (403) 329 1344 Toll Free: 1 844 279 8760 Fax: (403) 327 6847 E mail: admin@orrsc.com Website: www.orrsc.com
More informationExtractive Sector Transparency Measures Act Report
Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act Report (if necessary) E174397 Canadian Natural Resources Partnership, E300033 CNR Northern Alberta Partnership, E072724 CNR Hatton Partnership, E493358 CNR Royalty
More informationExtractive Sector Transparency Measures Act - Annual Report
Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act - Annual Report Reporting Entity Name Harvest Operations Corp. Reporting Year From 01/01/2017 To: 31/12/2017 Date submitted 30/05/2018 Reporting Entity ESTMA
More informationENMAX Power Corporation Distribution and Transmission Deferral Account Reconciliation
Decision 23108-D01-2018 2014 Distribution and 2014-2015 Transmission Deferral Account Reconciliation February 27, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23108-D01-2018 2014 Distribution and 2014-2015
More informationCapital Power Corporation. Halkirk 2 Wind Power Project
Decision 23255-D01-2018 Capital Power Corporation Halkirk 2 Wind Power Project July 9, 2018 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 23255-D01-2018 Capital Power Corporation Halkirk 2 Wind Power Project Proceeding
More informationAltaGas Utilities Inc.
Decision 21822-D01-2016 AltaGas Utilities Inc. 2016-2017 Unaccounted-For Gas Rider E and Rider H September 1, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21822-D01-2016 AltaGas Utilities Inc. 2016-2017
More informationEPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc.
Decision 22603-D01-2017 June 23, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22603-D01-2017 Proceeding 22603 June 23, 2017 Published by the: Alberta Utilities Commission Fifth Avenue Place, Fourth Floor,
More informationDaishowa-Marubeni International Ltd.
Decision 2011-299 25-MW Condensing Steam Turbine Generator July 8, 2011 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 2011-299: 25-MW Condensing Steam Turbine Generator Application No. 1606747 Proceeding ID
More informationE.ON Climate & Renewables Canada Ltd. Grizzly Bear Creek Wind Power Project
Decision 21513-D01-2016 Grizzly Bear Creek Wind Power Project July 21, 2016 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21513-D01-2016 Grizzly Bear Creek Wind Power Project Proceeding 21513 July 21, 2016 Published
More informationcommunity owned community supported
community owned community supported ANNUAL REPORT 2014-2015 1 Letter from the CEO JAMES McARA PRESIDENT & CEO The Calgary Food Bank has had a year of change and celebration. We continue to rise and meet
More informationConsumers Coalition of Alberta
Decision 22157-D01-2017 Decision on Preliminary Question AltaLink Management Ltd. 2012-2013 Deferral Account Reconciliation Costs Award February 15, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 22157-D01-2017
More informationHorse Creek Water Services Inc.
Decision 21340-D01-2017 Horse Creek Water Services Inc. 2016 General Rate Application October 20, 2017 Alberta Utilities Commission Decision 21340-D01-2017 Horse Creek Water Services Inc. 2016 General
More information