Preliminary Regional Rate Study Results & Remaining Rate Study Inputs June 5, 2014 Presentation Water Supply Operating Board Wholesale Rate Setting.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cross-Border Infrastructure: A Toolkit Tariff and Rate Setting Session on Regulation & Accountability Max Bradford Castalia The views expressed here are.
Advertisements

4/29/2015SFSU Auxiliary Business Services 1 How to Read Your Financial Statements Presented by San Francisco State University Auxiliary Business Services.
Duke Energy Ohio Standby Rates Jim Ziolkowski, P.E., Rates Manager September 13,
Revised FY 2007 & Proposed FY 2008 Operating & Capital Budgets Retail Rates Committee January 4, 2007.
CLECO TRANSMISSION RATE CASE. AGENDA Welcome and Introduction Purpose of Meeting Transmission System Update Formula Rate Overview Formula Rate Protocols.
1 Amador Water Agency System-Wide Cost of Service and Wastewater Rate Study October 9, 2014 The Reed Group, Inc.
1 Managing Revenues in Regulated Industries Rate Design May 2008 Richard Soderman Director-Legislative Policy and Strategy.
Jefferson County PUD Preliminary Cost of Service and Rate Design Results December 9, 2014 Presented by: Gary Saleba, President EES Consulting, Inc. A registered.
ANALYZING YOUR ELECTRIC BILL Bob Walker Met-Ed November 7, 2007.
1 City Light Rate Design- Review Presentation to Review Panel January 2013.
Pathways to Lasting Solutions “The Longest Yard” Water Budget Rate Structures & The City of Boulder, Colorado January 25, 2007 © 2006 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
City Of Phoenix Water Rates June 30, 2011 Denise Olson Deputy Finance Director Finance Department.
Incentive Regulation Topics Scott A. Struck, CPA Financial Analysis Division Public Utilities Bureau Illinois Commerce Commission.
Proposed Budget. July 1 - June 30 DISTRICT BUDGET Budget Approved in August by Finance & SB Budget Hearing/Annual Meeting in Sept. Budget Finalized.
Rate and Revenue Considerations When Starting an Energy Efficiency Program APPA’s National Conference June 13 th, 2009 Salt Lake City, Utah Mark Beauchamp,
Example of Revenue Decoupling Utah Committee of Consumer Services Witness: David Dismukes Docket No T01 CCS Exhibit 1.1 Allowed Revenue per Customer.
School District No. 73 (Kamloops/Thompson) Draft Operating Budget DRAFT BUDGET FOR
DSM Incentive Returns Proposal – Benefit/Cost Ratio Approach Utah Committee of Consumer Services Witness: David Dismukes Docket No T01 Supplemental.
1 Why Budgeting Matters NC Local Government Budget Conference Wilmington, NC July 2007.
Why is WPL filing a rate case?  Last Base Case Rates were set January, 2007  Cost of our utility investments must be reflected in prices our customers.
Highlights of AESC 2011 Report Vermont Presentation August 22, | ©2011 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All rights reserved.
Elk Grove Water District Water Rate Update and Connection Fees Habib Isaac – Principal April 10, 2013.
Finance Committee Meeting Water Rate Study Update Habib Isaac – Principal Gregg Tobler – Task Manager August 13, 2012.
Long Beach Water Department Review of FY 12 Budget.
The Australian Energy Regulator SA electricity distribution determination 2015–2020 Framework and approach Presentation to the Energy Consumers’ Council.
Washington’s Water Use Efficiency Rule May Require Increased Coordination for Many Utilities Dan Sander, P.E. Senior Engineer.
Financial Impact of Drought March 5, 2008 Updated 3/17/08.
THE FOSTER GROUP TFGTFG City of Detroit Water and Sewerage Department Wholesale Customer Rates Meeting Water Supply System Meeting #3 – Allocated FY
Elk Grove WD Board Meeting Water Rates Habib Isaac – Principal Gregg Tobler – Task Manager September 10, 2012.
B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N Predecisional. For Discussion Purposes OnlySlide 1 City of Port Angeles Above High Water Mark.
Elk Grove Water District – Finance Meeting Water Rate Update and Connection Fees Habib Isaac – Principal Gregg Tobler – Task Manager January 30, 2013.
NARUC SUMMER COMMITTEE MEETINGS Committee on Water Agenda California Regulatory Initiatives Case History – California American Water B. Kent Turner – President.
Chapter 3 The Adjusting Process
2016 Water and Wastewater Rates Committee of the Whole November 16, 2015 Presenter: Mike Mayes – Director, Financial Services/Treasurer.
Pasadena Water and Power Public Hearing Date Water Capital Improvement Charge Pasadena City Council Meeting November 16, 2015 Agenda Item #13.
Pasadena Water and Power Public Hearing Water Capital Improvement Charge Pasadena City Council Meeting January 11, 2016 Item #12.
Tourist Development Tax June 9, 2009 Orange County.
Presented to the City of Dover, Delaware June 6, 2006 Revenue Requirements, Cost of Service and Rate Adjustments for the Electric Utility.
RATE ANALYSIS FY FY 2019 March 6, 2014 CARSON VALLEY WATER UTILITY FUND 326 – DEPARTMENT 864.
1 Water Department FY 2014 Sources and Uses FY 2014 Sources Retail Sales$54,788,834 Wholesale Sales646,250 Other Operating Revenues145,000 Non-Operating.
Prepared by Aon Hewitt Retirement and Investment Consulting Presentation to Iowa School Districts Changes in Postemployment Benefit Accounting July 2015.
Kevin Burnett Presented by CITY OF TULARE, CALIFORNIA.
City of Fernley, Nevada – 164 th Ave. NE, Suite 300, Redmond, WA April 18, 2007 Rate Study Findings Water and Sewer Utility Rates.
Transmission Pricing Webinar 12 October Agenda for Webinar Introductions Purpose Potential Areas of Change – Overview –Revenue Proposal –Business.
Water Rate Presentation City Council Meeting December 14, 2010.
Review of 2016–2021 Strategic Budget Plan Development Process and 2016 Budget Assumptions Financial Administration and Audit Committee April 14,
California Independent System Operator 1 Department of Market Analysis California Independent System Operator California ISO Creation Time: July,
2013 Annual True-Up Meeting
SMECO Demand Response filing
Review of 2018–2023 Strategic Budget Plan Development Process and
Financial Accounting: Tools for Business Decision Making, 3rd Ed.
Biennial Budget for Fiscal Years and
Audited Financial Statements
Final Rate Study Findings
City of Sisters, OR 2017 Water & Sewer Rate Study
FY Proposed Budget and Rates
Non-Residential Customer Non- Residential - Capacity Evaluation Borough of Conshohocken Authority Customer Informational Meeting June 20, East.
Spring-Ford Area School District 2012/2013 Proposed Final Budget
Water Cost-of-Service
ELECTRIC REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS SERIES 2016A
Copyright 2013 Jitasa - Confidential - For Internal & Approved Use Only
City of Lebanon, Missouri Electric Department
Budget Proposal FY 17-18, July 5, 2017.
2016 Attachment O True-up customer meeting
Proposed Preliminary Budget
Water Rates Public Hearing
City of Santa Paula Water and Sewer Rate Study Results Public Workshop
Purchased Gas Cost Adjustment (PGA) 101
Southwestern Public Service Company
Purchased Gas Cost Adjustment (PGA) 101
Presentation transcript:

Preliminary Regional Rate Study Results & Remaining Rate Study Inputs June 5, 2014 Presentation Water Supply Operating Board Wholesale Rate Setting

Overview 2 Preliminary Regional Rate Results Regional O&M Costs True Up Results Background on Peak Season Rate

Rate Setting for Seattle Regional Wholesale Contracts 3 Regional revenue requirement is determined by three things: □O&M expenses (Supply and Transmission) □Asset costs (Supply and Transmission) □True Up balance Allocate revenue requirement between Block and F&P customers □Block customers are Cascade, Northshore, and Renton Conservation block □Seattle’s distribution system is an F&P customer for rate setting purposes Divide by F&P demand □F&P demand is defined in contracts as 98% of water produced minus block usage = Rate per unit

Preliminary Rate Study Results 4 Preliminary Results are based on: –O&M from Strategic Business Plan Baseline –6 Year CIP presented at April 3, 2014 Operating Board –Preliminary 2013 True Up results –Demand presented at April 2, 2014 Operating Board 2014 Actual 2015 Preliminary 2016 Preliminary 2017 Preliminary Peak Rate ($/ccf) Off-Peak Rate ($/ccf) Percent Change(8)%0%

Rate Drivers 5 Regional costs are increasing steadily, with a bump in 2016 for the initial close of the MLPP project A large 2014 true up balance offsets the increase in costs Increased demand over is the main driver of the balance CWA’s transition payment also a large factor Regional Cost2.3%4.4%2.8% True Up Balance(2.7)%(5.6)%(3.9)% Demand(8.0)%1.2% Total(8.4)%0.0%

Rate Drivers, continued 6 Besides creating a positive true up balance, the increase in demand means a decrease in rates as we step from one demand line to the other

Northshore’s block and true up balances are driven by changes in cost only Decrease in 2015 due to New Supply Assets, which are in FCs for F&P contracts rather than rates Northshore Fixed Block Actual 2015 Preliminary 2016 Preliminary 2017 Preliminary Fixed Block ($M) Prior Year True Up ($M) 0.2 TBD Total ($M)5.45.3TBD

Rate Setting for Seattle Regional Wholesale Contracts 8 Regional revenue requirement is determined by three things: □O&M expenses (Supply and Transmission) □Asset costs (Supply and Transmission) □True Up balance Allocate revenue requirement between Block and F&P customers □Block customers are Cascade, Northshore, and Renton Conservation block □Seattle’s distribution system is an F&P customer for rate setting purposes Divide by F&P demand □F&P demand is defined in contracts as 98% of water produced minus block usage = Rate per unit

Regional O&M is determined using an index system –The initial amount for each category of cost (supply and transmission) was specified in the contracts. This is the “base cost” for each category –Each of these amounts are then increased or decreased each year based on the total costs in “index activities” which were also set in the contracts (Exhibit IX) Regional O&M 9

Regional O&M – What is in the index? 10

Regional O&M Cost – History & Projections 11

Rate Setting for Seattle Regional Wholesale Contracts 12 Regional revenue requirement is determined by three things: □O&M expenses (Supply and Transmission) □Asset costs (Supply and Transmission) □True Up balance Allocate revenue requirement between Block and F&P customers □Block customers are Cascade, Northshore, and Renton Conservation block □Seattle’s distribution system is an F&P customer for rate setting purposes Divide by F&P demand □F&P demand is defined in contracts as 98% of water produced minus block usage = Rate per unit

Projected 2014 Year Ending true up balance is the beginning point for the rate study 2013 True Up currently being reviewed –Includes cumulative effect of prior year revenue adjustments 2014 revenues and costs based on same demand projection and O&M and CIP inputs as rate study –Amounts just happen to be identical to 2013 Regional True Up 13

Regional True Up Beginning Balance$(6.5M)$ F&P Revenues CWA Transition Payment5.0 + Prior Year Revenue Adjustments(0.7) - Regional Costs70.6 = Ending Balance$ 5.3M$ 12.7M

Rate Setting for Seattle Regional Wholesale Contracts 15 Regional revenue requirement is determined by three things: □O&M expenses (Supply and Transmission) □Asset costs (Supply and Transmission) □True Up balance Allocate revenue requirement between Block and F&P customers □Block customers are Cascade, Northshore, and Renton Conservation block □Seattle’s distribution system is an F&P customer for rate setting purposes Divide by F&P demand □F&P demand is defined in contracts as 98% of water produced minus block usage = Rate per unit Rate Design

Contracts say that rates should have a seasonal differential “to encourage the efficient use of water, conservation and the timely development of new environmentally responsible water sources” MIT Agreement requires Seattle to encourage conservation by wholesale customers and a seasonal rate is one method for this Peak Season ratio is not necessarily cost based Seasonal Component to F&P Rates 16

Ratio decreased when growth charge expired Difference has increased as rates have increased Two Views of Seasonal Differential 17

Ratio being held constant Difference decreases due to decrease in rates Seasonal Differential for

Next Steps and Targeted Dates 19 Richard Cuthbert to finish review, targeting these dates –July 10 th Operating Board presentation –End of July for delivery of written report Thirty days after independent review is finished, formal transmittal of proposal to Operating Board –Includes Seattle’s Rate Study Summary document –Targeting Sept 4 th meeting Begin Seattle City Council process –Targeting January 1, 2015 effective date