Sanctions

The IESO's Market Assessment and Compliance Division (MACD) monitors the operation of Ontario's electricity grid and market, investigating potential non-compliance with the Ontario market rules and North American reliability standards. Market participants who are found in breach of the market rules or reliability standards may be subject to enforcement sanctions if MACD considers it appropriate. Such possible enforcement sanctions range from non-compliance letters to financial penalties. Persistent breaches may result in de-registration, suspension or termination of the right to participate in the market.

A key goal of enforcement is to encourage compliance which benefits the reliability of the IESO-controlled grid and operations of the IESO-administered markets. In considering the appropriate sanction, Chapter 3, section 6.2.7 of the market rules requires MACD to consider a range of factors such as: actual or potential impacts on the market, other participants and reliability; “the presence and quality” of the market participant’s compliance program; and other factors. Market participants who have developed effective Internal Compliance Programs (ICPs) reduce the likelihood of committing breaches and being subject to enforcement actions.

Below is a list of enforcement sanctions that have been applied by MACD.

2016 Sanctions


  1. Resolute FP Canada Inc. ("Resolute"): On August 22, 2016, pursuant to Chapter 3 of the market rules, the IESO issued a non-compliance letter to Resolute FP Canada Inc. (“Resolute”) for breach of the requirements of the following provisions of the market rules:
  1. Chapter 7, section 3.3.8;
  2. Chapter 7, section 3.5.6; and
  3. Chapter 7, section 7.5.1.

The IESO’s determination relates to Resolute’s operation of its dispatchable pulp and paper facilities located in Fort Frances and Thunder Bay, during the period October, 2004 to September, 2013, as applicable. In this regard, the IESO has determined that on certain occasions during the relevant period, Resolute engaged in the following conduct:

  1. submitted bid quantities to the IESO in excess of the facility’s ability to withdraw energy from the IESO-controlled grid;
  2. failed to update dispatch data to be consistent with the reasonable expectations of the quantity of energy to be delivered or withdrawn by the facility; and
  3. deviated from the IESO’s dispatch instructions.

The non-compliance letter was issued as part of a settlement between the IESO and Resolute. Without acknowledging or admitting any breach of the market rules, Resolute has accepted, without contest, the IESO’s determinations and has agreed to voluntarily repay the amount of $8,750,000.00. This payment is in addition to an earlier voluntary repayment by Resolute in the amount of $1,825,010.03.

Going forward, Resolute has also agreed to develop and implement an Internal Compliance Program (“ICP”) in order to ensure that potential breaches of the market rules are detected and corrected. In doing so, Resolute will take into account relevant IESO guidance, including the Statement of Approach published December 19, 2013
(see Internal Compliance Programs).  Resolute will implement the ICP within one year of the date of the settlement with the IESO.

2015 Sanctions


  1. Goreway Station Partnership ("Goreway"):  On December 15, 2015, pursuant to Chapter 3 of the market rules, the IESO issued a non-compliance letter and financial penalty in the amount of $10,000,000 to Goreway, for breach of the requirements of Chapter 1, section 11.2.1 and section 11.3.1 of the market rules in relation to cost submissions made by Goreway under generation cost guarantee program(s) during the period June 10, 2009 to March 31, 2013.

The methodology or methodologies Goreway used to calculate its short-term operating and maintenance costs for the purpose of its cost submissions during the period created monthly differences between submitted costs and actual costs, resulting in $12,000,000 in overpayment for such costs during the period, which Goreway has agreed to remedy by repayment in full of that amount, in addition to the financial penalty imposed.

In this regard, the IESO has determined that the information that Goreway included in its submissions was not true, correct and complete to the best of its knowledge based upon the information available to it at the time of the cost submission(s). The IESO has further determined that, due to its failure to exercise sufficient due diligence regarding its cost submissions during the period, Goreway failed to correct the untrue, incorrect or incomplete information that it had submitted to the IESO as quickly as it reasonably could and ought to have done, and failed to provided true, correct and complete information on a timely basis.

Without acknowledging or admitting any breach of the market rules, Goreway has accepted, without contest, the IESO's determinations.

2014
  1. Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO): On December 19, 2014, the IESO was sanctioned for failing to comply with four North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) reliability standards on two separate dates. The four standards – TOP-002-2b R6, TOP-002-2b R10, IRO-005- 3a R1.3 and TOP-002-2b R19 – relate to the IESO’s functions as Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority and Reliability Coordinator.

    The IESO self-reported that on March 26, 2012 they failed to account for all potential contingencies – or unplanned system events – involving power system elements in the Bruce area when they developed and implemented an operating plan. The error occurred as the IESO prepared for a planned transmission outage. As a result of this oversight, the IESO failed to recognize and prepare for a post- contingency system configuration that might have compromised reliability of the bulk power system, if the contingency had occurred. Although these breaches did not have an impact on reliability in real time, they exposed the power system to increased risk.

    The IESO also self-reported that on April 27, 2012 they failed to maintain accurate computer models utilized for analyzing and planning system operations. Specifically, a contingency that should have been modelled was not included in the IESO’s Security Analysis program as required by the standard. This omission resulted in the IESO not preparing for the generation loss associated with the most severe single contingency that could affect the system. This failure had no actual impact on reliability as contingency conditions did not materialize in real time.

    MACD’s assessed sanction for these two events was reduced to a $16,000 penalty after consideration of all relevant penalty factors. The main mitigating factor was the IESO's proactive self-report in these matters. In addition, MACD considered the significant costs incurred by the IESO in respect of the voluntary implementation of mitigation plans and other additional compliance measures following these events. Spending on these measures totalled more than $800,000. The measures are intended to reduce the likelihood of similar events and strengthen the controls used by the IESO to manage Bruce-area outages. In keeping with MACD’s primary objective of fostering reliability via compliance with the market rules, these investments serve as the most effective vehicle.

  2. Hydro One Networks Inc. ("Hydro One"): In the period from 2005 to 2008, Hydro One failed to sufficiently complete the testing of critical components for its key facilities in accordance with the Northeast Power Coordinating Council criteria and the market rules. The test failure rates for testing critical components associated with key facilities varied between 1.5% and 29%. Hydro One was issued a suspended order to pay a financial penalty of $90,000 for the four years of non-compliance, taking into account that Hydro One became fully compliant before the conclusion of the investigation. During the course of these investigations, MACD and Hydro One discussed the benefits of Hydro One improving its compliance with reliability standards and the market rules through enhancements to Hydro One's Internal Compliance Program, and Hydro One voluntarily committed to doing so.

    Given the importance of Hydro One's role and function as a key owner and operator of transmission systems in Ontario, MACD and Hydro One jointly developed criteria and measures designed to enhance the quality of Hydro One's Internal Compliance Program.

    In order to allow Hydro One time to improve its ICP in accordance with all the measures, payment of the financial penalty was suspended until April 30, 2014. Hydro One has since taken steps to successfully improve its Internal Compliance Program in accordance with most of the measures to the satisfaction of MACD, resulting in a $65,000 reduction of the original $90,000 financial penalty.

  3. Ontario Power Generation was sanctioned $21,500 for failing to comply with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activations on 5 occasions over the period July 2010 to December 2010. The breaches were in relation to generation facilities at Beck 2 PGS, Holden GS, Lennox GS and Madawaska River Aggregate. Final breach determinations were established by and sanctions were agreed to pursuant to settlement discussions, subsequent initiation of a dispute by OPG.

  4. Ontario Power Generation Inc. (OPG) paid the sum of $550,000 to the IESO for its failure, on a timely basis, to remove its offers for Lambton G4 in HE19 on October 15, 2010 as required by Chapter 7, Section 3.3.8 of the Market Rules. The payment addresses financial benefit inadvertently received by OPG, impact to the market and other factors. Along with a lack of intent to breach the rule, MACD notes in particular the timely self-report and other cooperation by OPG regarding the matter.

  5. Brookfield Energy Marketing LP was sanctioned $47,500 for failing to comply with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activations on 14 occasions over the period July 2010 to June 2011. The breaches were in relation to generation facilities at Red Rock GS and Aubrey GS, and at generation facilities associated with the Mississagi River and the Montreal River. In levying the sanction amount, MACD took into account the fact that Brookfield Energy Marketing LP's failures were not deliberate, Brookfield Energy Marketing LP cooperated in MACD's investigation and Brookfield Energy Marketing LP has put remedial measures in place to improve its compliance with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activations.

2013
  1. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In the period from January 2004 to February 2010, Hydro One was found in breach of Chapter 4, section 7.7.3 (subsections 7.7.3.1 and 7.7.3.2) of the Market Rules for the Ontario Electricity Market ("the Market Rules"). Hydro One failed to restore the operational status and analog telemetering points to a fully operational state within time frames required by the Market Rules. No financial penalty was assessed for the breach for several reasons, primarily because of the limited actual and potential impact on reliability and the market; process improvements for communicating failed telemetry events; and completed repairs of the concerned operational status and analog telemetering points.

  2. Hydro One Networks Inc. ("Hydro One"): In the period from 2005 to 2008, Hydro One failed to sufficiently complete the testing of critical components for its key facilities in accordance with the Northeast Power Coordinating Council criteria and the market rules. The test failure rates for testing critical components associated with key facilities varied between 1.5% and 29%. Hydro One was issued a suspended order to pay a financial penalty of $90,000 for the four years of non-compliance, taking into account that Hydro One became fully compliant before the conclusion of the investigation. During the course of these investigations, MACD and Hydro One discussed the benefits of Hydro One improving its compliance with reliability standards and the market rules through enhancements to Hydro One's Internal Compliance Program, and Hydro One voluntarily committed to doing so.
    MACD encourages the development and implementation of comprehensive and effective internal compliance programs by all market participants and views these programs as paramount to the reliability of Ontario's interconnected power system through creating greater awareness of detection and prevention methods, and ensuring potential or actual breaches of reliability obligations are prevented or detected and corrected through the use of internal controls. Given the importance of Hydro One's role and function as a key owner and operator of transmission systems in Ontario, MACD and Hydro One have jointly developed criteria and measures designed to enhance the quality of Hydro One's Internal Compliance Program.
    In order to allow Hydro One time to develop and implement its Internal Compliance Program in accordance with all of the measures, payment of the financial penalty will be suspended until April 30, 2014. If Hydro One improves its Internal Compliance Program in accordance with the measures to the satisfaction of MACD, the order to pay the financial penalty shall be reduced by an amount that corresponds to the number of implemented measures. If all measures are met, the order to pay a financial penalty will be revoked entirely.

  3. Independent Electricity System Operator: On December 17, 2010 the IESO reached a settlement agreement with the Market Assessment and Compliance Division ("MACD"), in relation to a MACD finding that the IESO violated North American Electric Reliability Corporation reliability standards and associated Northeast Power Coordinating Council criteria, and thereby breached the market rules. The agreement stipulated that the IESO agreed to pay a penalty in the amount of $130,000, with $100,000 to be suspended pending MACD's evaluation of agreed improvements to the IESO's internal compliance program. MACD judged that those improvements would be of more value to the shared goal of reliability than a financial penalty, in this circumstance. That evaluation is now complete and the IESO has made the requisite improvements to its compliance program. The corresponding component of the penalty is now removed.

  4. GenSet Resource Management Inc.: In June 2013, GenSet Resource Management Inc. was sanctioned $13,500 for failure to comply with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activation on nine (9) separate occasions. These breaches were in relation to GenSet's Kingsville and Lauzon generation facilities. The breaches occurred between July 2010 and June 2011.

  5. Greenfield Energy Centre LP: In May 2013, Greenfield Energy Centre LP was sanctioned $19,000 for failure to comply with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activation on three (3) separate occasions. These breaches were in relation to Greenfield Energy Centre LP's Greenfield Energy Centre CGS facility (G1 to G4). The breaches occurred between July 2010 and June 2011.

  6. TransAlta Cogeneration LP: In January 2013, TransAlta Cogeneration LP was sanctioned $24,000 for failure to comply with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activation on six separate occasions. These breaches were in relation to TransAlta Cogeneration LP's Windsor facility. The breaches occurred between July 2010 and June 2011. TransAlta Cogeneration LP has also been ordered to provide evidence of the implementation and efficacy of certain mitigation measures by May 1, 2013.

2012
  1. PowerStream Inc.: In October, 2012, a letter of non-compliance was issued to PowerStream Inc. for failure to upgrade two metering installations. The breaches commenced in January 2010 and continued through to September 2011.

  2. TransAlta Generation Partnership: In September 2012, TransAlta Generation Partnership was sanctioned a total of $15,000 for failure to comply with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activations. The breaches were in relation to the Sarnia generating facility. The breaches occurred between July 2010 and June 2011.

  3. TransAlta Generation Partnership: In August, 2012, TransAlta Generation Partnership was sanctioned $31,000 for failure to comply with various NERC Critical Infrastructure Protection reliability standards. The breaches occurred between January 2010 and November 2010 and related to the failure to implement processes and have the required documentation necessary for a Critical Infrastructure Protection Program.

  4. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited: In July, 2012, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited was sanctioned $12,000 for failure to upgrade six metering installations. The breaches commenced in January 2008 and are ongoing. AECL has been ordered to bring the metering installations into compliance with the market rules on or before September 30, 2012. AECL has been further ordered to provide a status update on the upgrades to MACD by September 1, 2012 and confirmation of completion of the upgrades by October 15, 2012.

  5. Hydro One Brampton Networks Inc: In July, 2012, a letter of non-compliance was issued to Hydro One Brampton Networks Inc. for failure to upgrade two metering installations. The breaches commenced in January 2009 and continued through to September 2011.

  6. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In July, 2012, Hydro One Networks Inc. was sanctioned $6,000 for failure to upgrade one metering installation and issued a letter of non-compliance for failure to upgrade another metering installation. The breaches commenced in January 2008 and continued through to November 2009 and November 2010, respectively.

  7. London Hydro Inc.: In July, 2012, London Hydro Inc. was sanctioned $12,000 for failure to upgrade two metering installations. The breaches commenced in January 2009 and continued through to May 2011 and June 2011, respectively.

  8. Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc.: In July, 2012, Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc. was sanctioned $6,000 for failure to upgrade a metering installation. The breach commenced in January 2009 and is ongoing. Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc. has been ordered to bring the metering installation into compliance with the market rules on or before December 31, 2013. Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc. has been further ordered to provide status updates to MACD on or before December 31, 2012 and June 30, 2013, and confirmation of completion of the upgrades by December 31, 2013.

  9. Norfolk Power Distribution Inc.: In July, 2012, Norfolk Power Distribution Inc. was sanctioned $7,000 for failure to upgrade two metering installations, and for failure to ensure that each meter has been tested or verified for accuracy and sealed or re-sealed in accordance with all federal metering requirements. The breaches commenced in January 2008 and are ongoing. Norfolk Power Distribution Inc. has been ordered to bring the metering installations into compliance with the market rules on or before October 31, 2012. Norfolk Power Distribution Inc. has been further ordered to provide a status update to MACD on or before October 1, 2012 and with confirmation of completion of the upgrades by November 15, 2012.

  10. PowerStream Inc.: In July, 2012, a letter of non-compliance was issued to PowerStream Inc. for failure to upgrade three metering installations. The breaches commenced in January 2008 and January 2009 and continued through to April 2010 and December 2011, respectively.

  11. Red Rock Mill Inc.: In July, 2012, Red Rock Mill Inc. was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to upgrade a metering installation. The breach commenced in January 2008 and is ongoing. Red Rock Mill Inc. has been ordered to bring the metering installation into compliance with the market rules on or before December 31, 2013. Red Rock Mill Inc. has been further ordered to provide status updates to MACD on or before December 31, 2012 and June 30, 2013 and confirmation of completion of the upgrades by December 31, 2013.

  12. Tembec Enterprises Inc.: In July, 2012, Tembec Enterprises Inc. was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to upgrade a metering installation. The breach commenced in January 2008 and continued through to September 2010.

  13. Canadian Hydro Developers Inc.: In March 2012, Canadian Hydro Developers Inc. was sanctioned $5,000 for failure to comply with an operational instruction received from the IESO for a reliability purpose. The breach was in relation to the Amaranth wind generating facility. In addition, Canadian Hydro Developers Inc. is required to provide MACD by August 31, 2012, with proof that the mitigation measures cited in Appendix A are in place and are having the desired effect. The breach occurred in May 2011.

  14. Suncor Energy Products Inc. - Ripley.: In March 2012, Suncor Energy Products Inc. - Ripley was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to comply with an operational instruction received from the IESO for a reliability purpose. The breach was in relation to the Ripley wind generating facility. In addition, Suncor Energy Products Inc. - Ripley has also been ordered to provide sufficient evidence of the implementation and efficacy of certain mitigation measures to MACD by August 31st, 2012. The breach occurred in April 2011.

  15. CP Renewable Energy (Kingsbridge) LP.: In March 2012, CP Renewable Energy (Kingsbridge) LP was sanctioned $3,500 for failure to promptly notify the IESO of a change in status to their facility and for failure to comply with an operational instruction received from the IESO for a reliability purpose. The breach was in relation to the Kingsbridge wind generating facility. Kingsbridge has also been ordered to provide sufficient evidence of the implementation and efficacy of certain mitigation measures to MACD by August 31st 2012. The breaches occurred in April and May of 2011.

2011
  1. Gerdau Ameristeel Corporation: In August, 2011, Gerdau Ameristeel Corporation ("Gerdau") was found in breach of Chapter 7, sections 7.5.1 and 3.3.8, and Appendix 5, section 1.2.4 of the Market Rules for the Ontario Electricity Market ("the Market Rules"). Gerdau offered operating reserve which was unavailable for dispatch as scheduled. The Gerdau facility did not comply with dispatch instructions and did not submit revised dispatch data to the IESO as soon as practical. No financial penalty was assessed for the breach for several reasons, primarily because this is Gerdau's first notice of non-compliance with Market Rules. The breach occurred on March 6, 2011.

  2. Norampac Inc. - Trenton Division: In May, 2011, the Norampac Inc. - Trenton Division ("Norampac-Trenton") was found in breach of Chapter 5, section 14.1.2 of the Market Rules for the Ontario Electricity Market. Norampac-Trenton failed to provide IMO-FORM-1521, certifying that protection system maintenance and testing programs at its facility meet all applicable standards set by the Northeast Power Coordinating Council and/or the Ontario Energy Board, to the IESO. Norampac-Trenton has been ordered to submit the completed IMO-FORM-1521 by June 15, 2011. No financial penalty was assessed for the breach. The breach occurred in 2010.

2010
  1. The IESO has agreed to a settlement with the Market Assessment and Compliance Division ("MACD") in the amount of $130,000 for failure to identify an increased generation loss associated with a single contingency during a Bruce E Bus outage in October 2008. This event was found by MACD to violate North American Electric Reliability Corporation reliability standards and associated Northeast Power Coordinating Council criteria and market rules. An amount of $100,000 is suspended for one year. At that time, the suspension will be made permanent provided the IESO compliance program satisfies effectiveness criteria set out in the settlement.

  2. Red Rock Mill, Inc: On October 5, 2010, Red Rock Mill, Inc. ("Red Rock") was suspended from further participation in the IESO-administered markets and from causing or permitting electricity to be conveyed out of the IESO-controlled grid other than for reasons of health and safety of Red Rock's employees and the public or for protection of the environment. The suspension order was issued in respect of failing to pay the August 2010 invoice and continuing events of default pertaining to Red Rock's outstanding margin calls.

  3. Greater Toronto Airports Authority: In August 2010, Greater Toronto Airports Authority was sanctioned $2,200 for failure to comply with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activation. The breach occurred in January 2010.

  4. Greater Toronto Airports Authority: In May 2010, Greater Toronto Airports Authority was sanctioned $3,500 for failure to comply with dispatch instructions for operating reserve activation. The breaches occurred from April 2009 to October 2009.

2009
  1. London Hydro, Inc.: In October 2009, London Hydro, Inc. was sanctioned $500 for failure to obtain the approval of the IESO prior to effecting changes to the equipment of a metering installation. An additional $1000 has been applied as London Hydro has been held financially liable for the failure of its metering service provider to complete the required commissioning tests within the required time. The rules do not permit sanctioning of metering service providers in such circumstances. Instead, pursuant to Chapter 6, section 3.1.2.2.d, the metered market participant is held liable.

  2. TransAlta Cogeneration LP: In September 2009, TransAlta was sanctioned $26,000 for repeated failures to revise dispatch data in the period from June 9th 2008 to April 12th 2009.

  3. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In September 2009, Hydro One Networks Inc. was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to obtain approval of the IESO prior to effecting changes to the equipment of a metering installation. The breach occurred in August 2008.

  4. Superior Fine Papers Inc.: On July 10, 2009, Superior Fine Papers Inc. was suspended from further participation in the IESO-administered markets and from causing or permitting electricity to be conveyed out of the IESO-controlled grid other than for reasons of health and safety of Superior Fine Papers employees and the public or for protection of the environment. The suspension order was issued in regards to continuing events of default pertaining to Superior Fine Papers outstanding margin calls. The IESO does not intend to issue a disconnection order in respect of Superior Fine Papers Inc. at this time.

  5. Independent Electricity System Operator: In April 2009, the Independent Electricity System Operator was found in breach for systematically failing to maintain total operating reserve as a result of its practice of reducing the minimum operating reserve requirement at the start of operating reserve activations for matters not defined as 'contingency events' within the market rules. No voluntary payment amount was assessed for the breach; however, the IESO is ordered to come into compliance with the market rules by October 31, 2009.

  6. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In January 2009, Hydro One Networks Inc. was sanctioned $ 5,000 for failure to conduct spot checks of metering installations (Appendix 6.1 section 1.3.2.1) in 2005. Given the passage of time since the conduct in question, this improvement was taken into account in the sanction determination.

  7. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In January 2009, Hydro One was sanctioned $45,000 for failure to conduct routine testing of metering installations in 2005. Hydro One's performance with meter register dial readings is presently at acceptable levels. Given the passage of time since the conduct in question, this improvement was taken into account in the sanction determination.

2008
  1. Ontario Power Generation Inc.: In December 2008, Ontario Power Generation Inc. was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to inform the IESO of any anticipated change in the status of a generation facility. The breach occurred in August 2008.

  2. Ontario Power Generation Inc.: In December 2008, Ontario Power Generation Inc. was assessed a financial penalty of $3,000.00 for misuse of forced outages. The breach occurred in September 2007.

  3. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In December 2008, Hydro One Networks Inc. was found in breach for failure to upgrade metering installations and meet federal metering requirements at eight installations and assessed a financial penalty of $30,000. The breaches occurred in January 2007. An order has been issued to Hydro One Networks Inc. to complete two outstanding metering installations.

  4. Ontario Power Generation Inc.: In December 2008, Ontario Power Generation Inc. was assessed a financial penalty of $3,000.00 for misuse of forced outages. The breach occurred in September 2007 and is a separate matter from the above-described first December breach finding related to OPG.

  5. Veridian Connections Inc.: In July 2008, Veridian Connections Inc. was found in breach for failure to upgrade a metering installation and meet federal metering requirements. The breach occurred in January 2007.

  6. E.L.K. Energy Inc.: In June 2008, E.L.K. Energy Inc. was found in breach for failure to upgrade a metering installation, contract a metering service provider and meet federal metering requirements. The breach occurred in January 2007.

  7. Ford Motor Company of Canada Limited-Windsor: In May 2008, Ford Motor Company of Canada Limited - Windsor was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2007.

  8. Shell Energy North America (Canada) Inc.: In March 2008, Shell was sanctioned for failure to submit revised dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2007.

  9. Dofasco Inc: In January 2008, Dofasco was sanctioned $1000.00 for failure to revise dispatch data to be consistent with outage plan. The breach occurred in October 2007.

2007
  1. Falconbridge Limited - Ontario Divisions: In December 2007, Falconbridge Limited - Ontario Divisions was sanctioned $20,000 for failure to comply with an order to upgrade four metering installations by June 30, 2007. Falconbridge Limited - Ontario Divisions has again been ordered to complete the four outstanding installations.

  2. Guelph Hydro Electric Systems Inc: In October 2007, Guelph Hydro Electric Systems Inc. was found in breach for failure to upgrade a metering installation. The breach occurred in January 2006.

  3. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In October 2007 Hydro One Networks Inc. was found in breach for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2006.

  4. Middlesex Power Distribution Corporation: In September 2007, Middlesex Power Distribution Corporation was found in breach for failure to upgrade a metering installation and failure to reseal a meter in accordance to federal requirements. The breaches occurred in January 2006.

  5. Northern Ontario Wires Inc.: In September 2007, Northern Ontario Wires Inc. was found in breach for failure to upgrade a metering installation. The breach occurred in January 2006.

  6. North Bay Hydro Distribution Limited: In September 2007, North Bay Hydro Distribution Limited was found in breach for failure to upgrade a metering installation. The breach occurred in January 2006.

  7. Shell Canada Products: In September 2007, Shell Canada Products was found in breach for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2006.

  8. Casco Inc.-Cardinal: In September 2007, Casco Inc.-Cardinal was found in breach for failure to upgrade a metering installation. The breach occurred in January 2006.

  9. Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited: In September 2007, Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to upgrade metering installations by December 2005. The breach occurred in January 2006

  10. Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited: In September 2007, Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited was sanctioned $9,000 for failure to comply with an order to upgrade three metering installations by January 31, 2007. A supplementary order has been issued to Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited to complete the two outstanding installations.

  11. TransAlta Cogeneration LP: In September 2007, TransAlta Cogeneration LP was sanctioned $3,000.00 for two breaches for failure to submit revised dispatch data. The breaches occurred in July, 2007.

  12. Peninsula West Utilities Limited: In September 2007, Peninsula West Utilities Limited was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2006. An order has been issued to Peninsula West to complete one outstanding installation.

  13. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In September 2007, Hydro One Networks Inc. was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to obtain approval of the IESO prior to effecting changes to the equipment of a metering installation. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  14. London Hydro Inc.: In September 2007, London Hydro Inc. was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2006. An order has been issued to London Hydro Inc. to complete one outstanding installation.

  15. Ontario Power Generation Inc.: In August 2007, Ontario Power Generation was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to submit revised dispatch data. The breach occurred in February 2007.

  16. Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. ("Kitchener-Wilmot"): In July 2007, Kitchener-Wilmot was found in breach for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2006. An order has been issued to Kitchener-Wilmot to complete 2 outstanding installations.

  17. Ontario Power Generation Inc. ("OPG"): In August 2007, OPG was sanctioned $1000 for failure to maintain protection equipment in accordance with reliability standards set by the Northeast Power Coordinating Council. The breach occurred in June 2006.

  18. Hydro One Networks Inc. ("Hydro One"): In February 2007, Hydro One was found in breach for two occurrences for failure to maintain protection equipment in accordance with reliability standards set by the Northeast Power Coordinating Council. The breaches occurred in June 2006.

  19. Invista Canada Company, ("Invista"): In February 2007, Invista was found in breach for failure to maintain protection equipment in accordance with reliability standards set by the Northeast Power Coordinating Council. The breach occurred in June 2006.

2006
  1. Ontario Power Generation Inc.: In December 2006, Ontario Power Generation was sanctioned for failure to submit revised dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2006.

  2. TransAlta Energy Corporation: In November 2006, TransAlta Energy Corporation was sanctioned for failure to follow dispatch instructions. The breach occurred in September 2006.

  3. Ontario Power Generation Inc.: In November 2006, Ontario Power Generation was sanctioned for failure to follow dispatch instructions. The breach occurred in August 2006.

  4. Spruce Falls Inc: In November 2006, Spruce Falls Inc. was sanctioned for failure to upgrade a metering installation. The breach occurred in January 2005.

  5. Rideau St. Lawrence Distribution Inc. (Rideau St. Lawrence): In November 2006, Rideau St. Lawrence was sanctioned for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2005.

  6. The following is a list of market participants that have been assessed sanctions for failing to satisfy the obligation under the market rules to upgrade wholesale revenue meters whose seals expired in 2003 and 2004. This backgrounder outlines the importance of meter accuracy in the electricity market, and explains the compliance assessment principles.

    "Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited (Toronto Hydro): In October 2006, Toronto Hydro was sanctioned $27,500 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2005. An order has been issued to Toronto Hydro to complete 13 outstanding installations."

    "Hydro Ottawa Limited ("Hydro Ottawa"): In October 2006, Hydro Ottawa was sanctioned $12,000 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005. An order is issued to Hydro Ottawa to complete 19 outstanding installations."

    "PowerStream Networks Inc. ("PowerStream"): In October 2006, PowerStream was sanctioned $4,500 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005. An order has been issued to PowerStream to complete 9 outstanding installations."

    "Oakville Hydro Electricity Distribution Inc. ("Oakville Hydro"): In October 2006, Oakville Hydro was sanctioned for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2005."

    "Hydro One Networks Inc. ("Hydro One"): In October 2006, Hydro One was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005. An order is issued to Hydro One to complete 2 outstanding installations."

    "GBF Forging Specialists Inc. ("GBF"): In October 2006, GBF was sanctioned $ 5,000 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005. An order is issued to GBF to complete 2 outstanding installations."

    "Falconbridge Limited- Ontario Division ("Falconbridge"): In October 2006, Falconbridge was sanctioned $6000 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005. An order is issued to Falconbridge to complete 4 outstanding installations."

    "Marathon Pulp Inc. ("Marathon"): In October 2006, Marathon was sanctioned $500 for failure to upgrade its metering installation. The breach occurred in January 2005. An order is issued to Marathon to complete its outstanding installation."

    "Lanxess Inc. ("Lanxess"): In October 2006, Lanxess was sanctioned for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005."

    "Thunder Bay Hydro Electricity Distribution Inc. ("Thunder Bay Hydro"): In October 2006, Thunder Bay Hydro was sanctioned for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005."

    "Port Colborne Hydro Inc. ("Port Colborne"): In October 2006, Port Colborne was sanctioned for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005.

    "London Hydro Inc. ("London Hydro"): In October 2006, London Hydro was sanctioned $6000 for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2005. An order is issued to London Hydro to complete 4 outstanding installations."

    "American Water Services Canada Corp. ("American Water"): In October 2006, was sanctioned for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breach occurred in January 2005."

    "Horizon Electric System Limited ("Horizon"): In October 2006, Horizon was sanctioned for failure to upgrade metering installations. The breaches occurred in January 2005."

    "Kirkland Lake Gold Electric System Limited (Kirkland Lake Gold): In October 2006, Kirkland Lake Gold was sanctioned $8,000 for failure to upgrade metering installations and failure to contract with a new metering service provider. The breaches occurred in January 2005. An order has been issued to Kirkland Lake Gold to complete 2 outstanding installations."

  7.  Ontario Power Generation Inc.: In August 2006, Ontario Power Generation was sanctioned for failure to cancel (remove) offers. The breach occurred in December 2005.
  8. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In August 2006, Hydro One was sanctioned for failure to comply with an order to provide a compliance plan and regular progress reports of the meter spot checks it was required to conduct. The breach occurred in 2005. Statement in full.

  9. Gerdau Ameristeel Corporation - Cambridge: In July 2006, Gerdau Ameristeel Corporation - Cambridge was sanctioned $1000 for failure to follow dispatch instructions and revise schedules. The breach occurred in April 2006.

  10. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In July 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $3,525 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2006.

  11. NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc.: In July 2006, NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc. was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in July 2005.

  12. NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc.: In July 2006, NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc. was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in July 2005.

  13. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P.: In July 2006, EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. was sanctioned $3,236 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2006.

  14. Powerex Corp.: In June 2006, Powerex Corp. was sanctioned $1,610 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2006.

  15. Powerex Corp.: In June 2006, Powerex Corp. was sanctioned $2,815 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breaches occurred in May 2006.

  16. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In June 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $7,060 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breaches occurred in May 2006.

  17. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In June 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $9,759 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breaches occurred in May 2006.

  18. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In June 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $6,834 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breaches occurred in May 2006.

  19. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In June 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $1,645 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in April 2006.

  20. Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO): In June 2006, the IESO was found in breach of disclosing confidential information. No voluntary payment was assessed for the breach. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  21. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In June 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $4,687 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  22. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In June 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $24,153 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  23. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In June 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $23,313 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  24. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In June 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $17,680 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  25. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In June 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $25,748 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  26. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P.: In June 2006, EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. was sanctioned $2,157 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in March 2006.

  27. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P.: In June 2006, EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. was sanctioned $5,427 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  28. Constellation Energy Commodities Group Inc.: In June 2006, Constellation Energy Commodities Group Inc. was sanctioned $3,904 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2006.

  29. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In May 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $7,369 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breaches occurred in April 2006.

  30. Powerex Corp.: In May 2006, Powerex Corp. was sanctioned $3,835 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in April 2006.

  31. NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc.: In May 2006, NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc. was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in May 2006.

  32. NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc.: In May 2006, NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc. was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2006.

  33. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In May 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2006.

  34. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In April 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2006.

  35. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In April 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2006.

  36. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In April 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $2,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2006.

  37. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P.: In April 2006, EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. was sanctioned $2,271 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in March 2006.

  38. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In April 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $8,065 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in December 2005.

  39. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In April 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $6,800 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in January 2006 and February 2006.

  40. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In April 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $7,156 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in January 2006.

  41. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In April 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $3,401 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in January 2006.

  42. HQ Energy Marketing Inc.: In April 2006, HQ Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $24,216 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in March 2006.

  43. NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc.: In April 2006, NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc. was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2006.

  44. Conectiv Energy Supply Inc.: In March 2006, Conectiv Energy Supply Inc. was sanctioned $5,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in March 2006.

  45. Direct Energy Marketing Inc.: In March 2006, Direct Energy Marketing Inc. was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in January 2006.

  46. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In March 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in February 2006.

  47. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In March 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in March 2006.

  48. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In March 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in March 2006.

  49. DTE Energy Trading Inc.: In March 2006, DTE Energy Trading Inc. was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in February 2006.

  50. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P.: In March 2006, EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. was sanctioned $1,824 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in March 2006.

  51. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P.: In March 2006, EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. was sanctioned $3,230 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in March 2006.

  52. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P.: In March 2006, EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. was sanctioned $3,283 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in February 2006.

  53. Northpoint Energy Solutions Inc.: In March 2006, Northpoint Energy Solutions Inc. was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in February 2006.

  54. NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc.: In March 2006, NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc. was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in March 2006.

  55. NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc.: In March 2006, NorthPoint Energy Solutions Inc. was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in March 2006.

  56. Powerex Corp.: In March 2006, Powerex Corp. was sanctioned $3,646 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in December 2005.

  57. Sempra Energy Trading Corp.: In March 2006, Sempra Energy Trading Corp. was sanctioned $2,256 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  58. Sempra Energy Trading Corp.: In March 2006, Sempra Energy Trading Corp. was sanctioned $5,566 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  59. Sempra Energy Trading Corp.: In March 2006, Sempra Energy Trading Corp. was sanctioned $9,618 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  60. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in August 2005.

  61. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  62. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  63. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  64. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in August 2005.

  65. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in October 2005.

  66. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in October 2005.

  67. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $3,607 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  68. The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company: In March 2006, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company was sanctioned $6,884 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in February 2006.

  69. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp.: In March 2006, TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. was sanctioned $12,200 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in February 2006.

  70. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp.: In March 2006, TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in December 2005.

  71. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp.: In March 2006, TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. was sanctioned $7,794 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in February 2006.

  72. MAG Energy Solutions Inc. (MAGES): In February 2006, MAGES was sanctioned $5,111 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in January 2006.

  73. Conectiv Energy Supply Inc. (CONECTIV): In February 2006, CONECTIV was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in January 2006.

  74. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In February 2006, MEHQ was sanctioned $41,243 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in December 2005.

  75. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In February 2006, NSP was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in December 2005.

  76. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTEET): In February 2006, DTEET was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in February 2006.

  77. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTEET): In February 2006, DTEET was sanctioned $5,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in February 2006.

  78. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In January 2006, MEHQ was sanctioned $5,287 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  79. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In January 2006, NSP was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  80. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (SEMPRA): In January 2006, SEMPRA was sanctioned $71,336 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  81. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (SEMPRA): In January 2006, SEMPRA was sanctioned $3,561 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  82. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (SEMPRA): In January 2006, SEMPRA was sanctioned $22,599 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  83. Powerex Corp. (POWEREX): In January 2006, POWEREX was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  84. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (SEMPRA): In January 2006, SEMPRA was sanctioned $21,003 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  85. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (SEMPRA): In January 2006, SEMPRA was sanctioned $47,169 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  86. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In January 2006, NSP was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  87. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In January 2006, NSP was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  88. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In January 2006, NSP was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  89. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In January 2006, NSP was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  90. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In January 2006, NSP was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  91. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In January 2006, NSP was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  92. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In January 2006, NSP was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  93. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (SEMPRA): In January 2006, SEMPRA was sanctioned $6,167 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

2005
  1. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (MEI): In December 2005, MEI was sanctioned $24,040 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in December 2005.

  2. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In December 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $2,993 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  3. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (MEI): In December 2005, MEI was sanctioned $57,168 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  4. Powerex Corp. (POWEREX): In December 2005, POWEREX was sanctioned $11,123 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  5. Conectiv Energy Supply Inc. (CONECTIV): In December 2005, CONECTIV was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  6. Constellation Energy Commodities Group Inc. (CPSINC): In December 2005, CPSINC was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  7. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In December 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $11,082 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  8. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In December 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $1,263 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  9. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In December 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $4,669 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  10. Constellation New Energy Inc. (NEVI): In December 2005, NEVI was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  11. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $6,220 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  12. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (MEI): In November, 2005, MEI was sanctioned $1,500 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in November 2005.

  13. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In November 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $3,453 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  14. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (SEMPRA): In November 2005, SEMPRA was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  15. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In November 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $32,660 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  16. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In November 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $9,419 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  17. TransAlta Energy Corporation (TEC): In November 2005, TEC was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to submit dispatch data for a registered facility. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  18. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $16,596 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in October 2005.

  19. Split Rock Energy LLC (SPLITROCK): In November 2005, SPLITROCK was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  20. Constellation Energy Commodities Group Inc. (CPSINC): In November 2005, CPSINC was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  21. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $20,133 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  22. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In November 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $3,985 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  23. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In November 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $6,130 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  24. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In November 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $11,593 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  25. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $21,714 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  26. Constellation Energy Commodities Group Inc. (CPSINC): In November 2005, CPSINC was sanctioned $11,120 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  27. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $11,212 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  28. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In November 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $3,842 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  29. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In November 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $12,038 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  30. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $4,960 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  31. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $18,459 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  32. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $5,964 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  33. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In November 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $5,147 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  34. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In November 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  35. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In October 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  36. Coral Energy Canada Inc. (CORAL): In October 2005, CORAL was sanctioned $7,811 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in September 2005.

  37. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTEET): In October 2005, DTEET was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  38. Coral Energy Canada Inc. (CORAL): In October 2005, CORAL was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2005.

  39. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In October 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $3,876 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  40. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In October 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $6,023 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  41. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In October 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $9,873 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  42. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In October 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $5,238 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  43. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In October 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $3,083 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  44. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In October 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $4,008 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  45. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In October 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $3,148 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  46. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTEET): In October 2005, DTEET was sanctioned $2,073 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  47. EPCOR Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In September 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  48. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (MEI): In September 2005, MEI was sanctioned $30,087.36 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in July 2005.

  49. Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO): In August 2005, IESO was found in breach of failure to establish, for each such eligible prudential support provider, an aggregate limit of the prudential support which can be provided by each organization. The duration of the breach was two months and it was remedied in August 2005. No voluntary payment was assessed for the breach.

  50. TransAlta Cogeneration LP (TransAlta): In August 2005, TransAlta was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to notify and seek approval for an extension to an outage and failure to submit revised dispatch data. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  51. Kirkland Lake Power Corp. (Kirkland Lake): In August 2005, Kirkland Lake was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to seek final approval before taking an outage. The breach occurred in June 2005.

  52. Powerex Corp (Powerex): In August 2005, Powerex was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  53. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TEMC): In August 2005, TEMC was sanctioned $2,787 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in May 2005.

  54. Ontario Power Generation Inc. (OPG): In July 2005, OPG was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to submit to the IESO revised dispatch data in a timely manner. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  55. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In July 2005, NSP was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  56. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (BEMI): In July 2005, BEMI was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  57. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTEET): In July 2005, DTEET was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  58. Epcor Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In July 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2005.

  59. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In July 2005, NSP was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2005.

  60. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (BEMI): In July 2005, BEMI was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2005.

  61. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTEET): In July 2005, DTEET was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in March 2005.

  62. Epcor Merchant and Capital L.P. (EMCC): In June 2005, EMCC was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2005.

  63. Direct Energy Marketing Inc. (DEMI): In June 2005, DEMI was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2005.

  64. Powerex Corp (Powerex): In June 2005, Powerex was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in March 2005.

  65. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (BEMI): In May 2005, BEMI was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in February 2005.

  66. Coral Energy Canada Inc. (Coral): In May 2005, Coral was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in March 2005.

  67. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTEET): In May 2005, DTEET was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in February 2005.

  68. TransAlta Energy Corporation (TransAlta): In April 2005, TransAlta was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to follow dispatch instructions and failure to submit revised dispatch data when the pre-dispatch schedule differed from the quantity it reasonably expected to deliver. The breach occurred in March 2005.

  69. TransAlta Cogeneration LP (TransAlta): In March 2005, TransAlta was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to submit dispatch data indicating the amount of energy that TransAlta reasonably expected to be providing. The breach occurred in February 2005.

  70. Ontario Power Generation Inc. (OPGI): In March 2005, OPGI was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to promptly inform the IESO of any change or anticipated change in the status of any generation facility that could have an effect on the IESO-controlled grid. The breach occurred in January 2005.

  71. Powerex Corp. (Powerex): In March 2005, Powerex was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in January 2005.

  72. Northern States Power Company (NSP): In March 2005, NSP was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in January 2005.

  73. Kirkland Lake Power Corp. (Kirkland Lake): In March 2005, Kirkland Lake was sanctioned for failure to pass an operating reserve activation test. The breach occurred in December 2004.

  74. Ontario Power Generation Inc. (OPG): In March 2005, OPG was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to comply with dispatch instructions. The breach occurred in December 2004.

  75. Market Assessment and Compliance Division (MACD) of the Independent Electricity System Operator: In March 2005, MACD was sanctioned for disclosing confidential information to a person not permitted to receive the confidential information. The breach, which occurred in January 2005, was the communication of details of an alleged breach by one market participant to another market participant.

  76. Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO): In March 2005, IESO was assessed $1,000 for failure to ensure that the metering registry contained the information provided by the metering service provider in accordance with the applicable totalization table. The initial breach occurred in April 2002 and continued until October 2003.

  77. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In March 2005, Hydro One was sanctioned $6,000 for failure to conduct routine testing of metering installations in 2003. Statement in full.

  78. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In February 2005, MEHQ was sanctioned $8,756 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in October 2004.

  79. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In January 2005, Brascan was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in December 2004.

  80. Powerex Corp. (Powerex): In January 2005, Powerex was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in November 2004.

  81. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In January 2005, Brascan was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in November 2004.

  82. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTE): In January 2005, DTE was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2004.

2004
  1. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In December 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2004.

  2. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In December 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $14,937 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in October 2004.

  3. Split Rock Energy LLC (Split Rock): In December 2004, Split Rock was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2004.

  4. Sempra Energy Trading Group (Sempra): In December 2004, Sempra was sanctioned $44,613 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in May 2004.

  5. Sempra Energy Trading Corp (Sempra): In November 2004, Sempra was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2004.

  6. Powerex Corp. (Powerex): In November 2004, Powerex was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2004.

  7. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In November 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2004.

  8. The Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO): In November 2004, the IESO was assessed $2,000 for failure to issue dispatch instructions for each registered facility at the start of each dispatch interval. The breach occurred in October 2004.

  9. Sempra Energy Trading Corp (Sempra): In November 2004, Sempra was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2004.

  10. Conectiv Energy Supply Inc. (Conectiv): In October 2004, Conectiv was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2004.

  11. Epcor Merchant and Capital L.P. (Epcor): In October 2004, Epcor was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2004.

  12. Powerex Corp. (Powerex): In October 2004, Powerex was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2004.

  13. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In October 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $50,000 for failure to conduct routine testing of metering installations in 2003. Statement in full.

  14. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In October 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $6,000 for failure to provide and keep meter point documentation current. This breach occurred in March 2001. Statement in full.

  15. Erie Thames Services Corp (ETSC): In October 2004, ETSC was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to conduct data reconciliation and meter spot checks in a timely manner. The breach occurred in the year 2003.

  16. Hamilton Hydro Inc.(Hamilton Hydro): In September 2004, Hamilton Hydro was sanctioned for failure to conduct data reconciliation in a timely manner. The breach occurred in the year 2003.

  17. Epcor Merchant and Capital L.P. (Epcor): In September 2004, Epcor was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2004.

  18. Split Rock Energy LLC (Split Rock): In September 2004, Split Rock was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2004.

  19. Conectiv Energy Supply Inc. (Conectiv): In August 2004, Conectiv was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in July 2004.

  20. Constellation Power Source Inc. (Constellation Power): In August 2004, Constellation Power was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in July 2004.

  21. Powerex Corp. (Powerex): In August 2004, Powerex was sanctioned $8,199 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. The breach occurred in June 2004.

  22. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In August 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to upgrade a non-compliant metering installation. The breach was detected in April 2004.

  23. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In July 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in June 2004.

  24. Split Rock Energy LLC (Split Rock): In July 2004, Split Rock was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in June 2004.

  25. Split Rock Energy LLC (Split Rock): In June 2004, Split Rock was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in June 2004.

  26. Falconbridge Limited (Falconbridge): In June 2004, Falconbridge was sanctioned for failure to follow dispatch instructions. The breach occurred in April 2004.

  27. TransAlta Energy Corporation (TransAlta Energy Corp.): In June 2004, TransAlta Energy Corp. was sanctioned for failure to submit offers. The breach occurred in May 2004.

  28. Conectiv Energy Supply Inc. (Conectiv): In June 2004, Conectiv was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2004.

  29. Direct Commodities Trading Inc. (DCT Inc.): In June 2004, DCT Inc. was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2004.

  30. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp. (TransAlta Energy Marketing): In June 2004, TransAlta Energy Marketing was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2004.

  31. Cargill Energy Trading Canada, Inc. (Cargill Energy Trading Canada): In June 2004, Cargill Energy Trading Canada was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in May 2004.

  32. Epcor Merchant and Capital L.P. (Epcor): In June 2004, Epcor was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2004.

  33. Powerex Corp. (Powerex): In June 2004, Powerex was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2004.

  34. Coral Energy Canada Inc. (Coral): In June 2004, Coral was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in June 2004.

  35. Coral Energy Canada Inc. (Coral): In May 2004, Coral was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in May 2004.

  36. Constellation Power Source Inc. (Constellation Power): In May 2004, Constellation Power was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2004.

  37. Direct Commodities Trading Inc. (DCT Inc.): In May 2004, DCT Inc. was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2004.

  38. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In May 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $9,174 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in April 2004.

  39. Ontario Power Generation (OPG): In May 2004, OPG was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to promptly inform the IMO of equipment removed from service. The breach occurred in March 2004.

  40. American Water Services Canada Corp. (American Water): In May 2004, American Water was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to enter into a contract with a Metering Service Provider. The breach has been recurring since January 2004.

  41. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In May 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $5,000 for failure to provide an approved measurement error correction factor for a metering installation. The breach occurred between November 2003 and January 2004.

  42. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In April 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $9,384 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in March 2004.

  43. American Water Services Canada Corp. (American Water): In April 2004, American Water was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to enter into a contract with a Metering Service Provider. The breach has been reoccurring since January 2004.

  44. American Water Services Canada Corp. (American Water): In March 2004, American Water was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to enter into a contract with a Metering Service Provider. The breach has been recurring since January 2004.

  45. ERCO Worldwide, A Division of Superior Plus Inc. (ERCO Worldwide): In March 2004, ERCO Worldwide was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to enter into a contract with a Metering Service Provider. The breach has been recurring since January 2004.

  46. Epcor Merchant and Capital L.P. (Epcor): In March 2004, Epcor was sanctioned $2,029 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in January 2004.

  47. Ontario Power Generation (OPG): In March 2004, OPG was sanctioned for failure to submit revised dispatch data. The breach occurred in January 2004.

  48. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (HQEM): In March 2004, HQEM was sanctioned $14,396 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in August 2003.

  49. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In March 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to open breakers that were off potential. The breach occurred in August 2003.

  50. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In March 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $5,000 for failure to test backup power generation for a registered facility. The breach was detected in August 2003.

  51. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (HQEM): In February 2004, HQEM was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in February 2004.

  52. Ontario Power Generation (OPG): In February 2004, OPG was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to notify the IMO of a test. The breach occurred in January 2004.

  53. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (Sempra): In February 2004, Sempra was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in January 2004.

  54. Epcor Merchant and Capital L.P. (Epcor): In February 2004, Epcor was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in January 2004.

  55. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In February 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $11,016 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in December 2003.

  56. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In February 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $7,951 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in December 2003.

  57. Powerex Corp. (Powerex): In February 2004, Powerex was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in December 2003.

  58. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (HQEM): In February 2004, HQEM was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in December 2003.

  59. Abitibi-Consolidated Company of Canada (Abitibi): In February 2004, Abitibi was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to restore equipment within 24 hours of the discovery of an outage or defect. The breach occurred in November 2003.

  60. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In January 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $14,160 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. This breach of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred in August 2003.

  61. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (HQEM): In January 2004, HQEM was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in January 2004.

  62. Ontario Power Generation (OPG): In January 2004, OPG was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in December 2003.

  63. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In January 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to obtain authorization from the IMO prior to making changes to a metering installation. The breach occurred in July 2003.

  64. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In January 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $4,000 for failure to obtain authorization from the IMO prior to making changes to a metering installation. The breach occurred in November 2003.

  65. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In January 2004, Hydro One was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to inform the IMO of any change in the capability of its transmission facilities or the status of equipment. The breach occurred in November 2003.

  66. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In January 2004, Brascan was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in December 2003.

2003
  1. Ontario Power Generation (OPG): In December 2003, OPG was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to promptly inform IMO of change in generator status. The breach occurred in October 2003.
  2. Ontario Power Generation (OPG): In December 2003, OPG was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to obtain final approval from the IMO prior to taking an outage. The breach occurred in October 2003.
  3. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (Sempra): In December 2003, Sempra was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in November 2003.
  4. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In November 2003, Brascan was sanctioned $2,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in October 2003.
  5. Powerex Corp. (Powerex): In November 2003, Powerex was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in September 2003.
  6. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In October 2003, Hydro One was sanctioned $5,000 for failure to inform the IMO that a metering installation had gone out of service. The breach occurred in May 2003.
  7. Conectiv Energy Supply Inc. (Conectiv): In October 2003, Conectiv was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in August 2003.
  8. Ontario Power Generation (OPG): In October 2003, OPG was sanctioned $3,000 for failure to follow dispatch instructions. The breach occurred in August 2003.
  9. Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (Sempra): In September 2003, Sempra was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in July 2003.
  10. Cargill Energy Trading Canada Inc. (Cargill): In August 2003, Cargill was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in June, 2003.
  11. Split Rock Energy LLC (Splitrock): In August 2003, Splitrock was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update NERC tags consistent with dispatch data. The breaches occurred in June, 2003.
  12. Constellation Power Source Inc. (CPSINC): In August 2003, CPSINC was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in December, 2002.
  13. HQ Energy Marketing Inc. (MEHQ): In July 2003, MEHQ agreed to pay financial penalties totalling $118,012 for failure to schedule energy across an intertie after being accepted in the intertie schedule. These breaches of Chapter 7, section 7.5.8A of the market rules occurred 8 times during the period February through May 2003.
  14. Ontario Power Generation Inc. (OPG): In June 2003, OPG was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to prompty inform the IMO of a deviation from a dispatch instruction. The breach occurred in April 2003.
  15. Dynegy Power Marketing, Inc. (Dynegy): In June 2003, Dynegy was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in June 2003.
  16. Hydro One Networks Inc. (Hydro One): In June 2003, Hydro One was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to repair monitoring and control equipment within the required time following an outage or defect. The breach occurred in January 2003.
  17. DTE Energy Trading Inc. (DTE): In June 2003, DTE was sanctioned $1,000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in January 2003.
  18. Dynegy Power Marketing Inc. (Dynegy): In May 2003, Dynegy was sanctioned $1000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2003.
  19. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In May 2003, Brascan was sanctioned $1000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in April 2003.
  20. TransAlta Energy Marketing Corp.: In April 2003 TransAlta was sanctioned $1000 for failure to update a NERC tag consistent with dispatch data. The breach occurred in February 2003.
  21. Hydro One Networks Inc.: In February 2003, Hydro One Networks Inc. was issued a sanction letter for failing to provide metering data. The breach occurred in November of 2002.
  22. Brascan Energy Marketing Inc. (Brascan): In January 2003, Brascan was sanctioned $1000 for failing to follow operating reserve dispatch instructions. The breach occurred in December 2002.