Adjudicative reporting dashboard

The majority of decisions (74%) issued by the OEB were heard by Delegated Authority. This is consistent with historical trends.

71% of the decisions issued in Q1 and Q2 of Fiscal 2026-2027 were for applications related to electricity. This is consistent with historical trends.

54% of all the decisions issued were for Licence applications. Facilities comprised 25% of decisions, followed by Rates (18%) and Mergers, Amalgamations, Acquisitions and Divestitures (3%). These are consistent with historical trends.
 

In addition to monitoring whether a decision is issued on time, the OEB also monitors the degree to which decisions were issued early or late relative to the Total Cycle Time decision metric date established by the applicable performance standard. This Decision Issuance Spectrum highlights the fact that 66% of decisions issued this reporting period were issued more than two weeks in advance of the Total Cycle Time metric date.

The OEB issues many documents aside from decisions each month. “Key Documents” refers to all other documents that are issued by the OEB but are not a final Decision and Order (e.g., Notice, Procedural Order, Letter to Industry, etc.). The OEB issued 37 Key Documents on average each month of Q1 and Q2 of Fiscal 2026-2027.

The OEB has committed to report on the performance of key application milestones for applications heard by panels of Commissioners for major application types. The three graphs below illustrate the performance for various application types relative to the performance standard for:

This graph provides the average time from receipt of a complete application to the issuance of PO#1 and compares this to the performance standard.

For Complex Facilities applications and cost-based Rates applications with a revenue requirement of less than $500 million (Rates: <$500M), the average time to issue PO#1 exceeded the performance standard. This was due to several electricity facilities applications that had preliminary matters that required extra consideration prior to issuing PO#1 (e.g., requests for no hearing, requests for non-standard procedural steps, and questions related to legislative interpretation).

This graph provides the average time from the close of the record to the issuance of the decision and compares this to the performance standard. Although the OEB missed the Decision Writing Time metric for one case within this reporting period, on average it met or exceeded its targets.

This graph provides the average time from a complete application to the issuance of the decision and compares it to the performance standard.

The average Total Cycle Time for the Facilities: Complex applications exceeded the metric days. This was primarily driven by decisions involving complex issues that required additional time for deliberation by panels of Commissioners.