Industries · Electricity network
Electricity network
A distribution business is preparing a regulatory reset. Its repex proposal has to survive a regulator who has rejected volume-based replacement arguments twice, and it needs to show risk, not age, driving the programme.
Who this is for
Three people, one budget argument
Asset strategy manager
Owns the plan and answers for it. Everything on screen is built to make that week easier.
Reliability engineer
Holds the budget line and carries the valuation. Cares about defensibility before features.
Head of regulation
Signs, and is the one asked the awkward question in public. Needs one page, not a tour.
Asset classes
What AIPP scores in this industry
Configured for this industry out of the box: condition on the CNAIM_HI scale, the ENERGY weighting profile, budget shown as Regulatory period repex allowance, and the instruments it answers to (CIGRE_TB, IEEE_C57_104, IEEE1366, AS_NZS_7000) named on every score. All of it is yours to change — the weights are sliders, not our opinion.
The honest bit
6 of 30 assets will not score
That is the demo register for this industry, and the gaps are deliberate. AIPP refuses to rank an asset the evidence does not support — it will not apply a curve, a zero or a middle grade to a thing nobody has inspected. 20% of this register comes back unranked, with the reason named.
6 of 30 assets carry NO condition evidence and NO age. That is deliberate. A demo register where everything scores teaches a prospect nothing about what happens to the two-thirds of their own register that will not — and it is exactly where most tools quietly invent a zero. Open the demo on these.
How it runs
From export to defensible programme
Health indices already calculated in your own system load as bands; DGA status loads as transformer condition. AIPP does not recompute either.
Bushfire and safety consequence weight above service continuity — the emphasis a network regulator expects to see.
Ranking is by monetised risk reduction, not by asset age or installation vintage.
The repex envelope constrains the programme; the deferred set is reported with its reliability effect.
The prudency narrative exports with the basis of every figure, including which coefficients are AIPP's.
What you will see
The screens that matter here
Fair questions
What this industry actually asks us
Do you do CNAIM?
No, and it is declared as a gap in the registry rather than blurred. AIPP ranks on a health index you supply and adds the constrained programme and the defence CNAIM does not produce.
Our reliability model already monetises risk.
Good — feed it in as consequence. AIPP's contribution is the constrained multi-year allocation and the audit trail, not a competing risk number.
How do we know your coefficients are right?
They are not yours yet. They are labelled representative and unvalidated everywhere they appear, and the calibration path is a real feature, not a promise.
Run it on your own worst class
Bring one export — the class with the missing condition data and the costs from 2019. If AIPP tells you the truth about it in twenty minutes, that is worth a conversation. If it scores everything and looks clean, tell us so.