{"id":143394,"date":"2018-01-03T00:45:46","date_gmt":"2018-01-03T05:45:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=143394"},"modified":"2018-01-03T00:45:46","modified_gmt":"2018-01-03T05:45:46","slug":"energy-regulator-orders-compensation-cut-in-nuclear-budget-for-opg","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2018\/01\/03\/energy-regulator-orders-compensation-cut-in-nuclear-budget-for-opg\/","title":{"rendered":"Energy regulator orders compensation cut in nuclear budget for OPG"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_143400\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-143400\" style=\"width: 800px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><a href=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/OPG_Bldg.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-143400\" src=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/OPG_Bldg.jpg\" alt=\"OPG's head office in downtown Toronto (Photo By Aardvark114 at English Wikipedia - Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons., Public Domain)\" width=\"800\" height=\"604\" srcset=\"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/OPG_Bldg.jpg 800w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/OPG_Bldg-300x227.jpg 300w, https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/OPG_Bldg-768x580.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px\" \/><\/a><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-143400\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">OPG&#8217;s head office in downtown Toronto <a href=\"https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/w\/index.php?curid=37430536\">(Photo By Aardvark114 at English Wikipedia &#8211; Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons., Public Domain)<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>TORONTO\u2014 Ontario Power Generation must cut $500 million over the next five years from its nuclear operations budget after the province&#8217;s energy regulator took issue with compensation, corporate and administrative costs, including &#8220;excessive&#8221; pension and benefit levels at the province&#8217;s largest electricity producer.<\/p>\n<p>The Ontario Energy Board ordered the cuts in a decision released Friday.<\/p>\n<p>OPG must cut $150 million in pensions and benefits costs by 2021. It will make the other $350 million in cuts over that period from proposed corporate costs and its administration, operations and maintenance budget.<\/p>\n<p>The energy board&#8217;s decision comes after OPG, in May 2016, asked for $16.8 billion from the board for a period between 2017 and 2021 a request that would ultimately lead to an increase in rates.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The OEB finds that OPG&#8217;s overall pension and benefits costs are clearly excessive &#8230; there is voluminous evidence demonstrating that the costs of these programs are well above market,&#8221; the OEB report said. &#8220;It would not be reasonable, in the OEB&#8217;s view, to require ratepayers to pay these excessive costs.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>According to the decision, OPG offers both current and retired employees a &#8220;comprehensive&#8221; benefits package including a &#8220;generous&#8221; registered pension plan and supplemental pension plan and they cost the company &#8220;hundreds of millions of dollars per year.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>The report also notes that Ontario&#8217;s Auditor General has previously highlighted that the OPG&#8217;s pension plans and the company&#8217;s contribution ratios. In 2013, the auditor said OPG contributions are between four to one or five to one ratios when compared to employee contributions. In Ontario&#8217;s public service, the standard is generally a one to one contribution ratio, the OEB report said.<\/p>\n<p>The report notes that while those ratios have come down, they remain at least a two to one ratio.<\/p>\n<p>OPG said its request is intended to, in part, help offset the cost of a major nuclear refurbishment project at the Darlington Nuclear Station and the continued operation of the Pickering Nuclear Station past 2020.<\/p>\n<p>The OEB&#8217;s decision approves a request for $4.8 billion in costs related to the Darlington refurbishments and $292 million in fees associated with Pickering and says a rate increase associated with the request will be retroactively effective from June 1, 2017.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;OPG is reviewing the decision in detail,&#8221; the company said in a statement, adding that it will submit a draft rate order to implement the OEB&#8217;s decision by Jan. 17.<\/p>\n<p>While the final impact will be determined in early 2018, OPG estimated that its application would cost the average ratepayer an additional 65 cents a month over the five-year-period.<\/p>\n<p>The OEB also notes that the impact of the rate increase would not immediately be felt by consumers because of the Liberal government&#8217;s 25 per cent cut to hydro bills.<\/p>\n<p>The government plan is largely achieved by lowering time-of-use rates. That is done by removing from bills a portion of the global adjustment a charge consumers pay for above-market rates to power producers for the next 10 years.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime, producers will continue being paid the same, so Ontario Power Generation has been tapped to oversee the debt used to pay that difference through a new entity called OPG Trust. The cost of paying back the debt with interest will then go back onto ratepayers&#8217; bills for the following 20 years.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>TORONTO\u2014 Ontario Power Generation must cut $500 million over the next five years from its nuclear operations budget after the &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":143400,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[41489,41490,32296],"class_list":["post-143394","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news-ca","tag-energy-regulator-orders-compensation-cut-in-nuclear-budget-for-opg","tag-nuclear-operations-budget","tag-ontario-power-generation","mauthors-shawn-jeffords","mauthors-the-canadian-press"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143394","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=143394"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143394\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/143400"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143394"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143394"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143394"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}