Minutes of the Annual Meeting of the Power - New York Power ...

cooperatives, as well as the bargaining agents for the public bodies in the seven
neighboring states (collectively, the “Public Customers”). In addition, each of the
Public Customers agreed through either contract or settlement agreement with
the Authority that it would not object to those ratemaking principles and
methodologies in subsequent Authority rate increases, for the term of their
contract or settlement agreements.
The key agreed-upon principles include use of the following methodologies used
in the 2003 Staff Report:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
The principles set forth in the March 5, 1986 Settlement Agreement
(Appendix B to this Agreement) settling Auer v. Dyson, No. 81-124 (Sup.
Ct. Oswego Co.), Auer v. Power Authority, Index No. 11999-84 (Sup. Ct.
N.Y. Co.) and Delaware County Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Power
Authority, 82 Civ. 7256 (S.D.N.Y.) (the “Auer Settlement”).
Recovery of capital costs using Trended Original Cost and Original Cost
methodologies.
Treatment of sales to third parties, including the New York Independent
System Operator.
Allocation of Indirect Overheads.
Melding of costs of the Niagara Power Project and St. Lawrence-FDR
Power Project for ratemaking.
Post-employment benefits other than pensions (i.e., retiree health
benefits and now referred to as Other Postemployment Benefits, or
OPEBs).
(vii) Rate Stabilization Reserve (“RSR”) methodology.
To set the rates for the two future rate periods, Staff used projected calendar
year data. The Rate Modification Plan proposed the following rates:
2