Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada provided $7.658 million in funding to the Sault smart grid project through the green infrastructure smart grid program. The program selected projects through a competitive request for proposals process. Applications were assessed by a committee of evaluators according to established evaluation criteria and recommended for funding consideration.
Responsibility for matters such as project regulatory approval, public consultation and assessment of privacy and security risks rests with the provincial electricity regulator, which in the case of this project is the Ontario Energy Board, or OEB. Any specific questions pertaining to consultation, privacy or security should be addressed to the OEB.
In response to parts (a) and (b) of the question, the evaluation of the project was completed by a technical review committee according to defined evaluation criteria such as alignment with program objectives, project risk and project impact. As one of the top-ranked projects resulting from the evaluation of proposals, the project was considered as part of an overall recommended portfolio for the technology types and regional balance aspects provided. The result of this portfolio analysis was that the project was recommended for funding by the program.
In response to parts (c) and (d) of the question, the legislative responsibility to assess privacy and security risks belongs to the provincial electricity regulator, in this case the OEB. The project application to the program referenced existing cybersecurity requirements and their considerations within the project, with no issues identified by reviewers.
With respect to part (e) of the question, project evaluations by the technical review committees, composed of subject matter experts internal to the federal government and external, and within the program were completed to determine a recommended portfolio of projects for approval. The feedback from the evaluation committee focused on the merits of the proposals measured against the established evaluation framework.
In response to part (f) of the question, utility projects require approval from provincial electricity regulators to move forward, in this case the OEB. These regulatory review processes are intensive, involve extensive consultation processes and require that sufficient engagement be demonstrated where applicable. NRCan approved funding up to 25% of total project costs, and disbursement of funds was contingent on the ability of the proponent to obtain the regulatory approval necessary to proceed. The program did not add additional consultation requirements.
Regarding part (g) of the question, funding conditions are specified in a standard contribution agreement between Canada and the proponent, in this case PUC Distribution Inc. Project CAs use general terms that are non-negotiable unless those standard provisions are a legal impediment to entering into the agreement. The CA outlines a variety of conditions, including but not limited to intellectual property, indemnity, default, reporting requirements, disposition of assets, conflict of interest, confidentiality, eligible expenditure period, total project costs and contribution percentages.
In response to part (h) of the question, funding was disbursed quarterly following review and approval of quarterly expense reports submitted by the proponent within the eligible expenditure period from September 5, 2018, to March 31, 2023. NRCan reimbursed funding only based on eligible expenses incurred within a given quarter. NRCan contributed a total combined amount of $7.658 million towards the project.
In response to part (i) of the question, the contribution agreement specifies reporting requirements, including documentation for submitted claims, ongoing progress and technical reports, final financial and technical reports, post-completion revenue reporting, and a technical performance report for hold-back release.
With respect to parts (j) and (k) of the question, the project received approval from the OEB in April 2021 via a decision and order whereby the OEB determines sufficiency of engagement and the associated regulatory approval process provides opportunities for public intervention.
In response to part (l) of the question, the program did not complete its own internal analysis of the costs and benefits of advanced metering infrastructure. The costs and benefits of utility projects are specific to each utility system. Analysis of the costs and benefits is the responsibility of the regulator, in this case the OEB, which found that the project is in the public interest, delivering direct benefits to customers.
As for part (m) of the question, the legislative responsibility to ensure that a utility will protect system security, ensure redundancy and protect privacy belongs to the provincial electricity regulator, in this case the OEB. This performance is considered during provincial regulatory approval filings and requires regular demonstration of compliance. NRCan funding is contingent on receiving regulatory approval to proceed.
