23.03.2013 Views

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

10<br />

11<br />

12<br />

13<br />

14<br />

15<br />

16<br />

17<br />

18<br />

19<br />

20<br />

21<br />

22<br />

23<br />

24<br />

25<br />

26<br />

27<br />

28<br />

29<br />

30<br />

31<br />

32<br />

33<br />

Response:<br />

<strong>FortisBC</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. (<strong>FortisBC</strong> or the Company)<br />

<strong>Application</strong> <strong>for</strong> a <strong>Certificate</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Public</strong> Convenience and Necessity<br />

<strong>for</strong> the Advanced Metering Infrastructure Project<br />

Response to British Columbia Utilities Commission (BCUC or the Commission)<br />

In<strong>for</strong>mation Request (IR) No. 1<br />

Submission Date:<br />

October 5, 2012<br />

Page 199<br />

85.5 Has <strong>FortisBC</strong> considered as an alternative option to address electricity theft an<br />

expansion <strong>of</strong> the role <strong>of</strong> the Revenue Protection Program (which could be<br />

coupled with advanced meters at the feeder level)? If not, please explain why<br />

not. If yes, please describe the results.<br />

The alternative option as described has not been considered by <strong>FortisBC</strong> since the deployment<br />

<strong>of</strong> advanced meters at the feeder level in the absence <strong>of</strong> advanced meters at customer<br />

premises is not an effective tool in identifying electric theft. An expansion in the existing<br />

department in conjunction with advanced feeder meters would not increase the number <strong>of</strong> leads<br />

nor improve the quality <strong>of</strong> tips; both <strong>of</strong> which are possible with AMI deployment. Please see the<br />

responses to BCUC IR1 Q82.4 and Q84.1.1.<br />

86.0 Reference: Project Costs and Benefits<br />

Response:<br />

Exhibit No. B-1, Tab 5.0, Section 5.3.2, pp. 80-83<br />

Potential AMI Forecast<br />

86.1 Provide a copy <strong>of</strong> in<strong>for</strong>mation from Pr<strong>of</strong>essor Neil Boyd, pr<strong>of</strong>essor <strong>of</strong> criminology<br />

at Simon Fraser University, that allowed <strong>FortisBC</strong> to prepare the two additional<br />

calculations based on its interpretation <strong>of</strong> their data: a low range (“Low Range“)<br />

and a high range (“High Range”) estimate.<br />

Please refer to Appendix BCUC IR1 86.1 entitled Pr<strong>of</strong>essor Neil Boyd Opinion which supports a<br />

Low Range calculation. The High Range calculation was based on the 2011 report issued by<br />

Dr. Darryl Plecas and Jordan Diplock titled “The <strong>Inc</strong>reasing Problem <strong>of</strong> Electrical Consumption<br />

in Indoor Marihuana Grow Operations in British Columbia”. The latter report was filed by<br />

Commission staff on August 14, 2012 as Exhibit A2-1.<br />

Response:<br />

86.2 What would the low/high range <strong>for</strong>ecast be if grow ops switch to LED lighting<br />

systems?<br />

As current in<strong>for</strong>mation suggests that this technology is not yet proven <strong>for</strong> marijuana production,<br />

<strong>FortisBC</strong> does not contemplate the conversion to LED Lighting systems by producers during the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!