Utility Asset Disposition

Transcription

1 Decision Utility Asset Disposition Costs Award January 17, 2014

2 The Alberta Utilities Commission Decision : Utility Asset Disposition Costs Award Application Nos , , , , , , , , Proceeding ID No January 17, 2014 Published by The Alberta Utilities Commission Fifth Avenue Place, Fourth Floor, 425 First Street S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 3L8 Telephone: Fax: Web site:

3 Contents 1 Introduction Views of the Commission Commission findings Concentric and Regulation UnFettered shared costs AltaGas Utilities Inc AltaLink Management Ltd ATCO Electric Ltd. (distribution) ATCO Electric Ltd. (transmission) ATCO Gas ATCO Pipelines EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (distribution) EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (transmission) EPCOR Energy Alberta Inc FortisAlberta Inc GST Order... 8 AUC Decision (January 17, 2014) i

4

5 The Alberta Utilities Commission Calgary, Alberta Decision Application Nos , , , , Utility Asset Disposition , , , , Costs Award Proceeding ID No Introduction 1. The Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC or Commission), by notice dated April 2, 2008, initiated the Utility Asset Disposition proceeding (UAD proceeding) to deal with certain matters arising from the Supreme Court of Canada s decision in ATCO Gas & Pipelines Ltd. v. Alberta (Energy & Utilities Board), 2006 SCC 4, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 140 (Stores Block). 2. The notice commencing the UAD proceeding indicated the following with respect to cost recovery: Parties who participate shall not be entitled to submit cost claims to the Commission and no funding will be awarded by the Commission to participants. Each party shall be responsible for its own costs. The Commission considers this Proceeding to deal with generic issues which concern all stakeholders and that utility ratepayers should not be required to underwrite the costs of the participants through regulated rates. 3. ATCO Gas and ATCO Pipelines (divisions of ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd.) and ATCO Electric Ltd. (ATCO Electric) (collectively the ATCO Utilities) filed a motion to suspend the UAD proceeding. In Decision , 1 the Commission suspended the UAD proceeding in light of proceedings then before the Alberta Court of Appeal. 4. In a letter dated October 17, 2012, the Commission recommenced the UAD proceeding. The Commission provided an updated issues list and requested comments from interested parties regarding potential revisions to the issues list. Following review of the comments received, the Commission issued a final revised issues list on December 7, On November 23, 2012, the Commission received an application (R&V application) from AltaGas Utilities Inc.(AltaGas), AltaLink Management Ltd.(AltaLink), ATCO Utilities, EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (EDTI), EPCOR Energy Alberta Inc.(EEAI), and FortisAlberta Inc. (Fortis) (collectively, the Alberta Utilities) to review and vary the Commission s determination on cost recovery for participation in the UAD proceeding. 6. In its letter dated February 20, 2013, the Commission ruled on the R&V application stating: 27. The Commission denies the R&V application with respect to cost recovery to parties from April 8, 2008 until October 17, 2012, the date upon which the Commission 1 Decision : Review of Rate Related Implications of Utility Asset Dispositions Following the Supreme Court s Calgary Stores Block Decision, Reasons for Decision on Motion by the ATCO Utilities dated October 21, 2008, Application No , Proceeding ID No. 20, November 28, AUC Decision (January 17, 2014) 1

6 confirmed that the stranded cost and production abandonment matters would be incorporated into the UAD proceeding. 28. The Commission agrees, however, with the Alberta Utilities that an error of fact or law or jurisdiction occurred when the Commission reiterated its decision to deny cost recovery in its letter dated October 17, 2012 recommencing the UAD proceeding. The Commission agrees with the Alberta Utilities that the referral of certain stranded cost matters from the 2011 Generic Cost of Capital Review and Variance proceeding (Proceeding ID No. 1697) and the referral of production abandonment matters from the ATCO Gas General Rate Application Phase 1 Review and Variance proceeding (Proceeding ID No. 1698) to the UAD proceeding following successful applications on the preliminary question entitles eligible parties to apply for costs on these matters in the UAD proceeding pursuant to Section 5.3 of AUC Rule 022. While the Commission considers that only the matters referred to the UAD proceeding from the successful preliminary question R&V applications are entitled to cost recovery under Section 5.3 of AUC Rule 022, the Commission recognizes that the issues before the Commission in the UAD proceeding are so interdependent that the issues associated with the stranded cost and production abandonment matters are inseparable from other matters within the scope of the UAD proceeding. For these reasons, the Commission will allow those parties currently eligible to claim costs under AUC Rule 022, to file cost claims in respect of costs incurred subsequent to the recommencement of the UAD proceeding on October 17, Accordingly, the R&V application is granted to the above extent. 29. Alberta Utilities regulated pursuant to performance-based regulation may claim UAD proceeding costs incurred between October 17, 2012 and December 31, All other Alberta Utilities and eligible interveners may claim costs incurred between October 17, 2012 and the close of the record of the UAD proceeding. All cost claims submitted will be assessed in accordance with AUC Rule 022, including the Scale of Costs. 7. During the course of the UAD proceeding, evidence was received from the Alberta Utilities, the Office of the Utilities Consumer Advocate (UCA), The City of Calgary (Calgary), and TransAlta Corporation. 8. Pursuant to directions from the Commission, certain of the Alberta Utilities filed costs claims which were summarized in a letter from the Commission dated April 16, Subsequent to the filing of reply argument in the UAD proceeding the Commission issued supplemental information requests to parties. This was followed by supplemental argument and supplemental reply argument filed on August 28, In a July 4, 2013 letter, the Commission provided parties with the opportunity to submit new costs claims or revised costs claims by September 30, The Commission received costs claim applications from, AltaGas, AltaLink, ATCO Electric distribution, ATCO Electric transmission, ATCO Gas, ATCO Pipelines EDTI distribution, EDTI transmission, EEAI and Fortis. 11. The Commission circulated a revised summary of costs being claimed to interested parties. Parties were advised that any comments regarding the figures listed in the revised summary or costs, or the merits of total costs claimed, were to be filed by October 21, No comments were received from parties on the revised summary of costs. 2 AUC Decision (January 17, 2014)

7 12. The Commission considers the close of record for this cost proceeding to be October 21, The UAD proceeding concluded with the issuance of Decision on November 26, Views of the Commission 14. When assessing costs claims pursuant to Section 21 of the Alberta Utilities Commission Act, S.A c. A-37.2, the Commission applies AUC Rule 022: Rules on Intervener Costs in Utility Rate Proceedings (Rule 022). Rule 022 also prescribes a Scale of Costs applicable to all costs claimed. 15. In exercising its discretion to award costs, the Commission will, in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022, consider whether an eligible participant s costs are reasonable and directly and necessarily related to the proceeding; and whether the eligible participant acted responsibly in the proceeding and contributed to a better understanding of the issues before the Commission. To the extent reasonably possible, the Commission will be mindful of a participant s willingness to co-operate with the Commission and other participants to promote an efficient and cost-effective proceeding. 16. As the costs of a utility proceeding are generally passed on to customers, it is the Commission s duty to ensure that the customers receive fair value for a party s contribution. The Commission only approves those costs that are reasonable and directly and necessarily related to the party s participation in the proceeding. 3 Commission findings 17. The Alberta Utilities jointly filed evidence and argument in the UAD proceeding including the evidence of Concentric Energy Advisors (Concentric). Each of the Alberta Utilities other than Fortis sponsored the evidence of Regulation UnFettered. In submitting the joint evidence, each of the Alberta Utilities were assisted by counsel from Bennett Jones LLP and Davis LLP. In addition to the assistance provided in respect of the joint evidence, Bennett Jones LLP also assisted the ATCO Utilities individually and Fortis received additional assistance from Davis LLP. Each of the Alberta Utilities also filed a limited amount of individual evidence or information request responses. Total cost claimed by the Alberta Utilities amounted to $471, In making its determinations on the costs applications of each of the Alberta Utilities, the Commission has considered the record of the UAD proceeding, the cost submissions of each of the Alberta Utilities and the provisions of Rule Concentric and Regulation UnFettered shared costs 19. The Commission does not consider that the evidence of Concentric and Regulation UnFettered contributed materially to a better understanding of the issues before the Commission 2 Decision : Utilities Asset Disposition, Application No , Proceeding ID No. 20, November 26, AUC Decision (January 17, 2014) 3

8 as required by Section 11.1(b) of the Rule 022. Only summary references are included in Decision to this evidence and no reference is made to this evidence in the Commission s findings in the decision. 20. The focus of the UAD proceeding was the consideration of the Stores Block decision and the related Alberta Court of Appeal decisions and their its implications to Alberta utilities under Alberta legislation. Concentric is a Massachusetts-based organization providing financial and economic advisory services. The Commission found the evidence provided by Concentric on the interpretation of Stores Block and related cases, Alberta legislation and on regulatory policy within and outside of Alberta of little assistance in assessing the matters before the Commission in the UAD proceeding. The aggregate amount included with the Alberta Utilities costs claims in respect of Concentric is $106, In light of the above findings, the Commission has reduced the aggregate amount of fees claimed by 25 per cent ($26,486.03) resulting in a total award (fees and disbursements) of $79, Mr. Steven Fetter of Regulation UnFettered is based in the state of Washington. Mr. Fetter offered evidence in his capacity as a former state utility regulator, bond rater, legislative counsel, and utility consultant on the potential credit rating impacts of Commission determinations which significantly alter the regulatory paradigm that currently exists in Alberta. 3 The Commission found this evidence of no assistance in assessing how the courts decisions are to be applied in the interpretation of Alberta legislation. The aggregate amount included with the Alberta Utilities costs claims in respect of Regulation UnFettered was $30, In light of the above findings, the Commission denies the entirety of the fees claimed with respect to the services of Regulation UnFettered. 3.2 AltaGas Utilities Inc. 22. AltaGas submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $3, The claim is comprised of legal fees Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $1, and disbursements of $22.19; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $ and disbursements of $1.36; consulting fees for Concentric in the amount of $1, and disbursements of $0.37; and consulting fees for Regulation UnFettered in the amount of $ The Commission has considered the AltaGas costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and AltaGas were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP and Davis LLP. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves AltaGas costs claim for fees and disbursements in the amount of $2, AltaLink Management Ltd. 24. AltaLink submitted a costs claim in the total of $211, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $37, and disbursements of $426.91; consulting fees for Gannett Fleming Canada ULC in the amount of $322.00; legal fees for 3 Exhibit 77.04, Regulation unfettered evidence, page 1. 4 AUC Decision (January 17, 2014)

9 Borden Ladner Gervais in the amount of $117, and disbursements of $4,067.20; consulting fees for Concentric Energy Advisors in the amount of $26, and disbursements of $23.55; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $15, and disbursements of $0.61; and consulting services in the amount of $9, for Regulation UnFettered. 25. The Commission has considered the AltaLink costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and AltaLink were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel and consultants are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees, consulting fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP, Davis LLP, Borden Ladner Gervais and consulting fees for Gannett Fleming Canada ULC. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves AltaLink s costs claim for fees and disbursements in the amount of $195, ATCO Electric Ltd. (distribution) 26. ATCO Electric (distribution) submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $19, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $8, and disbursements of $108.84; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $3,122.40; consulting fees for Regulation UnFettered in the amount of $1,344.19; and consulting fees for Concentric in the amount of $6, and disbursements of $ The Commission has considered the ATCO Electric (distribution) costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and ATCO Electric were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP and Davis LLP. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves ATCO Electric (distribution s) costs claim for fees and disbursements in the amount of $16, ATCO Electric Ltd. (transmission) 28. ATCO Electric Ltd. (transmission) submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $85, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $37, and disbursements of $601.47; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $14, and disbursements of $10.52; consulting fees for Regulation UnFettered in the amount of $8,580.46; and consulting fees for Concentric in the amount of $24, and disbursements of $ The Commission has considered the ATCO Electric (transmission) costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and ATCO Electric were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by AUC Decision (January 17, 2014) 5

10 legal counsel are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP and Davis LLP. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves ATCO Electric (transmission s) costs claim for fees and disbursements in the amount of $70, ATCO Gas 30. ATCO Gas submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $27, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $12, and disbursements of $158.25; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $4,540.08; consulting fees for Concentric in the amount of $8, and disbursements of $2.76; and consulting fees for Regulation UnFettered in the amount of $1, The Commission has considered the ATCO Gas costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and ATCO Gas were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP and Davis LLP. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves ATCO Gas costs claim for fees and disbursements in the amount of $23, ATCO Pipelines 32. ATCO Pipelines submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $47, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $20, and disbursements of $333.28; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $7, and disbursements of $5.83; consulting fees for Concentric in the amount of $13, and disbursements of $15.28; and consulting fees for Regulation UnFettered in the amount of $4, The Commission has considered the ATCO Pipelines costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and AltaGas were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP and Davis LLP. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves AltaGas costs claim for fees and disbursements in the amount of $39, EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (distribution) 34. EDTI (distribution) submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $5, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $2,352.69, disbursements of $31.43 and GST of $232.83; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $866.29, disbursements of $1.92 and GST of $63.85; consulting fees for Regulation UnFettered in the amount of 6 AUC Decision (January 17, 2014)

11 $372.94; and consulting fees for Concentric in the amount of $1, and disbursements of $ The Commission has considered the EDTI (distribution) costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and EDTI were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP and Davis LLP. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves EDTI (distribution s) costs claim for fees, disbursements and applicable GST in the amount of $4, EPCOR Distribution & Transmission Inc. (transmission) 36. EDTI (transmission) submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $21, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $6,615.07, disbursements of $ and GST of $655.70; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $2,776.81, disbursements of $2.19 and GST of $214.75; legal fees for Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP in the amount of $2,310.00, disbursements of $19.40 and GST of $136.08; consulting fees for Concentric Energy Advisors in the amount of $6, and disbursements of $4.63; consulting fees for Regulation UnFettered in the amount of $1,690.65; and consulting fees for Gannett Fleming Canada ULC in the amount of $56.67 and GST of $ The Commission has considered the EDTI (transmission) costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and EDTI were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel and consultants are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees, consulting fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP, Davis LLP, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP and consulting fees for Gannett Fleming Canada ULC. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves EDTI (transmission s) costs claim for fees, disbursements and applicable GST in the amount of $17, EPCOR Energy Alberta Inc. 38. EEAI submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $21, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount $6,615.07, disbursements of $ and GST of $655.70; legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $2,776.81, disbursements of $2.19 and GST of $214.75; legal fees for Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP in the amount of $2,310.00, disbursements of $19.40 and GST of $136.08; consulting fees for Concentric Energy Advisors in the amount of $6, and disbursements of $4.63; consulting fees for Regulation UnFettered in the amount of $1,690.65; and consulting fees for Gannett Fleming Canada ULC in the amount of $ AUC Decision (January 17, 2014) 7

12 39. The Commission has considered the EEAI costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and EEAI were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel and consultants are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees, consulting fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP, Davis LLP, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP and consulting fees for Gannett Fleming Canada ULC. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision, the claims for Concentric and Regulation UnFettered costs have been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves EEAI s costs claim for fees, disbursements and applicable GST in the amount of $17, FortisAlberta Inc. 40. Fortis submitted a costs claim in the total amount of $28, The claim is comprised of legal fees for Davis LLP in the amount of $5,014.30; legal fees for Bennett Jones LLP in the amount of $13, and disbursements of $181.91; and consulting fees for Concentric Energy Advisors in the amount of $9, and disbursements of $ The Commission has considered the Fortis costs claim in accordance with Section 11 of Rule 022 and the Commission s Scale of Costs. Subject to the Commission s findings with respect to Concentric and RegulationUnFettered set out above, the Commission finds that the participation of the Alberta Utilities and Fortis were effective and of assistance in the proceeding. The Commission finds that the hours incurred by legal counsel are reasonable and that the claim for legal fees and disbursements was filed in accordance with the Scale of Costs. The Commission approves the full amount of the costs claimed for legal fees of Bennett Jones LLP and Davis LLP. Pursuant to Section 3.1 of this decision the claim for Concentric has been adjusted. Accordingly, the Commission approves Fortis s costs claim for fees and disbursements in the amount of $26, GST 42. In accordance with the Commission s treatment of GST on cost awards the Alberta Utilities are required to pay only the portion of GST paid that may not be recoverable through the GST credit mechanism. Accordingly, the Commission approves the eligible GST in the amount of $2, The Commission emphasizes that its treatment of the GST claim in no way relieves participants or their consultants from their GST obligations pursuant to the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E Order 44. It is hereby ordered that: 8 AUC Decision (January 17, 2014)

13 (1) AltaGas Utilities Inc. shall pay external costs in the amount of $2, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. AltaGas Utilities Inc. shall record in its 2012 Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $2, (2) AltaLink Management shall pay external costs in the amount of $195,379.34, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. AltaLink Management shall record in its Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $195, (3) ATCO Electric Ltd. (distribution) shall pay external costs in the amount of $16,331.80, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. ATCO Electric Ltd. (distribution) shall record in its 2012 Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $16, (4) ATCO Electric Ltd. (transmission) shall pay external costs in the amount of $70,729.75, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. ATCO Electric Ltd. (transmission) shall record in its Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $70, (5) ATCO Gas shall pay external costs in the amount of $23,746.99, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. ATCO Gas shall record in its 2012 Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $23, (6) ATCO Pipelines shall pay external costs in the amount of $39,176.57, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. ATCO Pipelines shall record in its Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $39, (7) EPCOR Distribution and Transmission Inc. (distribution) shall pay external costs in the amount of $4,831.00, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. EPCOR Distribution and Transmission Inc. (distribution) shall record in its 2012 Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $4, (8) EPCOR Distribution and Transmission Inc. (transmission) shall pay external costs in the amount of $17,735.42, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. EPCOR Distribution and Transmission Inc. (transmission) shall record in its Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $17, (9) EPCOR Energy Alberta Inc. shall pay external costs in the amount of $17,735.42, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. EPCOR Energy Alberta Inc. shall record in its Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $17, (10) FortisAlberta Inc. shall pay external costs in the amount of $26,234.53, as set out in column (h), of Appendix A. FortisAlberta Inc. shall record in its 2012 Hearing Cost Reserve account external costs in the amount of $26, AUC Decision (January 17, 2014) 9

14 Dated on January 17, The Alberta Utilities Commission (Original signed by) Willie Grieve Chair (Original signed by) Anne Michaud Commission Member (Original signed by) Tudor Beattie Commission Member 10 AUC Decision (January 17, 2014)

15 AUC Utility Asset Disposition Cost Proceeding ID No Costs Award Total Costs / APPLICANT Total Fees (a) Total Expenses (b) Total GST (c) Total Amount (d) Total Fees (e) Total Expenses (f) Total GST (g) Total Amount (h) AltaGas Utilities Inc. Bennett Jones LLP $1, $22.19 $0.00 $1, $1, $22.19 $0.00 $1, Davis LLP $ $1.36 $0.00 $ $ $1.36 $0.00 $ Concentric Energy Advisors $1, $0.37 $0.00 $1, $ $0.37 $0.00 $ Regulation UnFettered $ $0.00 $0.00 $ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Sub-Total $3, $23.92 $0.00 $3, $2, $23.92 $0.00 $2, AltaLink Management Ltd. Bennett Jones LLP $37, $ $0.00 $37, $37, $ $0.00 $37, Gannett Fleming Canada ULC $ $0.00 $0.00 $ $ $0.00 $0.00 $ Borden Ladner Gervais $117, $4, $0.00 $121, $117, $4, $0.00 $121, Concentric Energy Advisors $26, $23.55 $0.00 $26, $20, $23.55 $0.00 $20, Davis LLP $15, $0.61 $0.00 $15, $15, $0.61 $0.00 $15, Regulation UnFettered $9, $0.00 $0.00 $9, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Sub-Total $206, $4, $0.00 $211, $190, $4, $0.00 $195, ATCO Electric Ltd. (Distribution Function) Bennett Jones LLP $8, $ $0.00 $8, $8, $ $0.00 $8, Davis LLP $3, $0.00 $0.00 $3, $3, $0.00 $0.00 $3, Regulation UnFettered $1, $0.00 $0.00 $1, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Concentric Energy Advisors $6, $1.90 $0.00 $6, $4, $1.90 $0.00 $4, Sub-Total $19, $ $0.00 $19, $16, $ $0.00 $16, ATCO Electric Ltd. (Transmission Division) Bennett Jones LLP $37, $ $0.00 $37, $37, $ $0.00 $37, Davis LLP $14, $10.52 $0.00 $14, $14, $10.52 $0.00 $14, Regulation UnFettered $8, $0.00 $0.00 $8, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Concentric Energy Advisors $24, $27.58 $0.00 $24, $18, $27.58 $0.00 $18, Sub-Total $84, $ $0.00 $85, $70, $ $0.00 $70,

16 AUC Utility Asset Disposition Cost Proceeding ID No Costs Award Total Costs / ATCO Gas Total Fees (a) Total Expenses (b) Total GST (c) Total Amount (d) Total Fees (e) Total Expenses (f) Total GST (g) Total Amount (h) Bennett Jones LLP $12, $ $0.00 $12, $12, $ $0.00 $12, Davis LLP $4, $0.00 $0.00 $4, $4, $0.00 $0.00 $4, Regulation UnFettered $1, $0.00 $0.00 $1, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Concentric Energy Advisors $8, $2.76 $0.00 $8, $6, $2.76 $0.00 $6, Sub-Total $27, $ $0.00 $27, $23, $ $0.00 $23, ATCO Pipelines Bennett Jones LLP $20, $ $0.00 $20, $20, $ $0.00 $20, Davis LLP $7, $5.83 $0.00 $7, $7, $5.83 $0.00 $7, Regulation UnFettered $4, $0.00 $0.00 $4, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Concentric Energy Advisors $13, $15.28 $0.00 $13, $10, $0.00 $0.00 $10, Sub-Total $47, $ $0.00 $47, $38, $ $0.00 $39, EPCOR Distribution & Transmission (Distribution Function) Bennett Jones LLP $2, $31.43 $ $2, $2, $31.43 $ $2, Davis LLP $ $1.92 $63.85 $ $ $1.92 $63.85 $ Regulation UnFettered $ $0.00 $0.00 $ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Concentric Energy Advisors $1, $0.53 $0.00 $1, $1, $0.53 $0.00 $1, Sub-Total $5, $33.88 $ $5, $4, $33.88 $ $4, EPCOR Distribution & Transmission (Transmission Function) Bennett Jones LLP $6, $ $ $7, $6, $ $ $7, Davis LLP $2, $2.19 $ $2, $2, $2.19 $ $2, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP $2, $19.40 $ $2, $2, $19.40 $ $2, Regulation UnFettered $1, $0.00 $0.00 $1, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Concentric Energy Advisors $6, $4.63 $0.00 $6, $4, $4.63 $0.00 $4, Gannett Fleming Canada ULC $56.67 $0.00 $2.83 $59.50 $56.67 $0.00 $2.83 $59.50 Sub-Total $19, $ $1, $21, $16, $ $1, $17,

17 AUC Utility Asset Disposition Cost Proceeding ID No Costs Award Total Costs / EPCOR Energy Alberta Inc. FortisAlberta Inc. Total Fees (a) Total Expenses (b) Total GST (c) Total Amount (d) Total Fees (e) Total Expenses (f) Total GST (g) Total Amount (h) Bennett Jones LLP $6, $ $ $7, $6, $ $ $7, Davis LLP $2, $2.19 $ $2, $2, $2.19 $ $2, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP $2, $19.40 $ $2, $2, $19.40 $ $2, Regulation UnFettered $1, $0.00 $0.00 $1, $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Concentric Energy Advisors $6, $4.63 $0.00 $6, $4, $4.63 $0.00 $4, Gannett Fleming Canada ULC $56.67 $0.00 $2.83 $59.50 $56.67 $0.00 $2.83 $59.50 Sub-Total $19, $ $1, $21, $16, $ $1, $17, Davis LLP $5, $0.00 $0.00 $5, $5, $0.00 $0.00 $5, Bennett Jones LLP $13, $ $0.00 $13, $13, $ $0.00 $13, Concentric Energy Advisors $9, $3.04 $0.00 $9, $7, $3.04 $0.00 $7, Sub-Total $28, $ $0.00 $28, $26, $ $0.00 $26, TOTAL APPLICANT COSTS $462, $6, $2, $471, $405, $6, $2, $414,