OEB Responds to Comments from Kevin Lloyd, Rick Lloyd and Ian Chadwick

Councillor Kevin Lloyd, former Councillor Ian Chadwick, former Deputy Mayor Rick Lloyd
Councillor Kevin Lloyd, former Councillor Ian Chadwick, former Deputy Mayor Rick Lloyd have all written letters to the Ontario Energy Board


The OEB does not consider it necessary to delay the processing of these applications

The Ontario Energy Board has responded to comments pertaining to the Town of Collingwood sale of Collus PowerStream to EPCOR submitted by current Town of Collingwood Councillor Kevin Lloyd, former Collingwood Councillor Ian Chadwick and former Collingwood Deputy Mayor Rick Lloyd.

Councillor Kevin Lloyd’s letter was filed on May 7, 2018. Former Deputy Mayor Rick Lloyd’s letter was filed on May 10th. Former Councillor Ian Chadwick’s letters (2) were filed on May 2, 2018 and on May 11th, 2018.


Current Town of Collingwood Councillor Kevin Lloyd had written to the Ontario Energy Board to express his concerns about the sale of 50% of Collus PowerStream to Epcor.

Lloyd made it clear to the regulatory body that he was never in agreement with the sale.

“I’m a sitting Councillor for the Town of Collingwood. For the sake of disclosure, I have opposed this sale from the beginning”

In his letter to the Ontario Energy Board, Lloyd stated that he felt the sale was not in the best interests of the residents presently served by Collus PowerStream.

“In the case of the sale of the remaining 50% of Collus PowerStream and the subsequent sale of 100% to EPCOR, I am deeply concerned that the process was not in the best interest of all parties, including the residents.”

Lloyd stated in his letter that the public had no input into the process which in his opinion was unacceptable when disposing of a public asset.

“I am asking you to seriously consider the process that led us to where we are today when reviewing this application.”


The Ontario Energy Board replied to Kevin Lloyd on May 25th, 2018.

May 25, 2018

Mr. Kevin Lloyd:

Re: Applications by the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood and EPCOR Collingwood Distribution Corp. for approval of share acquisition transactions and related matters
OEB File Numbers: EB-2017-0373/EB-2017-0374

This letter is in response to the letter of comment that you filed on May 7, 2018.

On January 19, 2016, the OEB issued a Handbook to Electricity Distributor and Transmitter Consolidations (Handbook) setting out the OEB’s scope of review with respect to applications relating to mergers, acquisitions, amalgamations and divestitures (MAADs).

In reviewing a proposed MAADs transaction, the OEB considers the following factors in detail: any impact of the proposed transaction on the price and quality of service to customers, and the cost effectiveness, economic efficiency and financial viability of the consolidating entities. These factors are part of the OEB’s statutory objectives. The OEB assesses the cumulative impact of the transaction with respect to these factors. If the OEB finds that the impact is positive or neutral, the OEB will approve the proposed transaction. This is more generally known as the ‘no harm’ test.

The Handbook also clarifies that the OEB will not consider issues relating to the overall merits or rationale for the applicants’ consolidation plans nor the negotiating strategies or positions of the parties to the transaction. The OEB will also not consider issues relating to the extent of the due diligence, the degree of public consultation or public disclosure by the parties leading up to the filing of the transaction with the OEB.

The OEB issued a Notice of Hearing for these applications on February 13, 2018 advising that the OEB is holding a public hearing to consider these applications. The OEB’s hearing process provides individuals and groups that represent the customers of the utility, in this case Collus PowerStream Corp. (Collus), the opportunity to question the applicants and to file arguments. At the end of this hearing, the OEB will decide whether to approve these applications.

The OEBs hearing is a fully public and transparent process which provides adequate opportunity for the OEB to obtain the information that it requires in order to make a decision on these applications. Any Collus ratepayer that has concerns about the applicants meeting the ‘no harm’ test is free to participate and make submissions to the OEB.

Yours truly,

Kirsten Walli
Board Secretary


On May 25, 2018, the Ontario Energy Board also responded to two letters submitted to them by former Collingwood Councillor Ian Chadwick.

May 25, 2018

Dear Mr. Chadwick:

Re: Applications by the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood and EPCOR Collingwood Distribution Corp. for approval of share acquisition transactions and related matters
OEB File Numbers: EB-2017-0373/EB-2017-0374

This letter is in response to the letters of comment that you filed on May 2, 2018 and on May 11, 2018. Your letters request for a delay in the processing of the above named applications so that the OEB can require the applicants to conduct a public consultation and engagement process regarding the proposed applications.

On January 19, 2016, the OEB issued a Handbook to Electricity Distributor and Transmitter Consolidations (Handbook) setting out the OEB’s scope of review with respect to applications relating to mergers, acquisitions, amalgamations and divestitures (MAADs).

In reviewing a proposed MAADs transaction, the OEB considers the following factors in detail: any impact of the proposed transaction on the price and quality of service to customers, and the cost effectiveness, economic efficiency and financial viability of the consolidating entities. These factors are part of the OEB’s statutory objectives. The OEB assesses the cumulative impact of the transaction with respect to these factors. If the OEB finds that the impact is positive or neutral, the OEB will approve the proposed transaction. This is more generally known as the ‘no harm’ test.

The Handbook also clarifies that the OEB will not consider issues relating to the overall merits or rationale for the applicants’ consolidation plans nor the negotiating strategies or positions of the parties to the transaction. The OEB will also not consider issues relating to the extent of the due diligence, the degree of public consultation or public disclosure by the parties leading up to the filing of the transaction with the OEB.

The OEB issued a Notice of Hearing for these applications on February 13, 2018 advising that the OEB is holding a public hearing to consider these applications. The OEB’s hearing process provides individuals and groups that represent the customers of the utility, in this case Collus PowerStream Corp. (Collus), the opportunity to question the applicants and to file arguments. At the end of this hearing, the OEB will decide whether to approve these applications.

The OEBs hearing is a fully public and transparent process which provides adequate opportunity for the OEB to obtain the information that it requires in order to make a decision on these applications. Any Collus ratepayer that has concerns about the applicants meeting the ‘no harm’ test is free to participate and make submissions to the OEB. Given the scope of the OEB’s review as outlined above, however, the OEB does not consider it necessary to delay the processing of these applications.

Yours truly,

Kirsten Walli
Board Secretary


On May 25, 2018, the OMB replied to a letter of comment submitted by former Collingwood Deputy Mayor Rick Lloyd

The Ontario Energy Board issued a similar response to former Collingwood Deputy Mayor Rick Lloyd.

May 25, 2018

Dear Mr. Lloyd:

Re: Applications by the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood and EPCOR Collingwood Distribution Corp. for approval of share acquisition transactions and related matters
OEB File Numbers: EB-2017-0373/EB-2017-0374

This letter is in response to the letter of comment that you filed on May 10, 2018. Your letter requests for a delay in the processing of the above named applications so that the OEB can require the applicants to conduct a public consultation and engagement process regarding the proposed applications.

On January 19, 2016, the OEB issued a Handbook to Electricity Distributor and Transmitter Consolidations (Handbook) setting out the OEB’s scope of review with respect to applications relating to mergers, acquisitions, amalgamations and divestitures (MAADs).

In reviewing a proposed MAADs transaction, the OEB considers the following factors in detail: any impact of the proposed transaction on the price and quality of service to customers, and the cost effectiveness, economic efficiency and financial viability of the consolidating entities. These factors are part of the OEB’s statutory objectives. The OEB assesses the cumulative impact of the transaction with respect to these factors. If the OEB finds that the impact is positive or neutral, the OEB will approve the proposed transaction. This is more generally known as the ‘no harm’ test.

The Handbook also clarifies that the OEB will not consider issues relating to the overall merits or rationale for the applicants’ consolidation plans nor the negotiating strategies or positions of the parties to the transaction. The OEB will also not consider issues relating to the extent of the due diligence, the degree of public consultation or public disclosure by the parties leading up to the filing of the transaction with the OEB.

The OEB issued a Notice of Hearing for these applications on February 13, 2018 advising that the OEB is holding a public hearing to consider these applications. The OEB’s hearing process provides individuals and groups that represent the customers of the utility, in this case Collus PowerStream Corp. (Collus), the opportunity to question the applicants and to file arguments. At the end of this hearing, the OEB will decide whether to approve these applications.

The OEBs hearing is a fully public and transparent process which provides adequate opportunity for the OEB to obtain the information that it requires in order to make a decision on these applications. Any Collus ratepayer that has concerns about the applicants meeting the ‘no harm’ test is free to participate and make submissions to the OEB. Given the scope of the OEB’s review as outlined above, however, the OEB does not consider it necessary to delay the processing of these applications.

Yours truly,

Kirsten Walli
Board Secretary


CLICK HERE to review all Ontario Energy Board correspondence including letters written and responses given.


CLICK HERE TO RETURN TO NEWS HEADLINES