Transcanada Pipelines Limited
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TRANSCANADA PIPELINES LIMITED BUSINESS AND SERVICES RESTRUCTURING AND MAINLINE 2012 – 2013 TOLLS APPLICATION PART D: FAIR RETURN Appendix D1: Written Evidence of Paul R. Carpenter (The Brattle Group) SEPTEMBER 1, 2011Revised October 31, 2011 NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF the National Energy Board Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-7, as amended, and the Regulations made thereunder; AND IN THE MATTER OF an Application for (1) approvals required to implement a Restructuring Proposal that affects the businesses and services of TransCanada PipeLines Limited, NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. and Foothills Pipe Lines Ltd., and (2) approval of final tolls for the TransCanada Mainline for 2012 and 2013. TRANSCANADA PIPELINES LIMITED ______________________________________________________________________________ WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF PAUL R. CARPENTER THE BRATTLE GROUP ______________________________________________________________________________ September 1, 2011Revised October 31, 2011 WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF PAUL R. CARPENTER revised October 31, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. OVERVIEW/SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 1 II. BACKGROUND ON THE CONCEPT OF BUSINESS RISK ............................................. 7 III. NORTH AMERICAN MARKET ENVIRONMENT AND MAINLINE BUSINESS RISK ..................................................................................................................................... 18 A. Review of North American Market Environment ........................................................ 18 B. Competition Risk .......................................................................................................... 26 C. Supply Risk ................................................................................................................... 37 D. Market Risk ................................................................................................................... 38 E. Regulatory Risk ............................................................................................................ 42 F. Impact on the Mainline of Recent and Prospective Market Conditions ....................... 46 IV. THE MAINLINE’S RESTRUCTURING PROPOSAL ....................................................... 53 V. U.S. AND CANADIAN COMPARABLES FOR THE MAINLINE ................................... 54 A. U.S. Interstate Gas Pipelines ......................................................................................... 55 B. Dr. Vilbert’s Gas Pipeline Sample ................................................................................ 66 C. U.S. Oil Pipelines .......................................................................................................... 70 D. Dr. Vilbert’s Oil Pipeline Sample ................................................................................. 72 E. U.S. LDCs ..................................................................................................................... 74 F. Dr. Vilbert’s U.S. LDC Sample .................................................................................... 78 G. Dr. Vilbert’s Canadian Sample ..................................................................................... 84 i WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF PAUL R. CARPENTER revised October 31, 2011 1 I. OVERVIEW/SUMMARY 2 Q1. Please state your name, address and position. 3 A1. My name is Paul R. Carpenter. I am a Principal of The Brattle Group, an economic 4 and management consulting firm with offices in Cambridge, Washington D.C., San 5 Francisco, London, Brussels, Madrid, and Rome. My office is located at 44 Brattle 6 Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138. 7 Q2. Will you briefly describe your educational background and professional 8 qualifications? 9 A2. Yes. I am an economist specializing in the fields of industrial organization, finance 10 and energy and regulatory economics. I received a Ph.D. in Applied Economics and 11 an M.S. in Management from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and a B.A. 12 in Economics from Stanford University. I have been involved in research and 13 consulting on the economics and regulation of the natural gas, oil and electric utility 14 industries in North America and abroad for over twenty-five years. I frequently have 15 testified before federal, state and Canadian regulatory commissions, in federal court 16 and before the U.S. Congress, on issues of pricing, competition and regulatory policy 17 in these industries. Outside of North America, I have advised governments and 18 regulatory bodies on the structure of their natural gas markets and the pricing of gas 19 transmission services. These assignments have included testimony before the U.K. 20 Monopolies and Mergers Commission and the Australian Competition Tribunal, and 21 advice to the governments of, and regulators in, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, 22 New Zealand and Australia. 23 I have been extensively involved in the evaluation of the economics and regulation of 24 the natural gas industry in North America. In Canada, I have advised pipeline 25 companies and have previously testified before the National Energy Board (“NEB” or 26 the “Board”) and the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (“EUB”) on matters relating 27 to pipeline competition and capacity expansion, including the Alliance Pipeline Ltd. 1 WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF PAUL R. CARPENTER revised October 31, 2011 1 certification proceeding. I gave evidence on business risk previously before the NEB 2 in the multi-pipeline cost of capital case on behalf of Foothills Pipe Lines, in more 3 recent NEB proceedings on behalf of TransCanada PipeLines Limited (“TCPL”), and 4 I also gave evidence on business risk in the last proceeding before the Board 5 involving the Trans Québec and Maritimes (“TQM”) pipeline that resulted in 6 Decision RH-1-2008. I provided evidence on business risk before the Ontario Energy 7 Board (“OEB”) on behalf of Union Gas Limited and Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. 8 in each of their 2007 rate applications. I also provided business risk evidence before 9 the Québec Régie de l’énergie in Gaz Métro’s 2008 and 2010 rate cases. Further 10 details of my educational and professional background, as well as a listing of my 11 publications, are provided in my curriculum vitae appended to this evidence as 12 Attachment A. 13 Q3. What assignment were you given in this proceeding? 14 A3. I have been asked by TCPL to provide evidence concerning the Mainline’s current 15 and prospective business risks as they affect the return on capital required by 16 investors in the Mainline. My business risk evidence is one input to the estimates of 17 the Mainline’s cost of capital provided in the evidence of my Brattle colleagues Dr. 18 Lawrence Kolbe and Dr. Michael Vilbert. I have also been asked to evaluate the use 19 of U.S. interstate pipelines and U.S. natural gas local distribution companies 20 (“LDCs”) as comparables to the Mainline for cost of capital estimation purposes. 21 And in particular, I have been asked to provide evidence concerning the business 22 profile and regulatory environment of the LDCs that make up Dr. Vilbert’s U.S. LDC 23 sample and the subset of interstate natural gas pipelines contained in Dr. Vilbert’s 24 U.S. pipeline sample. Finally, I provide evidence concerning the comparability of Dr. 25 Vilbert’s Canadian utility and U.S. oil pipeline samples to the Mainline from a 26 business risk perspective. 2 WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF PAUL R. CARPENTER revised October 31, 2011 1 Q4. Could you summarize your conclusions with respect to the Mainline’s current 2 and prospective business risks? 3 A4. Yes. There has been a substantial and unexpected change in the competitive 4 landscape of the North American natural gas market since the last time the Board 5 evaluated the business risk of the Mainline for cost of capital purposes in RH-2-2004. 6 In particular, the development of new sources of unconventional gas supplies in the 7 Lower 48 has had a profound impact on the pattern of natural gas flows on the 8 pipeline grid in North America. Increasing supplies of natural gas from shale 9 formations in the Lower 48 have reduced the need for Canadian natural gas imports 10 into the Lower 48, resulting in substantial throughput declines on some pipelines, 11 especially the Mainline. These changes are having a significant effect on pipelines 12 like the Mainline that are dependent on the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin 13 (“WCSB”) for gas supply. 14 As a result of these trends, business risk for the Mainline has increased significantly 15 since 2004. The Mainline’s risk has also increased since the time of the Board’s 16 decision in RH-1-2008 for TQM as a result of its deteriorating competitive position. 17 As described in the Company’s evidence, actual throughput on the Mainline for 2010 18 turned out to be over 0.3 Bcf/d lower than TCPL’s 2004 low case forecast in RH-2- 19 2004 Phase II. While WCSB production has declined in recent years, other North 20 American basins have been witnessing reserves and production growth and are 21 vigorously competing for, and capturing, U.S. and Canadian markets that have 22 historically been served by WCSB gas production transported on the Mainline. 23 As an example of these trends, flows on the Mainline into Tennessee Gas Pipeline 24 (“TGP”) at Niagara have declined substantially, from 0.8 Bcf/d in 2004 to 0.2 Bcf/d 25 in 2010, and it is contemplated that physical reversal of flow may occur in the future 26 at Niagara. These declines