Enjoy a hearing with NB Power's evil lawyer and his buddies in the EUB as they play crooked parlour games with Smart Meters and OUR money

---------- Original message ----------
From: Brian Gallant briangallant10@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 13:26:02 -0700
Subject: Merci / Thank you Re: The EUB Matter 357 and Section 100 of the Electricty Act Yo Minister Ricky Doucet here is some of YOUR documents and that of your friends to enjoy
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com

(Français à suivre)

If your email is pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick, please email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca

If your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at greg.byrne@gnb.ca

Thank you.

Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du Nouveau-Brunswick, ‎svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca

Pour les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca

Merci.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/eub-hearing-nb-power-rate-design-smart-meters-1.4305685

EUB punts rate hearing as NB Power studies $122M smart meter plan

EUB agrees to suspend hearing so it can deal first with NB Power's proposed $122M purchase of smart meters

By Robert Jones, Posted: Sep 26, 2017 6:00 AM AT

NB Power wants to purchase and install smart meters before it has a rate design hearing. (Ryan Pilon/CBC)

An effort to redesign the way NB Power charges customers for electricity — generally viewed as bad news for those who heat with electricity — has been suspended by the New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board for one year.

The EUB has agreed to consider an upcoming NB Power application to spend $122 million on new "smart meters" for homes and businesses first.

"The Board finds that the AMI (Advanced Metering Infrastructure) application should precede the rate design hearing and therefore it is in the public interest to grant an adjournment," ruled EUB chairman Raymond Gorman in a brief hearing last week.

Energy and Utilities Board chair Raymond Gorman says the board has delayed the rate design hearing for one year. (Pat Richard/CBC)

NB Power has been under pressure from the EUB to better match prices it charges for electricity to the cost of producing and distributing power. That could see consumers paying substantially different prices for power between summer and winter — even between day and night.

• Seasonal power rates could cause consumer backlash, says consultant

But the utility has argued there is little room to make substantial changes like that until its entire inventory of power meters is upgraded.

"It is NB Power's submission that the rate design proceeding is … premature because it does contemplate discussion of rate design options that might not be available depending on … (smart meter) deployment," NB Power's senior legal counsel John Furey said during arguments for the suspension.

Tracking more frequent

Unlike current units that have to be physically visited to be read, smart meters will connect directly to NB Power computers, allowing individual customers to have electricity consumption tracked several times an hour instead of once a month.

The utility says this will allow it to charge a variety of rates for electricity — more when consumption is higher, such as in the mornings, on weekends and during winter — and less when consumption is lower.

"We are going from reading a customer's meter once a month, so 12 times a year, up to 12 times an hour," former NB Power executive Neil Larlee said during testimony in front of the EUB last February.

Smart meters for $122M

But the new meters are expensive, an estimated $92 million to acquire one for each customer and another $30 million to have them installed and made operational.

It's an expense that largely requires EUB approval, something the regulator is expected to hear evidence on this winter and rule on by next spring.  NB Power said without that decision being made first, redesigning rates made little sense.

John Furey, NB Power's senior legal counsel, argued for the delay in the rate design hearing until the utility installs smart meters, which record power usage more frequently. (LinkedIn)

"I don't see how we can have a meaningful process … because we don't know what rate design options are available or might be precluded in the event the (smart meter) decision is not to deploy or to deploy," said Furey.

Because those who heat with electricity consume large amounts of power during high-demand cold snaps, the rate design process is generally expected to result in higher costs for that group.

However, NB Power has argued smart meters will allow for enough discount periods that electric heat customers who move activities such as laundry, dishwashing and showers into the evening will be able to offset some or all of the increases they experience.

NB Power is expected to formally apply to buy and install smart meters provincewide within the next two weeks as part of its next general rate increase application.

The rate design hearing will resume next fall.

---------- Original message ----------
From: "MinFinance / FinanceMin (FIN)" fin.minfinance-financemin.fin@canada.ca
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 20:26:05 +0000
Subject: RE: The EUB Matter 357 and Section 100 of the Electricty Act Yo Minister Ricky Doucet here is some of YOUR documents and that of your friends to enjoy
To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com

The Department of Finance acknowledges receipt of your electronic correspondence. Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your comments.

Le ministère des Finances accuse réception de votre correspondance électronique. Soyez assuré(e) que nous apprécions recevoir vos commentaires.


---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 16:25:57 -0400
Subject: Re: The EUB Matter 357 and Section 100 of the Electricty Act Yo Minister Ricky Doucet here is some of YOUR documents and that of your friends to enjoy
To: rick.doucet@gnb.ca, Paul.Harpelle@gnb.ca, darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca, Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca, Robert.Jones@cbc.ca, nmoore@bellmedia.ca, premier@gnb.ca, David.Coon@gnb.ca, greg.byrne@gnb.ca, Jack.Keir@gnb.ca, blaine.higgs@gnb.ca,  Dominic.Cardy@gnb.ca, hugh.flemming@gnb.ca, serge.rousselle@gnb.ca, denis.landry2@gnb.ca>
Cc: David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com, briangallant10@gmail.com, brian.gallant@gnb.ca, Bill.Morneau@canada.ca>, markandcaroline markandcaroline@gmail.com, upriverwatch@gmail.com, oldmaison@yahoo.com, gphlaw@nb.aibn.com, gphlaw2@nb.aibn.com, bob@managesim.com, david.sollows@gnb.ca, Gilles.volpe@enbridge.com, Paul.Volpe@enbridge.com, dave.lavigne@enbridge.com, len.hoyt@mcinnescooper.com, KissPartyofNB@gmail.com, cstewart@stewartmckelvey.com, hanrahan.dion@jdirving.com, lcozzarini@nbpower.com, jfurey@nbpower.com, srussell@nbpower.com, wharrison@nbpower.com, NBPRegulatory@nbpower.com, NConnellyBosse@nbpower.com, general@nbeub.ca, ecdesmond@nbeub.ca, Michael.Dickie@nbeub.ca, John.Lawton@nbeub.ca, Dave.Young@nbeub.ca, Kathleen.Mitchell@nbeub.ca, heather.black@gnb.ca, rdk@indecon.com, sussexsharingclub@nb.aibn.com, jeff.garrett@sjenergy.com, dan.dionne@perth-andover.com, pierreroy@edmundston.ca, ray.robinson@sjenergy.com, marta.kelly@sjenergy.com, sstoll@airdberlis.com, pzarnett@bdrenergy.com, leducjr@nb.sympatico.ca

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Doucet, Rick (LEG)" Rick.Doucet@gnb.ca
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 01:07:58 +0000
Subject: RE: Final Docs
To: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com

Will get right on this.
Always look forward to your brilliant thoughts.
R


Hon.Rick Doucet
Legislative member for Charlotte-the isles
28 Mt.Pleasant Rd.
St.George, N.B. E5C 3K4

Phone / Téléphone : 506-755-4200
Fax / Télécopieur : 506-755-4207
E-mail / Courriel : rick.doucet@gnb.ca

This message is intended for the person to whom it is addressed and is
to be treated as confidential or private communications. It must not
be forwarded unless permission has been received from the originator.
If you have received this message inadvertently, please notify the
sender and delete the message. Then delete your response. Thank you
for your cooperation.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ce message est destiné à la personne désignée dans la présente et il
doit demeurer confidentiel. Il ne doit pas être réacheminé sans la
permission de l’expéditeur. Si ce message vous a été envoyé par
erreur, veuillez aviser l’expéditeur et effacer le message. Effacez
ensuite votre réponse. Merci de votre collaboration.



New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board
Commission de L'Energie et des Services Publics N.-B.

Matter 357

IN THE MATTER OF an application by New Brunswick Power Corporation
with respect to proposed changes to its rate structure, rate classes
and rate design.

held at Board Premises, Saint John, N.B., on October 5th 2017.


                        Henneberry Reporting Service
New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board
Commission de L'Energie et des Services Publics N.-B.
Matter 357

IN THE MATTER OF an application by New Brunswick Power Corporation
with respect to proposed changes to its rate structure, rate classes
and rate design.

held at Board Premises, Saint John, N.B., on October 5th 2017.

BEFORE:  Raymond Gorman, Q.C. -  Chairman
         Patrick Ervin        -  Member
         Michael Costello     -  Member

New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board
                    Counsel   - Ms. Ellen Desmond, Q.C.
                    Board Staff  - David Young
                                 - Michael Dickie
............................................................


  CHAIRMAN:  Good morning.  This is a hearing of the New Brunswick
Energy and Utilities Board in relation to Matter 357, which is an
application by New Brunswick Power Corporation with respect to
proposed changes to its rate structure, rate classes and rate design.
At this point -- I think somebody has just joined us.
    Today's hearing is a Motions Day.  We had two motions filed, one by
the Public Intervenor and one by Mr. David Amos.  The motion by the
Public Intervenor, the Board has been advised that that motion, which
was requesting additional information from IRs, that the additional
information has in fact been filed and that motion has been withdrawn.
That leaves us with one motion, that's Mr. Amos' motion.
    So I will take the appearances at this time starting with NB Power Corporation.

  MR. FUREY:  Good morning, Mr. Chair.  John Furey.  I am with Stephen
Russell and Natasha Connelly Bosse.  Mr. Chair, I am having a little
difficulty hearing you.

  CHAIRMAN:  All right.  If I move this microphone closer, is that a
little bit better?

  MR. FUREY:  Yes, thank you.

  CHAIRMAN:  All right.  And perhaps I could remind the parties to
mute their phones, if you can, when you are not talking, because we
get a lot of feedback on our conference phone.  So David Amos?

  MR. AMOS:  Yes, sir.  I am here.  And Gerald Bourque is here as well.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Bourque is here as well.  Thank you.  Enbridge Gas
New Brunswick?  Not on the line.  J.D. Irving Limited?

  MR. STEWART:  Christopher Stewart, Mr. Chairman.

  CHAIRMAN:  Thank you, Mr. Stewart.  Sussex Sharing Club?  Not here.
Utilities Municipal?

  MR. STOLL:  Good morning, Mr. Chair.  Scott Stoll.  And Ms. Kelly is
on the other line.

  CHAIRMAN:  Thank you, Mr. Stoll.  York North Veneer Products?  Not
here.  Public Intervenor?

  MS. BLACK:  Good morning, Mr. Chair.  Heather Black.

  CHAIRMAN:  Thank you, Ms. Black.  New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board?

  MS. DESMOND:  Good morning, Mr. Chair.  It's Ellen Desmond.  And
from Board Staff, David Young and Michael Dickie.

  CHAIRMAN:  Thank you, Ms. Desmond.  The motion this morning filed by
Mr. Amos was filed on October 3rd and it's seeking an order from the
Board that it maintain the schedule that it ordered after the
pre-hearing conference on June 15th 2017.  Of course, that schedule
was altered as a result of a motion that was heard on September 21st.
So, Mr. Amos, that's your motion, so I am going to ask you to proceed.
The Board notes that you filed a motion, but that -- with that motion
there was no additional evidence.

  MR. AMOS:  It's my understanding the evidence is not required.  I
asked you about it on the 21st and you wouldn't answer me, but October
3rd was the deadline for Motion Day.  The Public Intervenor and I both
filed a motion.  That said, she withdrew, I did not.
    According to the Act, this hearing that, as CBC, the Board has punted
down the road, is supposed to have been heard in three years when I
wanted to cross-examine Mr. Russell on the 21st.  It was my
understanding he had years to prepare for this hearing and then why he
is suddenly too busy to go on with it, I had many questions with that
regard, particularly after a confidential meeting with NB Power this
summer.  That said, you didn't allow me to cross-examine him, but you
did extend this matter till November 1st so people could get their
information responses, at the very least, and file motions with
questions.
    As you know from the pre-conference hearing -- or the pre-hearing
conference on June 15th, I have many questions and I introduced myself
to you folks before I even became an intervenor.  Nobody has asked me
any questions all summer, but the public is certainly entitled to know
why NB Power wants to go forward and blow more money to install smart
meters where there are many law suits, et cetera in many other
jurisdictions about site meters.  They are supposed to reduce debt,
not increase debt.  And the public are going to have to fund the
purchase of these site meters so then the public can turn around and
be billed more.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Amos, I don't want to interrupt you, but just on that
point, you should be aware that it's our understanding that the
general rate application for 2018/2019 will be filed probably --

  MR. AMOS:  I am talking about this hearing.

  CHAIRMAN:  -- probably this week.

  MR. AMOS:  I don't care about that one.  I am talking about this hearing.

  CHAIRMAN:  No, I appreciate that, but you raise the issue of the
advanced metering and it's my understanding that that will be part of
the filing that the Board will receive over the next couple of days.

  MR. AMOS:  Yes, but this Board -- this hearing is relationship to
Mr. Todd's report that stakeholders -- you and me as people of this
province, by way of NB Power, paid Mr. Todd for his report.  Mr. Furey
and his associates at NB Power want to keep most of that report
confidential from the stakeholders of this province.  We paid Mr.
Furey for his report.  We should have the right to read it.  Now I
wouldn't sign any non-disclosure agreement with Mr. Furey.  I only
want to know what the public is entitled to know.  If NB Power wants
to keep its secrets, I can get it through the Private of Information
Act, or whatever that other people are in trouble for these days.
    This hearing is ordered by the Act.  They had three years to prepare
for this hearing, which is supposed to begin next spring.  I don't
know why Mr. Russell, suddenly one week before the proper Motion Day,
which was October 3rd, or weeks before that -- and 30 minutes after
Mr. Hyslop pulls himself from the matter, they have a sudden motion to
have it dismissed sine die, which means forever, and the Board
accommodates NB Power with a proper Board hearing, not on a scheduled
Motion Day, and tried hard to make this matter go away.  Well all that
happened was it's delayed until after the next election.
    Meanwhile, I have got emails from your current Minister Rick Doucet
before the last election waiting to receive my documents.  When he
received my documents, he said nothing since.  You folks have never
responded to any of my emails.  Nobody will talk to me on the phone.
And the only way I can speak to anyone is on the record, which is what
I am doing.   This hearing was properly scheduled.  All the
intervenors lined up, information requests, and information responses
and the hearing should go forward as per your mandate and the law that
was set down in 2013.  That's my position.  I don't know how you think
and NB Power think you can delay the matter down the road until you
are no longer Chair of the Board.  You were appointed in 2007, your
term is up this year.  I don't know who the next Chair of the Board
will be, he is yet to be appointed, but I will take it up with him.
That said, I told you I have the right to judicial review.  That's
also in the Act.  And I am quite -- I am being very honest with you, I
think this is political, period.  Where is the Conservatives in this?
What's going on here?  There is a properly scheduled hearing.  The
Public Intervenor doesn't appear to be speaking on my behalf, but I
am.
    And my number one concern, as a lot of Maritimers are who have voiced
it to me, is this smart meter nonsense and more debt.  The Act was
there to bring the debt down and bring the equity up, it's my
understanding.  I don't know how you increase equity by borrowing more
money.  First off, to pay for these meters, you have to bill your
clients more money to recoup the money you borrowed to buy the smart
meters and then they might come forward with a profit.  But I have
been in business a long time and I am older than most of you folks.  I
have litigated and sued more lawyers, law firms, and argued with more
Attorney Generals and politicians than most folk can name.

    Mr. Gorman, you cannot deny that I didn't send you a couple of very
interesting emails this weekend to remind you when I first introduced
myself to you in 2007.  Correct?  Are you there?

  CHAIRMAN:  Yes, I am here.  And I am just waiting for the rest of
your submission.

  MR. AMOS:  Well that said, you used to be on the Board back in the
'90s, and then you had Mr. Stoll's job for a few years, and then when
Bernard Lord canned the old PUB -- and as you know, I was involved
with all of that.  I sent you the documents and the National Energy
Board.  And I ran in Saint John, just like Mr. Hyslop did.  I sent you
his voicemail between him and I.  I sent you all my documents.  I sent
you the document that I gave NB Power in 2006, right after I ran for
Parliament in Fredericton. NB Power had hired Simpson Bartlett &
Thacher to sue Venezuela over orimulsion.  Ms. Black's law firm,
McInnes Cooper were hired by Venezuela, Richard Costello, to search
with PUB as to when there was a pipeline from the Irving refinery to
Coleson Cove.  All of this is easily verified in the information I
already sent you.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Amos --

  MR. AMOS:  I have issues with conflict of interest with Stewart
McKelvey.  NB Power hired them to sue the insurance companies to
recoup losses on Lepreau.  And Irving hired the same law firm to
approach this Board to protect Irving's interest.  That's a huge
conflict of interest.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Amos --

  MR. AMOS:  Mr. Hoyt --

  CHAIRMAN:  -- Mr. Amos --

  MR. AMOS:  -- he picked the cabinet that you guys --

  CHAIRMAN:  -- excuse me, Mr. Amos --

  MR. AMOS:  -- report to.  And he speaks for Enbridge while his law
firm -- his law firm partner is a Public Intervenor.  I smell conflict
of interest everywhere I look in this matter.  And everybody knows I
enjoy suing lawyers.

  CHAIRMAN:  Okay.  Mr. Amos --

  MR. AMOS:  As I said, I have --

  CHAIRMAN:  -- Mr. Amos, I --

  MR. AMOS:  -- a right to judicial review and I don't care --

  CHAIRMAN:  -- excuse me, Mr. Amos --

  MR. AMOS:  -- for the Court of Queen's Bench in Fredericton, I will
be suing you guys in Federal Court.

  CHAIRMAN:  Okay.  Mr. Amos, the motion that you brought today is for
an order from this Board to return --

  MR. AMOS:  To get you guys to obey the rules.

  CHAIRMAN:  -- excuse me, could you just wait a moment.

  MR. AMOS:  The law clearly states there is supposed to be a hearing
within three years.

  CHAIRMAN:  So which law are you referring to?

  MR. AMOS:  Section 100.

  CHAIRMAN:  Just one moment.

  MR. AMOS:  You guys are supposed to report to the Executive Council
and, et cetera, et cetera.  The law is the law.  Rules are rules.
Then there is Bill 60 about accountability.  I know when the
Conservatives come out with this Act in 2013, part of the NB Power's
mandate was to save money.  They want to bill more, but I don't see
much evidence where they have cut costs.  That was a big part of this
new bill.

  CHAIRMAN:  Can I bring you back to your section 100.  You are
talking about section 100 of the Electricity Act?

  MR. AMOS:  Yes, sir.

  CHAIRMAN:  And you are saying that this Board was supposed to do
something within three years?

  MR. AMOS:  There is all kinds -- have you read the Act?

  CHAIRMAN:  I have.

  MR. AMOS:  That's just one part of it.

  CHAIRMAN:  Is that -- but I am not sure how your argument pertains to what --

  MR. AMOS:  My argument is --

  CHAIRMAN:  -- excuse me, just  --

  MR. AMOS:  -- the Act says --

  CHAIRMAN:  -- Mr. Amos, I would like to know how --

  MR. AMOS:  Are you a lawyer?

  CHAIRMAN:  -- I would like to know how that --

  MR. AMOS:  You are a lawyer, sir.

  CHAIRMAN:  -- I would like --

  MR. AMOS:  You don't understand the Act?

  CHAIRMAN:  -- I would like to know --

  MR. AMOS:  We will argue the Act in another court, if you don't
understand the Act you are supposed to follow.  If you want to argue a
layman about some small portion of the Act -- but you will see in the
Act where the Executive Council is involved, section 100.  How can
that be if you don't even have your hearing until after the next
election?

  CHAIRMAN:  Sir, your concerns seem to be about the --

  MR. AMOS:  I will take it up with the Executive Council right after
I hang up the phone, Rick Doucet.

  CHAIRMAN:  Okay.  Mr. Amos, your concerns that you talked about this
morning seem to --

  MR. AMOS:  I am asking you to obey the law and uphold your own
rules, as per your mandate.  This hearing was properly scheduled, all
the intervenors lined up.  They had their information requests,
information responses.  And now all of a sudden, just because Mr.
Russell is too busy in September, you allow NB Power to end it.  I
smell politics through and through, sir.

  CHAIRMAN:  Okay.  Mr. Amos, do --

  MR. AMOS:  It was politicians who appointed you to this position.
  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. --

  MR. AMOS:  Len Hoyt picked the Executive Council, for God's sake,
and he is an intervenor for Enbridge.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Amos, do you have anything else in respect to why
this matter should -- the original schedule should be --

  MR. AMOS:  Yes.  Can you think of one good reason why I don't sue
you, Mr. Gorman?  You have my documents.  Do you understand what are
on file in your Board?  Do you not see where I am already in Federal
Court suing the Queen?  Did I not properly introduce myself before you
allowed me to be an intervenor?  Did not I explain my issues to this
Board in no uncertain terms on June 15th?
    I am here protecting my own interests as a citizen and a stakeholder
in this province who pays your wages.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Amos, anything further?

  MR. AMOS:  You are an officer of the court.  You are obliged to
uphold the law, sir.

  CHAIRMAN:  Okay.

  MR. AMOS:  If you want to mince words with me with sections 100,
fine.  We will do that in front of a judge.

  CHAIRMAN:  Anything further?

  MR. AMOS:  Yes.  I look forward to meeting you in court, sir.

  CHAIRMAN:  Right.  Thank you.  Mr. Furey, anything?

  MR. FUREY:  Just very briefly, Mr. Chair.  While it has not been
characterized by Mr. Amos, I think the appropriate way to treat the
motion is request for a re-hearing or variation of the Board's Order
of September 21st, which is permitted under section 43 of the EUB Act.
And rule 8.1.1. sets out how the Board would go about that or how the
application should demonstrate whether the Board should exercise its
discretion to do that.  And in that rule, it talks about the types of
things that you would expect to see in this type of application,
whether there is some alleged error of law or jurisdiction, I don't
hear that.  And whether there is any new facts or new evidence that
was not before the Board at the time it made its decision on September
21st, I don't hear any of that.

  MR. AMOS:  You had lots of my information before September 21st.
It's properly documented.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Amos, you had an opportunity --

  MR. FUREY:  Well, Mr. Amos, you had your turn.  Let me speak please.

  CHAIRMAN:  Yes.  Mr. Amos, you have had an opportunity to speak.
It's Mr. Furey's --

  MR. AMOS:  Yes, I am considered hostile by Mr. Furey.

  MR. FUREY:  I can't imagine why.

  MR. AMOS:  We will find out in another court, won't we, Mr. Furey?

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Amos --

  MR. FUREY:  So, Mr. Chair, I don't see any of the types of things
that would justify the Board exercising its jurisdiction to vary its
previous decision and so I would simply ask that the motion be
dismissed.

  CHAIRMAN:  Thank you, Mr. Furey.  Mr. Bourque?

  MR. AMOS:  Mr. Bourque?

  MR. BOURQUE:  Yes.  No, I think the motion should -- you know, we
should go ahead with this.  That's what the Act says, that's what we
should be doing.

  CHAIRMAN:  Thank you, Mr. Bourque.  We have a new participant.

  MR. VOLPE:  Paul Volpe, Enbridge Gas.

  CHAIRMAN:  Good morning, Mr. Volpe.

  MR. VOLPE:  My apologies.

  CHAIRMAN:  Yes.  So we are partway through the hearing of the
motion, Mr. Volpe.  Do you have anything to say about this motion?  Do
you have --

  MR. VOLPE:  I do not.  Please proceed.  Thank you.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Stewart?

  MR. STEWART:  I have no submissions.

  CHAIRMAN:  Mr. Stoll?

  MR. STOLL:  Mr. Chair, I think Mr. Furey captured our position.

  CHAIRMAN:  Thank you.  Ms. Black?

  MS. BLACK:  Thank you, Mr. Chair.  I agree with Mr. Furey's analysis
based on the EUB Act and the Rules of Procedure and I have no further
submission.

  CHAIRMAN:  Thank you.  Ms. Desmond, any comments?

  MS. DESMOND:  No, comments, Mr. Chair.

  CHAIRMAN:  All right.  Just give us a moment.  We are just going to
recess briefly, but I am going to ask the parties to stay on the
phone.

    (Short recess)

  CHAIRMAN:  All right.  The Board will now provide a decision with
respect to this matter.
    Mr. Amos filed this motion on October 3rd seeking an order from the
Board that it maintain the schedule that it ordered after the
pre-hearing conference on June 15th 2017.
    By way of background, NB Power filed a rate design application on May
1st 2017.  A pre-hearing conference was held on June 15th 2017.  The
Board provided a complete and final filing schedule to all parties on
July 13th.  A hearing was set for April 9th 2018.
    On September 12th, NB Power filed a motion seeking an adjournment of
this matter.  This motion was heard on September 21st 2017 at which
time all parties had the opportunity to comment on NB Power's request
for an adjournment.
    Having considered all of the submissions at that time, including that
of Mr. Amos, the Board determined that -- and I am quoting from that
decision -- "it should exercise its discretion and grant an
adjournment in this matter.  The Board finds that the AMI application
should precede the rate design hearing and therefore it is in the
public interest to grant an adjournment."  I believe that can be found
in the transcript.
    In a motion of October 3rd, Mr. Amos is asking the Board to
reconsider its decision of September 21st and to require NB Power to
proceed with the matter as was first ordered on July 13th.
    Section 8 of the EUB Rules of Procedure specifically addressed the
process to be used when requesting the Board to review, rescind or
vary an order, which it is and able to do under section 43 of the Act.
The Rule provides that when an applicant makes a request of this
nature, the application should provide a number of things, including
the grounds on which they intend to rely and the changed circumstances
or new facts that have arisen since the close of the original
proceeding.
    The Board has read the information provided in Mr. Amos' motion and
considered his comments at today's hearing.  The Board finds that Mr.
Amos has provided no new information since the Board made its decision
on September 21st.
    As a result, as per Section 8.2 of the Rules of Procedure, Mr. Amos
has not raised sufficient grounds to reconsider the Board's decision
of September 21st and the motion is dismissed.  Thank you.  And we
will now adjourn.

    (Adjourned)

                      Certified to be a true transcript of
                      the proceedings of this hearing
                      as recorded by me, to the best of my
                      ability.         Reporter




http://www.gnb.ca/legis/bill/FILE/57/3/Bill-39-e.htm

BILL 39
Electricity Act
Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative
Assembly of New Brunswick, enacts as follows:


PART 6
REGULATION OF ELECTRICITY
Division A
Planning
Integrated resource plan

100( 1) The Corporation shall, in accordance with subsection (4),
submit to the Executive Council for approval an integrated resource
plan that covers a planning period of not less than 20 years and that
includes the following:
(a)  the Corporation’s load forecast for the planning period;
(b)  demand-side management and energy efficiency plans considered by
the Corporation and those it has chosen for implementation;
(c)  supply-side options considered by the Corporation and those it
has chosen for implementation;
(d)  the anticipated impact on load of the demand-side management and
energy efficiency plans chosen for implementation by the Corporation;
(e)  the cost implications of the demand-side management and energy
efficiency plans and supply-side options chosen for implementation by
the Corporation as projected for the initial 10-year period covered by
the integrated resource plan;
(f)  any key assumptions relied on by the Corporation in developing
the integrated resource plan;
(g)  a description of the stakeholder consultations carried out by the
Corporation in developing the integrated resource plan; and
(h)  any other information the Corporation considers relevant or that
is ordered by the Board under subsection (3) to be included.

100( 2) Subject to any changes requested under subsection (7), an
integrated resource plan shall be developed by the Corporation in
accordance with the principles of least-cost service, economic and
environmental sustainability and risk management.

100( 3) The Board may, on its own motion, order the Corporation to
include additional information in any subsequent integrated resource
plans submitted under subsection (1) for the approval of the Executive
Council.

100( 4) An integrated resource plan shall, at the following times, be
submitted to the Executive Council under subsection (1) for approval:
(a)  within one year after the commencement of this section;
(b)  at any time on the request of the Board; and
(c)  at least once every three years after the date of the submission
of the latest integrated resource plan under either paragraph (a) or (b).

100( 5) The Executive Council shall approve or reject an integrated
resource plan within 90 days after receipt of the plan.

100( 6) If the Executive Council does not render a decision under
subsection (5) within the time specified in that subsection, the
integrated resource plan shall be deemed to be approved on the expiry
of that time.

100( 7) The Executive Council may request changes to an integrated
resource plan or request additional information from the Corporation
before approval.



100( 8) An integrated resource plan approved by the Executive Council
under subsection (5) or deemed to be approved under subsection (6)
shall be filed by the Corporation with the Board within 30 days after
the approval or deemed approval.




Strategic, financial and capital investment plan




101( 1) The Corporation shall file with the Board for information
purposes within one year after the commencement of this section and
annually after that a strategic, financial and capital investment plan
covering the next ten fiscal years that includes the following:
(a)  a schedule showing, for each fiscal year covered by the plan,
each capital project contemplated by the Corporation that has a total
projected capital cost of $50 million or more and the related
projected annual capital expenditures for each such project;
(b)  a schedule showing, for each fiscal year covered by the plan, the
projected aggregate capital expenditures that relate to the capital
projects contemplated by the Corporation that have a projected total
capital cost of less than $50 million;
(c)  the revenue requirements of the Corporation for each fiscal year
covered by the plan;
(d)  a projected balance sheet for the Corporation for each fiscal
year covered by the plan;
(e)  the Corporation’s load and revenue forecast for each fiscal year
covered by the plan;
(f)  a schedule showing, for each fiscal year covered by the plan, the
projected annual overall change in rates for sales of electricity
within the Province, expressed as a percentage, that is necessary to
meet the revenue requirements referred to in paragraph (c); and
(g)  any other information that the Corporation considers relevant or
that is ordered by the Board under subsection (2) to be included.