The PSCW will hold a hearing on March 19, 2010, on WEPCO’s request to increase rates by $60.5 million
to cover increases for fuel costs. WEPCO’s application states its fuel costs have exceeded January’s monthly fuel range and will exceed its annual variance for the 2010 test year allowed in the December 18, 2009, Final Decision. WEPCO’s application requests an electric fuel-only increase of $60.5 million or about a 2.8 percent increase on a Wisconsin retail basis.

Docket 6630-FR-102

Wisconsin is one of the few midwestern states whose utilities do not have
explicit economic development tariffs on file.

This is the first of a couple of EDRs the Commission will be considering. WPL, whose service territory has been hard hit by the economy, requested this EDR, which is a targeted discount on the
price paid for energy to reduce excess capacity and stimulate the local economy.
The hope is that this could assist in developing a more favorable business
climate, particularly in the Janesville, Rock County area, where the loss of the
GM plant took with it 2,600 jobs and corresponding electric load.

The estimated EDR deductions would total up to $5 million annually to targeted businesses,
both new and, under certain conditions, existing. The Commissioners were
cautiously supportive, stating that the tariff must be well-designed to avoid
running afoul of state laws that prohibit anti-discrimination in rates and avoid
free ridership. The Commission returned the tariff to WPL, requesting that it
work with Commission staff and other stakeholders to fine tune the tariff and
bring it back for Commission consideration in 30 days.

Docket 6680-GF-126

The PSC Chairman called this a ‘unique and unfortunate situation.” In 2004, Menasha undertook a project to refurbish its existing unused coal-fired electric generating plant to produce steam which it proposed to supply to several nearby industries. As it evolved, the city experienced substantial cost overruns and failed to contract with enough steam-host industries for the full output of the plant. As a result, the city defaulted on steam revenue bonds and risks defaulting on general obligation bonds. Several of the revenue bond holders have sued the city in federal court in Indiana.
WPPI is involved in this matter because Menasha is one of its largest members and the fallout of consequences to Menasha would have serious consequences to the financial integrity of WPPI and its other members.
The Commission approved the Menasha-WPPI request for Menasha to sell its electric distribution system and related facilities to WPPI at net book value; sell its ownership shares in ATC; lease back the electric system facilities from WPPI to continue its obligations as an electric public utility; raise its rates for electric service (by less than 2 percent) to cover its ongoing costs of the electric utility on a cash-flow basis; and use the proceeds from the sale of facilities and ATC ownership shares to meet a substantial portion of its debt requirements.

Docket 05-EI-149

The PSCW approved NSPW’s request to refund $12.7 million to ratepayers over the period February 16 to March 15 2010.

Wisconsin customers will see a $0.02476 credit per kWh in that billing period.

Today the Commission laid over the decision on order language which would approve the sale of property from MGE to ATC.  Azar and Callisto split over the inclusion of indemnification language in the order.  Azar
Azar stated she believed MGE should indemnify ATC for any potential environmental contamination that exists at the time of closing.  Callisto said he was comfortable that due diligence was done by ATC on the environmental concerns.  He said he saw no evidence of contamination or potential contamination to support additional indemnification by MGE or to question the validity of the property value made by the independent assessor.
Meyer, holding the deciding vote, said he would need time to consult with Commission staff legal counsel before he could make the tie-breaking decision.

Docket 5-AE-198

In a 2-1 vote, the Commission decided to allow the Village of Muscoda Electric Utility to collect in rates the cost of a transmission upgrade, even though the utility neglected to file for approval prior to beginning — and completing — the project.
Azar rejected the utility’s request to recover the project in rates, stating that if the Commission did not respect the bright line deadline set forth in the statute and rule it would be sending a message that after-the-fact applications may be okay, which is not protecting ratepayers.

Docket 4000-CE-103

The Commission approved the petition of the Abbotsford Municipal Water Utility to open a proceeding to establish procedures for curtailing water service during water shortages or emergencies and to establish a water conservation surcharge and issued Notice Of Proceeding And Prehearing Conference.
Commission staff believes that the Commission could authorize a water conservation penalty or surcharge as an initial rate. Staff would conduct a full evaluation of the penalty along with other rate design options to promote water conservation and efficiency, such as inclining block rates for both residential and non-residential customers, as part of Abbotsford’s next rate case.
Docket 10-WI-100

Water Conservation-Oriented Rates at Amazon.com.

Sierra Club intervened in dockets 6680-UR-116 and 6690-UR-119 (Wisconsin Power and Light Company (WP&L) and Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (WPSC) rate cases in 2008) to present evidence about the utilities’ renewable energy initiatives. In those rate cases, Sierra Club submitted extensive testimony about the viability of utility-owned solar generation. The record developed as a result of this testimony was a driving force in the establishment of the investigation docket for which Sierra Club now requests IC. The Solar Collaborative includes members representing Alliant Energy, American Transmission Company LLC, Clean Wisconsin, Cooperative Network, IBEW Local 2150, Johnson Controls, Madison Gas and Electric Company, Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., RENEW Wisconsin, Sierra Club, We Energies, Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation, Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, WPSC. WPPI Energy, and Xcel Energy. To date, members of the Solar Collaborative, including representatives from the Sierra Club, have been engaged in a technical and economic analysis. In the future, the Solar Collaborative will conclude the economic analysis, issue a draft report for public comment, conduct an analysis of policy matters, and draft a final report to the Commission regarding the results of the investigation. Many of the issues under the group’s consideration are complex and require a significant amount of attention to detail.

Docket 5-EI-147

The 2007 Report on 16 Megawatt Off-Grid Industrial and Commercial Solar Photovoltaic Systems: World Market Segmentation by City at Amazon.com.

This is the largest wind farm in Wisconsin approved to date. It will increase installed wind capacity in this state by 30 to 46%, depending upon the size of the final turbines. On October 30, 2008, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 196.491(3) and Wis. Admin. Code§ PSC 111.53, Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO) filed an application with the Commission for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) to construct a new wind electric generation facility. The facility, known as the Glacier Hills Wind Park (Glacier Hills, GHWP), is proposed to be located in the towns of Randolph and Scott, Columbia County, and would have a total generating capacity of up to 207 megawatts (MW).

Docket 6630-CE-302

Wind Energy Handbook at Amazon.com.

This investigation will consider applicant’s request to issue and have outstanding short-term indebtedness which at times may exceed 5% of the par value of outstanding securities but which would not exceed $250 million principal amount.

Docket 6690-SB-130

Check out Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice at Amazon.com.