Transmission Pricing Methodology
-
TPM judicial review judgement
28 Jun 2022
The High Court released its judgement on 21 June 2022. The Court decided that the application for judicial review is dismissed.
Manawa Energy Limited (formerly Trustpower Limited) applied for judicial review (JR) of the Authority’s 2020 TPM guidelines decision in July 2020. Other parties actively involved in the JR were Fonterra and Nova (on the applicant's side), Meridian (in defence of the decision), and Transpower (a neutral intervener). The High Court hearing of the JR application ran from 18-27 October 2021.
The High Court released its judgment on 21 June 2022. The Court decided that the application for judicial review is dismissed. The judge found that:
- The Authority did not err in its interpretation of its statutory objective or role.
- There is no evidence the Authority's decision was biased or pre-determined.
- The Authority's use of cost-benefit analysis was not unlawful.
- The Authority's decision on the residual charge was not unlawful.
The High Court’s judgement can be found on the Courts of New Zealand’s website.
-
A new Transmission Pricing Methodology
12 Apr 2022
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
12 April, letter from EA to ComCom A new Transmission Pricing Methodology
12-April-letter-from-EA-to-ComCom-A-new-Transmission-Pricing-Methodology.pdf (PDF, 169 KB)
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
12 April, letter from EA to Transpower A new Transmission Pricing Methodology and PD Manual
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
13 April, letter Transpower response to EA New TPM and initial prudent discount practice manual
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
15 June, letter ComCom response to EA A new Transmission Pricing Methodology
15-June-letter-ComCom-response-to-EA-A-new-Transmission-Pricing-Methodology.pdf (PDF, 666 KB)
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
-
Proposed a new TPM
28 Feb 2022
-
28 February 2022, letter from EA to ComCom Proposed new Transmission Pricing Methodology (TPM)
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
17 March 2022, letter ComCom response to EA Proposed new Transmission Pricing Methodology (TPM)
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
-
Commencement Day
22 Feb 2022
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
22 February 2022, letter from EA to Transpower Commencement date for a new transmission pricing methodology (TPM)
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
14 March 2022, letter from EA to Transpower Commencement date for a new transmission pricing methodology (TPM)
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
18 March 2022, letter Transpower response to EA Commencement date for a new transmission pricing methodology (TPM)
Last updated: 30 August 2022
-
-
Transpower releases its proposed TPM
10 Aug 2021
Transpower has released its proposed TPM which it submitted to the Authority on 30 June 2021.
-
Letter from EA CE to Alison Andrew re Transpowers proposed TPM
Letter-from-EA-CE-to-Alison-Andrew-re-Transpowers-proposed-TPM-2021-07-28.pdf (PDF, 558 KB)
Last updated: 09 August 2021
-
Proposed TPM marked up with comments
Proposed-TPM-marked-up-with-comments-2021-07-28.pdf (PDF, 2.1 MB)
Last updated: 09 August 2021
-
-
Electricity storage and residual transmission charges
22 Mar 2021
The Authority has published Electricity storage and residual transmission charges by Sense Partners. It considers the application of the TPM’s residual charge to grid-connected batteries and other similar storage, and provides an early high-level analysis of the issues and possible solutions. It was prepared to support the Authority’s own analysis and is currently being extended into a more detailed consideration of options.
-
Electricity-storage-and-residual-charges-Sense-Partners-v2.pdf
Electricity-storage-and-residual-charges-Sense-Partners-v2.pdf (PDF, 333 KB)
Last updated: 22 March 2021
-
-
Letter to Transpower on TPM residual charges and the treatment of batteries
22 Mar 2021
The Authority has published a letter sent to Transpower on 18 March 2021 regarding the application of the proposed TPM’s provisions relating to the residual charge to grid-connected batteries and similar storage. The respective Transpower and Authority TPM teams have been discussing this issue from time to time since mid-November 2020, when Contact Energy wrote to the Authority outlining its concerns and particularly following the Authority’s response to Transpower’s Checkpoint 2A submission on 7 December 2020.
-
Letter to Transpower re proposed residual charges and the treatment of batteries
Letter-to-Transpower-re-proposed-residual-charges-and-the-treatment-of-batteries.pdf (PDF, 92 KB)
Last updated: 22 March 2021
-
-
Transitioning to proposed new TPM- correspondence with Transpower, New Zealand Steel and the Authority
15 Mar 2021
-
Correspondence-with-Transpower.-NZ-Steel-and-the-Authority.pdf
Correspondence-with-Transpower.-NZ-Steel-and-the-Authority.pdf (PDF, 132 KB)
Last updated: 15 March 2021
-
-
Correspondence following the release of the 2020 TPM Guidelines
29 Jan 2021
Contact Energy letter to the Authority and the Authority's response
-
Contact Energy letter to the Authority
Contact-Energy-letter-to-the-Authority.pdf (PDF, 143 KB)
Last updated: 29 January 2021
-
Authority response to Contact Energy
Authority-response-to-Contact-Energy.pdf (PDF, 145 KB)
Last updated: 29 January 2021
Entrust, IEGA, Trustpower and Vector letters to the Authority, and the Authority's response
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
Entrust letter to the Authority
2020-05-20-Entrust.pdf (PDF, 273 KB)
Last updated: 29 January 2021
-
IEGA letter to the Authority
2020-05-28-IEGA-letter.pdf (PDF, 334 KB)
Last updated: 29 January 2021
-
Trustpower letter to the Authority
Trustpower-letter-to-the-Authority.pdf (PDF, 334 KB)
Last updated: 29 January 2021
-
Vector letter to the Authority
2020-05-20-Vector.pdf (PDF, 1.6 MB)
Last updated: 29 January 2021
-
Authority response to Entrust, IEGA, Trustpower and Vector
Correspondence-with-Entrust-IEGA-Trustpower-and-Vector.pdf (PDF, 663 KB)
Last updated: 29 January 2021
TPM Group letter and response from Transpower and the Authority
The TPM Group wrote to Transpower about the implementation of the 2020 transmission pricing methodology. The letter from the TPM Group and Transpower's response can be read here, while the Authority's response is available below.
-
Authority's response to TPM Group
TPM-Group-letter-and-response-from-Transpower-and-the-Authority.pdf (PDF, 137 KB)
Last updated: 29 January 2021
-
-
Notice of appeal
14 Jul 2020
The Authority has received an appeal against its decision to publish new guidelines and a process for the development of a new proposed TPM. Read the Notice of Appeal and Memorandum of Counsel and its attachment.
-
Notice of Appeal
Notice-of-Appeal-1.pdf (PDF, 2.5 MB)
Last updated: 13 July 2020
-
Memorandum of Counsel
Memorandum-of-Counsel.pdf (PDF, 623 KB)
Last updated: 13 July 2020
-
-
Letters to Transpower and Commerce Commission
22 Jun 2020
Following on from the Authority’s decision on the transmission pricing methodology (TPM) review and the release of new TPM guidelines, the Authority has written to Transpower requesting they develop a TPM consistent with the 2020 guidelines.
The Authority has also written to the Commerce Commission asking the Commission to reconsider Transpower’s Individual Price-Quality Path to recognise the additional costs of TPM development and implementation.
-
Letter to Commerce Commission - 10 June 2020
Letter-to-Commerce-Commission-10-June-2020.pdf (PDF, 117 KB)
Last updated: 22 June 2020
-
Letter to Transpower New Zealand Limited - 10 June 2020
Letter-to-Transpower-New-Zealand-Limited-10-June-2020.pdf (PDF, 79 KB)
Last updated: 22 June 2020
-
-
Correspondence relating to 2019 Issues Paper
27 Sep 2019
Correspondence relating to 2019 Issues Paper.
We received a letter from New Zealand Steel expressing its concerns about the consultation process for the 2019 Issues paper.
-
13 September 2019 - Letter from New Zealand Steel
New-Zealand-Steel-letter-13-September-2019.pdf (PDF, 126 KB)
Last updated: 27 September 2019
-
20 September 2019 - Response to New Zealand Steel
Letter-to-New-Zealand-Steel-Ltd.pdf (PDF, 903 KB)
Last updated: 27 September 2019
Email correspondence with NZ Steel on further engagement on TPM
8 March 2020
Dear Alan
Thank you for your 14 February 2020 email to James Stevenson-Wallace. As with previous correspondence James has asked me to respond directly, as the executive responsible for the TPM consultation process.
I know the Authority Board was most appreciative of the time stakeholders, including New Zealand Steel, invested in making oral submissions last December – they found considerable value in hearing directly from stakeholders. As you note, during New Zealand Steel’s oral submission the Board invited New Zealand Steel to provide further information to the Authority's TPM team, including the NZIER report. Subsequently the Authority received and considered your email of 18 December 2019, and the NZIER report you attached to your 14 February 2020 email.
You have specifically asked about the process to further engage on the points outlined in your email of 18 December 2019. Based on your various engagements with the Authority, including most recently your 3 March 2020 submission on the supplementary consultation paper, we consider that New Zealand Steel has had appropriate opportunities to engage with the Authority and submit its views. Should the Authority’s TPM team require clarification or further information to support its consideration of points made or information provided by New Zealand Steel, they will be in contact with you.
As you are aware the Authority has been proactively releasing TPM related stakeholder correspondence. Although the NZIER report you provided refers to third parties, as it is based on data in the public arena we see no grounds for not publishing it. If you disagree can you please advise, within 5 working days, the grounds upon which you believe the Authority should not publish the report. We will then decide whether or not to publish it. If this timeframe is too short, please contact me as soon as possible to request additional time to respond.
Finally, as previously advised in Market Brief, it is our intention is to publish, this month, papers covering the Authority’s consideration of submissions on the cost benefit analysis and peak charges. We expect to publish the peak charge paper within the next week.
Should you wish to discuss any of this email further, can you please contact my EA, Eleni Kosmadakis (Eleni.Kosmadakis@ea.govt.nz) to arrange a time to talk to me and Jean-Pierre de Raad.
Rob Bernau
General Manager Market Design
Electricity Authority14 February 2020
Hi James
I email to seek clarification regarding the process for further engagement on TPM.
- As you are aware our chief Executive, Gretta Stephens, and myself made an oral submission to the Board on 2 December 2019. We gained the clear impression the Board was keen to further engage on some of the points we raised.
- Having received no follow-up from the Authority, I phoned and spoke with a member of the TPM team on 16 December 2019. I got the impression little if any thought had been given to a follow-up process. It was stressed to me the process was to be kept as formal with written information to be provided. This varied from the impression Gretta and I gained on 2 December that face-to-face interaction was desirable to gain a full understanding of the points raised, particularly with regard to the practical application of the TPM proposals and avoiding perverse outcomes.
- On the 18th of December the email below was sent to the TPM team.
- The Market Brief on 21 January outlined the intention to issue a supplementary consultation document on specific aspects of the TPM proposal. Reference was also made to further engagement on the CBA and peak charging.
- The supplementary consultation paper was published on 11 February. We have briefly reviewed this and may submit on some points. However, the points consulted on are not directly connected to the points we emphasized in our session with the Board on 2 December.
- We look further to the planned engagement later this month on the CBA and peak charging.
In our oral submission we noted work that had been undertaken by NZIER relating to AMD as an allocator. This report has been completed and is attached. While all the information in the report comes from data in the public arena, we are mindful it does include reference to third parties and question if it should be released on the Authority website.
It will be appreciated if you can advise us as to the process to further engage on the points outlined in the email below.
Thanks
Alan Eyes
Energy Manager
New Zealand Steel18 December 2019
To the Electricity Authority Board and TPM review team
Thank you for the opportunity for Gretta Stephens and myself to make an oral submission to the Board on 2 December. We were able to highlight areas of particular concern with the current proposals and interact briefly with the Board on some of the topics. However, there was limited notice given to prepare for the meeting and in the half-hour allocated we could do little more than identify areas we would like the Board to re-examine, and we provided high-level responses to the questions we were asked. Members of the Board indicated they would like to better understand some of the points we raised and have additional information supplied.
Outlined below are the matters we noted from the meeting, but it will be appreciated if these can be confirmed against the notes taken by members of the Board as to the additional information / engagement they are inviting from NZ Steel.
- Information was provided on the NZ Steel EBIT over the last 10 years and that the modelled increase in transmission charges would range between 20-33%. We ask the Authority to re-examine the reasons for excluding wealth transfers from the 23 July proposals and the impact this has on individual businesses and other consumers.
- Concern was expressed at the proposed allocator and the inconsistency of treatment of consumers.
- The Residual, and to a lesser extent benefits charge, form a large part of the proposed revenue recovery formula. The size of the residual is an issue in its own right for the Authority to re-consider.
- An AMD allocator for a large residual is arbitrary and inappropriate. The fact it is proposed to be based on historic AMD and gross of cogen, amplifies the situation.
- The proposal applies AMD at the Transpower customers level. This is inconsistent treatment across consumers and disadvantages direct connect consumers.
If AMD is to be the allocator, it needs to be applied at the ICP level, and related to current load and be net of cogen.
We commended the attention of the Board to the 2015 TPM paper which allocated on an assumed AMD at the ICP level. Also we noted initial analysis undertaken by NZIER for NZ Steel on the subject. This has involved looking at EDB pricing methodology work and assessed AMDs based from coincident peak information. The Board asked we share this work. While we are happy to make available the initial paper, NZIER are currently expanding the EDB information base and we expect a fuller report prior to Christmas. We will welcome the opportunity to work through the detail with you, and answer the question asked re cost differentials between net and gross load.
- Avoiding perverse outcomes. We briefly explained the configuration of the Glenbrook cogen plant and how this is an integral part of the iron making process. The cogen is fuelled by off-gases and waste heat, which if not used for generating electricity would be vented to the atmosphere. On average cogen meets 60% of the electrical energy needs at Glenbrook. This generation is currently the largest north of Huntly and plays an important role in grid stability including power factor, voltage and frequency support. We got the impression members of the Board are as keen as we are to find a way to differentiate cogen such as Glenbrook, and at other industrial plants, from embedded generation built for the purpose of reducing peak charges.
- NZ Steel actively manages load over peaks. This minimises requirements on the grid and the need for further investment. It is achieved with minimal impact on production, and by managing cogen plant outages. We questioned the proposed move for the UNI from a strong coincidental peak pricing signal and pointed out that no, or a weak signal, could see the peak demand at Glenbrook increase by more than the 75MW modelled for the whole country. We encouraged the Authority to recognise the extensive lead times for grid upgrade, and to move away from ‘a one size fits all approach’ for the country. This includes providing Transpower with clear guidelines for a peak pricing signal for the UNI (and other parts of the country where warranted).
Thank you again for the opportunity to make the oral submission. We seek your early confirmation as to the points for further engagement, the timing, and the process.
Regards
Alan Eyes
Energy Manager
New Zealand SteelThe NZIER report below was attached to New Zealand Steel's email from 14 February 2020
The NZIER report was attached to New Zealand Steel
The NZIER report was attached to New Zealand Steel's email from 14 February 2020
-
NZIER report TPM 2019 Residual Allocator
NZIER-report-TPM-2019-Residual-Allocator-2.1-Final.pdf (PDF, 340 KB)
Last updated: 19 May 2020
-
-
Correspondence relating to the second issues paper: supplementary consultation paper
17 Mar 2017
We have received a request from Vector to extend the cross-submissions due date for the TPM second issues: supplementary consultation paper.
-
13 March 2017 - Vector letter to EA requesting extension to cross-submissions due date
13Mar17-VectortoEA-cross-submissions-extension.pdf (PDF, 162 KB)
Last updated: 17 March 2017
-
16 March 2017 - EA response to Vector letter requesting extension
16Mar17-EAtoVector-cross-submissions-extension.pdf (PDF, 538 KB)
Last updated: 17 March 2017
-
-
Correspondence relating to the second issues paper
Jun 2016
We have received requests from Trustpower, Vector, the Auckland Energy Consumer Trust and the Electricity Networks Association to extend the consultation period for the TPM second issues paper.
We have declined their requests because we consider that ten weeks is enough time for interested parties to understand our proposals and prepare high-quality submissions.
-
Letter from AECT requesting extension for reponse to TPM proposal
Letter-from-AECT-requesting-extension-for-reponse-to-TPM-proposal.PDF (PDF, 432 KB)
Last updated: 05 July 2016
-
Letter to AECT re extension for reponse to TPM proposal
Letter-to-AECT-re-extension-for-reponse-to-TPM-proposal.PDF (PDF, 406 KB)
Last updated: 05 July 2016
-
Letter from ENA requesting time extension
Letter-from-ENA-requesting-time-extension-TPP-June-15-2016.PDF (PDF, 132 KB)
Last updated: 05 July 2016
-
Letter to ENA regarding time extension
Letter-to-ENA-re-time-extension-TPP-June-15-2016.PDF (PDF, 412 KB)
Last updated: 05 July 2016
-
Letter from Trustpower requesting extension
Letter-from-Trustpower-requesting-Extension-Jun2016-TPM-DGPPs.PDF (PDF, 334 KB)
Last updated: 05 July 2016
-
Letter to Trustpower regarding extension
Letter-to-Trustpower-re-Extension-Jun2016-TPM-DGPPs.PDF (PDF, 438 KB)
Last updated: 05 July 2016
-
Letter from Vector requesting extension
Letter-from-Vector-requesting-extension-TPM.PDF (PDF, 168 KB)
Last updated: 05 July 2016
-
Letter to Vector regarding extension
Letter-to-Vector-re-extension-TPM.PDF (PDF, 547 KB)
Last updated: 05 July 2016
-
-
Correspondence relating to the options paper submissions
Oct 2015
On 6 October 2015, we received the following cover letter and report from TrustPower regarding the submissions to the TPM options paper.
-
6 October 2015 - Letter from TrustPower regarding TPM options paper submissions
6Oct2105-Covering-letter-regarding-TPM-SoS-analysis.pdf (PDF, 189 KB)
Last updated: 20 October 2015
-
Independent Analysis of Submissions on Transmission Pricing Methodology Options Working Paper
TrustPower-Independent-Analysis-of-Submissions-on-TPM-Options-Working-Paper.pdf (PDF, 1.3 MB)
Last updated: 20 October 2015
-
-
Correspondence relating to the problem definition working paper
Oct 2014
We have received two enquires and sent a request for further information relating to the problem definition working paper.
Email from Genesis Energy 15th October 2014
In our review we have come up against the question of what is lobbying and why is it a problem? What we don’t understand is how the Authority distinguishes between “negative” lobbying and “positive” lobbying.
The Authority’s response, 15th October 2014
The distinction is between lobbying for regime change, which relates to the durability of the TPM, and lobbying for or against a transmission investment, where the issue is whether the charges provide the incentives on parties to reveal to the regulator the value they would receive from an investment. We see the former as problematic since the lobbying involves costs that would be avoided if the TPM were durable while the latter may improve efficiency if it results in more efficient transmission investments, which in turn will help promote efficient investment in generation and load.
Email from Castalia, on behalf of Genesis Energy, 14th October 2014
- What cost concept is being shown by the blue line in Figures 1 and 2?
- In paragraph 11.123, for the vSPD modelling of the impacts of the HAMI charge, is it reasonable to assume that the frequency keeping constraint would be relaxed once new capacity is introduced? And has the Authority considered how much difference it would make to the inefficiency from out-of-merit dispatch to not relax the frequency keeping constraint?
The Authority’s response, 14th October 2014
- This chart is intended to be high level, included to deliver a simple point – that under the current TPM, some customers pay more than the cost of meeting their demand while others pay less. For example, given the way the RCPD charge is calculated, South Island load currently pays a portion of the North Auckland and Northland (NAaN) grid upgrade, whereas this is not a cost associated with meeting South Island demand. Given the price refers to an annual price, the corresponding cost refers to an annual cost, and would include things such as return on capital for the assets required to meet a customer’s demand for transmission services, and operating expenses required to meet that customer’s demand for transmission services.
- The removal of frequency keeping constraints is just a simplification for modelling purposes. It should not be interpreted to mean that frequency keeping constraints would actually be relaxed if new generation was made available. Rather, frequency keeping constraints would continue to be in effect, but the RHS of the constraint would reflect the new, higher, level of generation output.
Letter to Meridian Energy requesting further information, 14 July 2014
The Authority contacted Meridian Energy requesting further information on the impact of HVDC charges. The letter and Meridian’s response can be found below.
-
14 July 2014 - Authority request for further information
14July2014-Authority-request-for-further-information.pdf (PDF, 941 KB)
Last updated: 24 June 2015
-
24 July 2014 - Meridian response
24July2014-Meridian-response.pdf (PDF, 96 KB)
Last updated: 17 August 2016
-
Correspondence relating to the beneficiaries-pay working paper
Mar 2014
We have received the following request to extend the submissions timeframe for the Beneficiaries-pay working paper, which is due to close at 5pm on 25 March 2014:
-
Letter from Contact Energy, 3 March 2014
Ltr-from-Contact-Energy-3-March-2014.PDF (PDF, 527 KB)
Last updated: 17 August 2016
-
Authority response to Contact Energy, 17 March 2014
Letter-to-Contact-Energy-17-March-2013.PDF (PDF, 933 KB)
Last updated: 17 August 2016
-
-
Correspondence relating to the TPM review process
Mar – Apr 2014
We have received the following letter from TrustPower regarding the TPM review process.
The letter and the Authority's response can be found below.
-
Letter from TrustPower, 25 March 2014
Letter-fromTrustPower-re-TPM-process-25-March-2014.pdf (PDF, 204 KB)
Last updated: 17 August 2016
-
Authority response to TrustPower, 25 March 2014
Authority-response-to-letter-TrustPower-25-March-2014.pdf (PDF, 159 KB)
Last updated: 17 August 2016
-
-
Correspondence relating to the ACOT working paper
Dec 2013
We have received the following requests to extend the submissions timeframe for the ACOT working paper, which is due to close at 5pm on 31 January 2014:
-
Letter from Energy3 Limited, 3 December 2013
Letter-from-Energy3-3-December-2013-Electricity-Authority-ACOT-3-December-2013.PDF (PDF, 131 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Energy3 Limited, 9 December 2013
Ltr-to-Energy-3-5-December-2013-extension-of-ACOT-timeframe.PDF (PDF, 369 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Letter from Independent Electricity Generators Association, 3 December 2013
Ltr-from-IEGA-TPM-ACOT-extension-3-Dec-13.PDF (PDF, 184 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Independent Electricity Generators Association, 9 December 2013
Ltr-to-IEGA-6-December-2013-extension-to-ACOT-working-paper.PDF (PDF, 626 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Letter from Pioneer Generation, 3 December 2013
Ltr-from-Pioneer-Generation-ACOT-working-paper-extension-request-3Dec13.PDF (PDF, 86 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Pioneer Generation, 9 December
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Email from EnviroWaste Services Limited, 4 December 2013
email-from-EnviroWaste-4-December-2013-extension-to-ACOT-working-paper.PDF (PDF, 37 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to EnviroWaste Services Limited, 9 December 2013
Ltr-to-EnviroWaste-6-December-2013-Extension-to-ACOT-working-paper.PDF (PDF, 614 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Letter from Buller Electricity Limited, 9 December 2013
Ltr-from-Buller-Electricity-Ltd-9-December-2013-Request-for-ACOT-Extension-2.PDF (PDF, 295 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Buller Electricity Limited, 11 December 2013
Letter-to-Buller.pdf (PDF, 78 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Letter from Wind Farm Group, 11 December 2013
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Wind Farm Group, 11 December 2013
Ltr-to-Wind-Farm-Group-Ltd-11-December-2013-extension-to-ACOT-timeframe.PDF (PDF, 381 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Letter from Trustpower, 20 December 2013
Ltr-from-Trustpower-20-December-2013-.pdf (PDF, 125 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Trustpower, 23 December 2013
Ltr-to-TrustPower-23-December-2013.pdf (PDF, 701 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
-
Correspondence relating to concerns about the proposed TPM
Nov 2013 – Jan 2014
On 21 November 2013, The Proprietors of Taheke 8C & Adjoining Blocks (inc) wrote to us outlining their concerns with the proposed TPM. We responded on 2 December 2013.
-
Letter from the Proprietors of Taheke 8C & Adjoining Blocks (inc), 21 November 2013
Ltr-from-Taheke-8C-21-November-2013.pdf (PDF, 638 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Authority response to the Proprietors of Taheke 8C & Adjoining Blocks (inc), 2 December 2013
Ltr-to-Taheke-8C-2-Dec-2013.pdf (PDF, 80 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
On 19 December, Ruahine & Kuharua Incorporated wrote to us outlining their concerns with the proposed TPM. We responded on 14 January 2014.
-
Letter from Ruahine & Kuharua Incorporated, 19 December 2013
Ltr-from-Ruahine-Kuharua-Incorporated-19-December-2013.PDF (PDF, 695 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Authority response to Ruahine & Kuharua Incorporated, 14 January 2014
Ltr-to-Ruahine-Kuharua-Incorporated-14-Jan-2014.PDF (PDF, 645 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
On 18 January 2014, Paehinahina Mourea Trust wrote to us outlining their concerns with the proposed TPM. We responded on 3 February 2014.
-
Letter from Paehinahina Mourea Trust, 18 January 2014
Letter-from-Paehinahina-Mourea-Trust-18-January-2014.PDF (PDF, 523 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Letter to Paehinahina Mourea Trust, 3 February 2014
Letter-to-Paehinahina-Mourea-Trust-3-February-2014.PDF (PDF, 624 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
-
Correspondence relating to Tiwai Point charges
Oct – Nov 2013
On 30 October 2013, we received a letter from Meridian Energy regarding the transmission charges faced at Tiwai Point. We responded on 4 November 2013.
-
Letter from Meridian Energy, 30 October 2013
Ltr-from-M-Binns-30-October-2013-Tiwai-Point-Transmission-costs.PDF (PDF, 504 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
Authority response to Meridian Energy, 4 November 2013
Response-to-M-Binns-4-November-2013-Tiwai-Point-Transmission-costs.PDF (PDF, 79 KB)
Last updated: 25 June 2015
-
-
Correspondence and feedback relating to the TPM conference
Apr – Jul 2013
We received a number of letters in advance of it's conference that was held in May 2013. The letters received and the response are published below.
Transmission pricing methodology review - issues and proposal.
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
Letter from Genesis Energy dated 18 April 2013
Ltr-from-Genesis-Energy-18-April-2013.pdf (PDF, 1.2 MB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Genesis Energy dated 26 April 2013
Response-to-Genesis-26-April-2013.pdf (PDF, 347 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from Contact Energy dated 22 April 2013
Ltr-from-Contact-Energy-22-April-2013.pdf (PDF, 321 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Contact Energy dated 26 April 2013
Response-to-Contact-26-April-2013.pdf (PDF, 340 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from Energy3 Limitted 24 April 2013
Letter-from-Energy-3-TPM-24-April-2013.PDF (PDF, 96 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Energy3 Limited 6 May 2013
Response-to-Energy3-Limited.PDF (PDF, 278 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from Auckland District Health Board 30 April 2013
Letter-from-Auckland-district-health-board.PDF (PDF, 436 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Auckland District Health Board 6 May 2013
Response-to-Auckland-district-health-board.PDF (PDF, 279 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from Pioneer Generation 30 April 2013
Ltr-from-Pioneer-re-TPM-conference.PDF (PDF, 189 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Pioneer Generation 6 May 2013
Response-to-Pioneer-Generation.PDF (PDF, 367 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from Vector - 3 May 2013
Letter-from-Vector-to-EA-re-TPM-Conference-BG.PDF (PDF, 104 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Vector Ltd - 9 May 2013
Response-to-Vector-Ltd-.PDF (PDF, 297 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from MEUG - 9 May 2013
MEUG-to-EA-TPM-conference-09-May-13.PDF (PDF, 32 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to MEUG - 10 May 2013
Response-to-MEUG-.PDF (PDF, 330 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
On 9 July 2013, we received a letter from Vector providing feedback on the TPM conference. We responded to Vector on 15 July 2013.
-
Letter from Vector, 9 July 2013
Vector-EA-Feedback-on-TPM-Conference-2013-07-05.pdf (PDF, 191 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Vector, 15 July 2013
Letter-to-Vector-10-July-2013.pdf (PDF, 91 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
-
Correspondence relating to the October 2012 Issues paper
Nov 2012 – Mar 2013
We have received several letters of communication throughout the consultation process.
We received a number of requests to extend the consultation timeframe, which was due to close on 30 November 2012:
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
Letter from MEUG, 5 November 2012
Ltr-from-MEUG-05-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 26 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Letter from NZ Steel, 5 November 2012
NZ-steel-5-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 120 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Letter from TrustPower, 6 November 2012
TrustPower-r6-November-2012.PDF (PDF, 464 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from Contact Energy, 7 November 2012
Ltr-from-Contact-Energy-7-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 218 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Contact Energy, MEUG, NZ Steel and TrustPower, 9 November 2012
Authority-response-letters-9-November-2012.PDF (PDF, 1.4 MB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
We subsequently received requests to extend the consultation time frame further:
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
Letter from Mighty River Power, 9 November 2012
Ltr-from-MRP-9-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 446 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Joint letter from Consumer, EMA and MEUG, 9 November 2012
Joint-letter-from-consumer-EMA-and-MEUG-09-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 100 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Letter from Contact Energy, 7 November 2012
Ltr-from-Contact-Energy-7-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 218 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
On 27 November, we agreed to extend the consultation time frame to 1 March 2013, we responded to the requests on 30 November 2012:
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
Authority response to Contact Energy, 30 November 2012
Ltr-to-Contact-30-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 571 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Mighty River Power, 30 November 2012
Ltr-to-MRP-30-Nov-2012.PDF (PDF, 583 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Consumer, EMA and MEUG, 30 November 2012
Ltr-to-EMA-MEUG-and-Consumer-30-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 1.6 MB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
We have received the following correspondence from parties regarding the consultation process:
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
Letter from Vector, 13 November 2012
Ltr-from-Vector-13-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 714 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Vector, 30 November 2012
Ltr-to-Vector-30-Nov-12.PDF (PDF, 336 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from TrustPower, 26 November 2012
Ltr-from-TrustPower-26-Nov-2012.PDF (PDF, 903 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to TrustPower, 13 December 2012
Ltr-to-TrustPower-13-December-12.PDF (PDF, 789 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
We received the following correspondence during the consultation of the TPM proposal:
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
Letter from Tauhara North No. 2 Trust, 13 December 2012
Ltr-from-Tauhara-North-No-2-Trust-13-Decemebr-2012.PDF (PDF, 204 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Tauhara North No. 2 Trust, 17 December 2012
Ltr-to-Tauhara-North-No.2-Trust-17-December-2012.PDF (PDF, 81 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Letter from Tauhara North No. 2 Trust, 19 December 2012
Letter-from-Tauhara-North-No.2-Trust-19-December-2012.PDF (PDF, 208 KB)
Last updated: 18 August 2016
-
Authority response to Tauhara North No. 2 Trust, 21 December 2012
Letter-to-Tauhara-North-No.2-Block-21-December-2012-2.PDF (PDF, 527 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
We have received the following requests to extend the cross-submissions time frame, which closed at 5pm on 28 March 2013.
-
Download a ZIP file containing all documents
-
Letter from TrustPower, 1 March 2013
Ltr-from-TrustPower-1Mar13.PDF (PDF, 234 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to TrustPower, 8 March 2013
Ltr-to-TrustPower-8Mar13.PDF (PDF, 327 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Letter from Contact Energy, 8 March 2013
Ltr-from-Contact-8March13.PDF (PDF, 229 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
Authority response to Contact Energy, 12 March 2013
Ltr-to-Contact-12March13.pdf (PDF, 315 KB)
Last updated: 26 June 2015
-
-
Correspondence relating to the TPAG Transmission Pricing Discussion paper
Jun – Jul 2011
We received four requests for an extension to the submissions deadline. We have declined the requests to grant an extension in each case after consideration of the appropriateness of a later deadline.
-
Email from NZ Steel, 30 June 2011
Email-from-NZSteel.pdf (PDF, 131 KB)
Last updated: 19 August 2016
-
Authority response to NZ Steel, 4 July 2011
Response-to-NZSteel.pdf (PDF, 51 KB)
Last updated: 19 August 2016
-
Letter from MEUG, 30 June 2011
Letter-from-MEUG.pdf (PDF, 19 KB)
Last updated: 19 August 2016
-
Authority response to MEUG, 4 July 2011
Response-to-MEUG.pdf (PDF, 51 KB)
Last updated: 19 August 2016
-
Letter from Norske Skog Tasman, 30 June 2011
Letter-from-NorskeSkogTasman.pdf (PDF, 24 KB)
Last updated: 19 August 2016
-
Authority response to Norske Skog Tasman, 4 July 2011
Response-to-NorskeSkogTasman.pdf (PDF, 51 KB)
Last updated: 19 August 2016
-
Email from Fonterra, 1 July 2011
Email-from-Fonterra.pdf (PDF, 131 KB)
Last updated: 19 August 2016
-
Authority response to Fonterra, 4 July 2011
Response-to-Fonterra.pdf (PDF, 51 KB)
Last updated: 19 August 2016
-
-
Correspondence from Transpower - October 2009
30 Oct 2009
The below letter from Transpower outlines issues that are relevant to the on-going transmission pricing review.
-
Letter from Transpower dated 30 October 2009
TP-ltr-30Oct09.pdf (PDF, 854 KB)
Last updated: 06 August 2015
-
Contact Us
EMAIL: info@ea.govt.nz
Sign up to our newsletter
© 2023 Copyright material on this site is protected by copyright owned by the Electricity Authority or its licensors. Full copyright statement.