Public Service Commission
Utility Recovery of Deferred MISO Day 2 Costs
Docket 05-EI-139
In the summer of 2006, the PSC opened this docket to determine whether and how utilities should be able to recover costs that they have accumulated due to the regional electricity market administered by the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator (MISO). CUB intervened to make sure that the utilities don't try to rig the methodology in a way that would raise rates to recover costs already included in rates. On August 30, 2007, the Commission ordered that to recover deferred MISO day 2 costs a utility must demonstrate in its next full rate case an overall increase in costs as a result of MISO Day 2. The Commission also ordered that utilities may not defer MISO costs unless they also defer MISO revenues to prevent the possibility of a utility over-collecting its costs.
Direct Testimony of Lee Smith
Rebuttal Testimony of Lee Smith
Surrebuttal Testimony of Lee Smith
CUB's Initial Brief
CUB's Reply Brief
CUB's Comments on the Staff Briefing Memorandum
Public Service Commission
PSC Generic Investigation into Cost of Service Principles
PSC Docket 05-EI-137
On July 22nd, 2006, the Commission issued of Notice of Investigation requesting comments on how to narrow cost of service and rate design issues in rate cases. CUB and WIEG filed an extensive joint report addressing mutual and opposing positions on electric cost of service and rate design issues on August 29th. Each major utility also filed separate comments. Our September 12th reply comments requested that the Commission convene working groups for parties to further discuss differences of opinion on COSS methodologies and rate design principles. Now that comments are filed the question is "what will the commission do with it?", and the options don't necessarily bode well for residential customers. The reason for that is industry power and the complexity of the issues.
On November 9th, 2006, the Commission discussed this docket at an open meeting. The Commission decided that it could not make any decisions on the various proposals because of on-going rate cases, and that it did not want to prejudge any of the issues. The Commission kept the docket open stating that they need more information regarding the 12CP method and rate design issues.
Public Service Commission
Fule Rule Rulemaking Proceeding
PSC Docket 1-AC-224
On June 23, 2006, the Commission opened a rulemaking proceeding to address changes to the fuel rule that are being proposed by the utilities. The utilities are requesting the ability to true up fuel costs incurred in a 12 month period. They are also requesting the ability to adjust fuel costs during the 12 month period for extraordinary events, which they define as being fuel costs which exceed a 1% change in the average annual cost of fuel. The utilities' proposal also allows a fuel cost increase request to be based on a projected increase in the annual average cost of fuel. CUB is opposed to revisions to the existing rule because it's providing significant benefits to customers. Each of Wisconsin's major utilities have provided significant refunds to customers in 2006 because of over-collection of fuel costs.
A schedule is yet to be set for filing comments with the Commission on proposed revisions to the rule.
Public Service Commission
Gas Service Standards
PSC Docket 1-AC-210, PSC 134
The PSC has opened a rule making proceeding to revise its rules relating to natural gas service standards for residential utility customers. To represent residential ratepayer interests in the revision of Wis. Admin. Code PSC 134, Gas Service Standards, CUB is undertaking a review of the sections of the natural gas service standards rule that will likely most affect residential customers.
No more workshops are scheduled at this time. Staff will prepare proposed rule language and issue it for comment. Eventually a public hearing will be held to comment on proposed final language for the rule.
Public Service Commission
Investigation on the Commission's Own Motion of Impacts or Activities Related to the Operation of Energy Markets by MISO
PSC Docket 9300-EI-100
On September 29, 2005, the Commission issued a Notice of Investigation in docket 9300-EI-100 to gather information from interested parties regarding issues related to the operation of MISO including, but not limited to:
* The formation of a joint and common market between MISO and PJM;
* The regional and sub-regional cost allocation for new transmission lines constructed for reliability or economic purposes;
* Appropriate resource adequacy standards;
* Establishment of a capacity market or ancillary service market.
CUB is participating in this docket on demand response issues, and by attending MISO stakeholder meetings. The case is on-going.
Public Service Commission
Strategic Energy Assessment for the Years January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2012
PSC Docket 05-ES-103
This docket examined the following issues:
1. Identify and describe large electric generating facilities on which an electric utility plans to commence construction within 3 years.
2. Assess the adequacy and reliability of purchased generation capacity and energy to serve the needs of the public.
3. Identify and describe high voltage transmission lines on which an electric utility plans to commence construction within 3 years.
4. Identify and describe any plans for assuring that there is an adequate ability to transfer electric power into the state and the transmission area in a reliable manner.
5. Identify and describe the projected demand for electric energy and the basis for determining the projected demand.
6. Identify and describe activities to discourage inefficient and excessive power use.
7. Identify and describe existing and planned generating facilities that use renewable sources of energy.
8. Consider the public interest in economic development, public health and safety, protection of the environment and diversification of sources of energy supplies.
9. Assess the extent to which the regional bulk power market is contributing to the adequacy and reliability of the state?s electrical supply.
10. Assess the extent to which effective competition is contributing to a reliable, low cost and environmentally sound source of electricity for the public.
11. Assess whether sufficient electric capacity and energy will be available to the public at a reasonable price.
CUB worked with Clean Wisconsin and RENEW in preparing comments in this case as the Joint Public Intervenors. The Joint Public Intervenors presented testimony at the public hearing in this docket and filed comments on the draft SEA.
The PSC's Final Strategic Energy Assessment
Joint Public Intervenor Comments on Draft Strategic Energy Assessment filed September 6 2006
