skip to main content
Back to all blog posts

Posted in: Ratemaking | Practice & Procedure

Sep 8, 2017

Alberta Utilities Commission Comments on Arguments About Information Asymmetry

By Fred D. Cass

On August 29, 2017, the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) issued a decision on an application by ATCO Pipelines for approval of its 2017-2018 general rate application. The decision addressed many issues, including points of dispute with regard to rate base and operating costs and numerous issues arising from a depreciation study filed by ATCO Pipelines.

In their arguments, certain parties expressed concerns about the disclosure of information during the proceeding by ATCO Pipelines. It was argued that ATCO Pipelines had failed to provide relevant information and had exploited information asymmetry between it, on the one hand, and the interveners and the AUC, on the other hand. Submissions on this issue referred to a previous decision with respect to an application by ATCO Electric Ltd. in which the AUC had made comments about information asymmetry. In the earlier decision, the AUC recognized that information asymmetry presents a challenge, but said that its process incorporates robust pre-hearing discovery mechanisms and that the process, when engaged in by the parties in a focused manner and in good faith, provides ample opportunity for the development of an unbiased and complete record.

In the August 29th decision, the AUC noted the concerns that had been expressed in argument, but said it was not persuaded that any reduced weight should be applied to the evidence on the record. The AUC went on to confirm that the determinations made in the proceeding would be based on the merits of the application and that the burden of proof is on the utility to show that increases, changes or alterations to rates are just and reasonable. While the AUC indicated its concern about the level of responsiveness in interrogatory responses by the applicant, it acknowledged that, in certain other instances in the proceeding, the applicant had submitted information in an organized and transparent manner.

Areas of Expertise

Related Categories

Related Blogs

Posted in: Practice & Procedure | Ontario | Ratemaking | Energy Policy

Insights EnergyInsider
OEB Rejects Hydro One’s Proposed Acquisition of Orillia Power Distribution By David Stevens Apr 18, 2018 On April 12, 2018, the Ontario Energy Board issued a Decision and Order denying Hydro One Inc.’s application to purchase the shares of Orillia Power Distribution Corporation. The OEB’s Decision explains that Hydro One and Orillia Power have failed to establish that there will be no harm to Orilli...

Posted in: Ratemaking | Practice & Procedure | Ontario

Insights EnergyInsider
OEB Issues Its First Decision Using “Proportionate Review” By David Stevens Apr 04, 2018 On March 29, 2018, the Ontario Energy Board (OEB) issued a Decision on Scope of Review in an electricity distributor rate application that is being processed under the OEB’s new proportionate review approach. Under that approach, selected local distribution companies (LDCs) can agree to have thei...

Posted in: Ontario | Practice & Procedure | Ratemaking | Facilities

Insights EnergyInsider
OEB Issues its Final Report on Wireline Pole Attachment Charges By David Stevens Mar 26, 2018 On March 22, 2018, the Ontario Energy Board issued its Final Report on Wireline Pole Attachment Charges setting the amount that telecom carriers will pay to attach to electricity poles. In the Final Report, the OEB has set a province-wide charge of $43.63 per pole/per attacher/per year.