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 BP-14 Transmission Pre-Rate Case August 8, 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 BP-14 Transmission Pre-Rate Case August 8, 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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 2 Agenda Incremental Rate Redispatch Revenue Forecast Follow-up Large Generation Interconnection Agreement (LGIA) Credits Follow-up Risk Assessment/Use of Reserves Segmented Revenues Follow-up

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 Rates Workshop Follow-Up Items

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 4 ABC #Customer RequestBPA ResponseDate Complet ed 17/25/12 - Transmission pre-rate case workshop follow-up items: 2What are the differences in “use” compared to “demand”? 3What is the aggregate of total system load by month? 4What are the months of de-rate for the DC and when will it come back on?Will be discussed during Revenue Forecast Follow-up portion of Pre-Rate Case Workshop on 8/8/12. 5Provide the 12 NCP billing information.Will be discussed during Revenue Forecast Follow-Up portion of Pre-Rate Case Workshop on 8/8/12. 6What is the demand of MW decrease due to conversion? 7Have a discussion on 12 NCP.Will be discussed during Revenue Forecast Follow-Up portion of Pre-Rate Case Workshop on 8/8/12. 8What is the interest for LGIA when not operational?Will be discussed during Segmented Revenues Follow-up portion of Pre- Rate Case Workshop on 8/8/12. 9If we were to use the FERC “Brightline” test, 1) how much would be directly assigned and 2) how much would stay in the network in the past and in the future? 10Provide an updated wind forecast. 11Provide information on revenue credits. Rates Workshop Follow-Up Items

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 5 Rates Workshop Follow Up Items, cont. ABC #Customer RequestBPA ResponseDate Completed 12Why is the segmented O&M changing from $112 million to $178 million? What are the drivers? 13Provide an MRNR comparison of what we projected to what we experienced.Will be discussed during Segmented Revenues Follow-up portion of Pre- Rate Case Workshop on 8/8/12. 14Provide the LGIA presentation that Alex and Ron talked about.Will be discussed during Segmented Revenues Follow-up portion of Pre- Rate Case Workshop on 8/8/12. 15Include variability for creditworthiness and resales, in revenue assumptions. 16Is Method 1 for NT LGIA Transmission repayment industry standard?

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 Incremental Rate

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 7 Background New Transmission facilities required to serve new requests for service are subject to the “higher of” test, also known as the “or” test. Under this test, BPA may charge the higher of the embedded cost rate with the new facilities included, or an incremental cost rate that fully recovers the costs of the new facilities from the requests that need the facilities over the contract term. Under our current (FY12-13) Rate Schedules, incremental cost rates must be established in a 7(i) rate case. In the workshops prior to the FY10-11 and FY12-13 rate cases, BPA and customers considered developing a formula incremental rate. Discussions were productive, but BPA and customers ultimately decided in the workshops not to develop a formula incremental rate during these rate cases. –BPA and customers decided to focus on other rate case issues instead.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 8 Background, cont. BPA continues to believe that it could have a need for incremental costs rates in the future. –Network Open Season reform is being discussed now. Network upgrades identified in future Network Open Season cluster studies as required for service, but that do not move forward at embedded costs rates, will be subject to incremental rates. –Intertie upgrades may also be subject to incremental costs rates. –The incremental rate would apply to service taken under the upgrades, once they were constructed and energized. –If there is not a formula incremental rate in place, the incremental rate would have to be developed in a 7(i) process after or simultaneously with completion of the NEPA study. This could be an iterative process and may have to be repeated for each individual project that was moving forward at an incremental rate.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 9 Question The question at this point is whether it would be beneficial to take the time now to work through specific Network and Intertie examples to better understand all the inter-related revenue requirement and revenue recovery issues involved in developing a formula incremental rate, or wait to have such a discussion when we are ready to establish rates through the 7(i) process. –Advantages to developing and adopting a formula rate now: Formula would be in place when it was needed, potentially minimizing the time required to offer service under the rate. In theory, would eliminate the need to run a special 7(i) process to develop the rate later. While it may be difficult to develop a formula incremental rate in the abstract, BPA could use the Garrison to Ashe project from the 2010 NOS as an example in developing the formula. –Advantages to waiting to develop a rate: May be easier to develop and tailor an incremental rate for a specific project, rather than developing one in the abstract. May be a more efficient use of BPA and customer resources to develop a rate at the time it is needed.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 10 Feedback Do customers have a preference as to whether we continue to discuss developing a formula incremental rate now, or wait until a specific project is identified and moving forward? Other questions/comments?

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 11 Next Steps Looking for customer comments on: –Do customers have a preference as to whether we continue to discuss developing a formula incremental rate now, or wait until a specific project is identified and moving forward? Comments due by August 22, 2012: –techforum@bpa.govtechforum@bpa.gov –Please include in subject line: “BP14 Transmission Rate Case – Incremental Rate”.

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 Attachment M - Redispatch

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 13 Types of Redispatch Under Attachment M  Under Bonneville’s Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT), Attachment M, Transmission Services (TS) requests redispatch from Power Services as part of its congestion management efforts.  There are three different types of Attachment M redispatch:  Discretionary Redispatch - requested by TS prior to curtailing any firm or non-firm point-to-point (PTP) schedules or secondary NT schedules for the purpose of avoiding or ameliorating curtailments.  NT Firm Redispatch - requested by TS for the purpose of maintaining firm network transmission (NT) schedules after non-firm point-to-point (PTP) and secondary NT schedules are curtailed according to NERC curtailment priority.  Emergency Redispatch - requested by TS in response to a “system emergency” as defined by NERC.  Under Attachment M, in response to any redispatch request, including requests for redispatch specific to Network Load located either within or outside of the BPA control area, Power Services (PS) may provide redispatch through redispatch of federal generation, purchases and/or sales of energy, or purchases of transmission.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 14 Discretionary Redispatch  TS may request Discretionary Redispatch from PS prior to curtailing any firm or non-firm PTP schedules or any firm or secondary NT schedules in order to avoid or ameliorate curtailments.  PS has the discretion whether or not to provide requested amount, or any amount less than the total request.  TS has the discretion to request Discretionary Redispatch and PS has the discretion to provide Discretionary Redispatch. There is no obligation on either party.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 15 NT Redispatch  Requested by TS only after all applicable non-firm point-to- point (PTP), secondary NT schedules and conditional firm schedules are curtailed according to NERC curtailment priority.  For NT Reliability Redispatch, TS requests redispatch from PS and simultaneously curtails firm PTP schedules in amounts proportionate to the firm NT and firm PTP flows on the affected transmission flowgates at the time of the request.  PS must comply with requests for NT Reliability Redispatch to the extent that it can do so without violating non-power constraints.  BPA is currently reviewing options for using non-federal resources, in addition to the FCRPS, to provide NT Reliability Redispatch.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 16 Additional NT Redispatch Options BPA’s OATT, based on the pro forma tariff, provides for Redispatch of all designated Network Resources. BPA agrees in principle that processes, systems and business practices to implement least cost redispatch from all federal and non-federal Network Resources with the potential to resolve the transmission constraint is desirable. Reduction in FCRPS flexibility. –Due to non-power constraints placed on the FCRPS for flood control, fish and wildlife, navigation, recreation, and other special operations, the ability to move/adjust federal generation has become more limited since the inception of Attachment M in 2001. –Balancing Authority Area (BAA) requirements such as additional balancing reserves for variable generation have further reduced FCRPS flexibility. Additional resources for NT Redispatch are needed to maintain reliable service to Network Loads through Redispatch during transmission congestion.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 17 Attachment M Redispatch - Actual and Forecasted Costs  In the 2012 Transmission Rate Case, Transmission Services forecasted a total of $400,000 per year for Attachment M Redispatch costs. This amount was included as part of the overall Transmission Services’ revenue requirement.  Power Services is only compensated when there is a redispatch event. Actual FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Discretionary Redispatch $170,157 $46,439$11,355 NT Redispatch$392,162 $49,261$470,500 Emergency Redispatch $964 $1,510- Attachment M Total Cost $563,282 $97,210$481,855 2012 Rate Case Forecast (per yr) Actual FY 2012 (through April) $175,000$3,924 $225,000$201,878 -- $400,000$205,802

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 18 Potential FY 2014-2015 Rate Case Items  In the 2012 Transmission Rate Case, Attachment M costs were estimated and included in the network revenue requirement. Because the rate levels were settled, Attachment M costs were not allocated to customer classes.  BPA is considering three alternatives for rate recovery of Redispatch costs. Under all three alternatives, the cost of NT Redispatch would be allocated to NT Customers only.  Alternative 1: Recover all Redispatch costs in the network revenue requirement.  Alternative 2: Recover all Redispatch costs through a Formula Rate.  Alternative 3: Recover NT Redispatch costs through a Formula Rate and Discretionary and Emergency Redispatch costs in the network revenue requirement.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 19 Redispatch Rate Recovery Alternative 1  Alternative 1: Recover all Redispatch costs in the network revenue requirement.  Pros:  Creates more certainty for customers with regard to cost since they will be set in the rate case.  Is the most administratively simple to implement.  No impact to billing.  Cons:  Redispatch costs have varied significantly from year-to-year and are difficult to forecast because they occur infrequently.  NT Redispatch costs, in particular, will be difficult to forecast because it is difficult to anticipate congested network conditions and BPA is considering significant changes to the resource pool that will provide NT Redispatch during the rate period.  Under or over-recovery is likely, the magnitude of which may be significant for NT Redispatch.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 20 Redispatch Rate Recovery Alternative 2  Alternative 2: Recover all Redispatch costs through a Formula Rate (NT Redispatch will be allocated to NT Customers only).  Pros:  Redispatch costs have varied significantly from year-to-year and are difficult to forecast because they occur infrequently. Use of a formula rate would ensure that redispatch costs would not be under or over-recovered.  The costs of redispatch have historically been relatively small. A formula rate would not create a great deal of uncertainty for customers with regard to their total cost of transmission.  Decisions on specific resources to add to the resource pool for the NT Redispatch program could be made after the initial rate proposal because BPA would not have to forecast redispatch costs.  Cons:  Customers would not know the redispatch costs they would have to bear until after they have been billed. This may make budgeting more difficult.  Creates additional workload for billing, particularly for Discretionary and Emergency redispatch which requires allocation among customer classes.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 21 Redispatch Rate Recovery Alternative 3  Alternative 3: Recover NT Redispatch costs through a Formula Rate and Discretionary and Emergency Redispatch costs in the network revenue requirement (NT Redispatch will be allocated to NT Customers only).  Pros:  Addresses the particular forecasting challenge for NT Redispatch.  Some billing implementation workload, but less than Alternative 2.  Creates certainty for customers on Discretionary and Emergency Redispatch costs.  Cons:  Uncertainty of forecast Discretionary and Emergency Redispatch costs.  Under or over-recovery is still an issue for Discretionary and Emergency Redispatch.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 22 Next Steps  After consideration of customer comments, BPA will propose a rate treatment.  Please provide comments and/or proposals on rate treatments for Redispatch by August 22.  Comments due by August 22, 2012: –techforum@bpa.govtechforum@bpa.gov –Please include in subject line: “BP14 Transmission Rate Case – Redispatch”.

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 Revenue Forecast Follow-Up

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 24 Sales Forecast Follow-up Customers requested information on the IR & FPT contracts that were not expected to rollover. –That total demand is 600 MW. The tables below show a further breakout (in average monthly MW) of the changes between FPT & IR forecast in RC12 and the RC14 Initial Proposal. Customers also had questions about the increases in PTP related to NOS. –An additional handout has been provided showing how the monthly averages discussed were calculated based on demand during the rate period.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 25 Sales Forecast Follow-up, cont. Customers requested information on what are the months of de-rate for the DC upgrade and when will it come back on? –Increase rated capacity from 3,100 MW to 3,220 MW. –Project construction begins early 2015 with de-rate to 2,000 MW (10-11 months). –Then a curtailment to 0 MW for a few months in late 2015 to early 2016. –Energization in early 2016.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 26 Network Segment Long Term Sales

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 27 Intertie Segment Long Term Sales

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 28 Short Term Sales

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 29 Delivery A B C D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 30 Revenue Credits

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 Large Generation Interconnection Agreement (LGIA) Credits Follow-up

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 32 Method 1 vs. Method 2 Method 1 – 34 Credit Balances Method 2 – 5 Credit Balances COI – 10 Credit Balances

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 33 LGIA Interest Transmission Credits Business Practice – Version 7 –“Interest begins to accrue at the 10-year Government Agency Borrowing Rate on all funds advanced for the construction of Network Upgrades from the date BPA Transmission Services receives the payment(s) for Network Upgrades from the Interconnection Customer.” – Page 2, Section A, #3

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 34 LGIA Cash Deposits It is likely that the amount of cash forecasted to be deposited during FY 13-15 will not be as high as $130 Million. The LGIA forecast will be adjusted to better reflect our current outlook on Generation Interconnection.

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 Risk Assessment/Use of Reserves

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 36 Brief History BPA’s TPP Standard –Adopted in the 1993 Rate Case Financial Reserves –Cash in the BPA Fund –“Treasury Specials” in the BPA Fund –Deferred Borrowing

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 37 Brief History, cont. PNRR – Planned Net Revenues for Risk. –Augments financial reserves in a rate case if needed to increase TPP. CRAC – Cost Recovery Adjustment Clause. –Augments cash flow between rate cases. TPP calculations during rate cases. TS TPP over time.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 38 The 2012 Rate Case Initial Proposal. –Preliminary TS TPP was over 99%. –Preliminary PS TPP was below 95%. –BPA proposed that PS be allowed to temporarily rely for TPP purposes on reserves attributed to TS. Controversial.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 39 The 2012 Rate Case, cont. Initial Proposal, cont. –Reserves-based ACS rates subject to Power CRAC. Controversial. Complicated, too: while the rates are levied by TS, the costs allocated to them come from the system managed by PS.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 40 The 2012 Rate Case, cont. Final Proposal. –PS TPP was over 95% without reliance on reserves attributed to TS. –Therefore, reserves attributed to TS played no part in the final PS risk mitigation package.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 41 Preview of the 2014 Rate Case TPP will probably be above 95% for each BL (though it is too early to be sure of that). ACS rates and financial risk mitigation will be discussed in future workshop(s).

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 Segmented Revenues Follow-up

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 43 LGIA’S EFFECT ON REVENUE REQUIREMENTS

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 44 LGIA’S EFFECT ON REVENUE REQUIREMENTS, cont.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 45 LGIA’S EFFECT ON REVENUE REQUIREMENTS, cont. A B C

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 46 LGIA’S EFFECT ON REVENUE REQUIREMENTS, cont. The unique nature of the revenue credits associated with LGIA is that payback occurs via rates that must fully recover the costs of the Network.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 47 MRNR Rate Case/Actual Example A B

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 48 Next Steps Upcoming Workshops –August 22 Transmission Pre-Rate Case - AM –Reservation Fee –Montana Intertie –Segmentation Generation Inputs - PM –September 12 & 26 - Transmission Pre-Rate Case - All Day –http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/bp14_meeting_ws.cfmhttp://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/bp14_meeting_ws.cfm

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 49 Appendix

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 50 Links to Materials from Previous Discussions Links to previous presentations on incremental rates: –July 14, 2010 presentation (pre-FY 2012/2013 rate case) (beginning on slide 23): http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2012/docs/BPA- 12%20Final%20Transmission%20Rates%20Workshop_071410.pdfhttp://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2012/docs/BPA- 12%20Final%20Transmission%20Rates%20Workshop_071410.pdf –April 14, 2010 presentation (pre-FY 2012/2013 rate case) (beginning on slide 30): http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2012/docs/04-14- 2010%20Workshop%20Transmission%20Slides%20.pdfhttp://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2012/docs/04-14- 2010%20Workshop%20Transmission%20Slides%20.pdf –November 9, 2009 presentation (pre-FY 2012/2013 rate case): http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/do cs/Afternoon%20Session_Transmission%20Rates%20Meeting_%20Inc remental%20Rate%20Design_110909.pdf http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/do cs/Afternoon%20Session_Transmission%20Rates%20Meeting_%20Inc remental%20Rate%20Design_110909.pdf

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 51 Links to Materials from Previous Discussions, cont. October 2008-February 2009 materials (pre-FY 2010/2011 rate case): –February 4, 2009: Potential rate schedule language: http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/do cs/DraftProposedIncRateSched.pdf http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/do cs/DraftProposedIncRateSched.pdf –Draft proposals from workshops: January 9, 2009: http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/docs/Workshop_F ormulaIncrementalRateProposal_1-9-09.pdf http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/docs/Workshop_F ormulaIncrementalRateProposal_1-9-09.pdf December 5, 2008: http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/Docs/12-5- 08Workshop_Formula%20Incremental%20Rate%20Proposal.pdf http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/Docs/12-5- 08Workshop_Formula%20Incremental%20Rate%20Proposal.pdf November 21, 2008: http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/docs/Workshop_F ormula%20Incremental%20Rate%20Proposal.pdf http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/docs/Workshop_F ormula%20Incremental%20Rate%20Proposal.pdf –October 23, 2008 presentation (beginning on slide 13): http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/do cs/TR-10%20Transmission%20Workshop_102308_Phase%20III.pdf http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/ratecase/2008/2010_BPA_Rate_Case/do cs/TR-10%20Transmission%20Workshop_102308_Phase%20III.pdf

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 Rate Case Forecast to Actual Variances

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 53 Rate Case Forecast to Actual Variance Summary Over FY09 through FY12, Transmission revenues before Reimbursable and Generation Inputs Rate Case revenue forecasts have been well aligned within ~2.5% variance. In FY08, a 5.7% positive variance is driven by: –Strong NT load growth to go along with colder winter and warmer summer seasons. –High hydro run-off in May and June resulted in a ~$40M PTP ST year. There is a 6 to 8% positive variance in FY06 through FY07 due to: –Approximately 1,600 MW average of Point-to-Point (PTP LT) acquisitions more than forecast in Rate Case in FY07. –Approximately 780 MW average over FY06 through FY07 of Southern Intertie (IS LT) acquisitions more than forecasted in Rate Case. –Above average water year in 2006 resulted in high levels of short term sales, a ~$40M PTP ST year.

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 August 8, 2012 Predecisional - For Discussion Purposes Only 54 * FY12 Actual is FY12 Q3 Forecast

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 BP-14 Transmission Pre-Rate Case August 8, 2012.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "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 BP-14 Transmission Pre-Rate Case August 8, 2012."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

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 BP-14 Transmission Pre-Rate Case August 8, 2012.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "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 BP-14 Transmission Pre-Rate Case August 8, 2012."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback