David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-rate-meters-1.5430140
NB Power rate used to justify smart meters 'low,' says expert
Expert calculated 1 per cent swing worth $7M
· CBC News · Posted: Jan 17, 2020 6:00 AM AT
Erik Gilbert testified Wednesday and Thursday at NB Power's smart meter hearing. The U.S.-based consultant said he found a critical discount rate being used by NB Power to calculate costs of its smart meter plan to be "low." (Roger Cosman/CBC)
Questions about whether NB Power has padded the business case supporting its proposed purchase of smart meters continue to dog the utility at Energy and Utilities Board hearings.
A U.S. expert hired by NB Power to independently evaluate the reasonableness of its smart meter plan said he found a key interest rate input used by the utility to calculate costs of its project — known as a discount rate — to be "low"
"A lower discount rate will increase a positive result," said Erik Gilbert in explaining the significance of the issue
Gilbert, a Colorado-based energy consultant, testified at hearings into NB Power's smart meter plan Wednesday and Thursday and said the utility supplied his company with a discount rate of 5.25 per cent to calculate the interest cost of money that will be invested in the smart meter project.
"Typically when we do one of these benefit cost analyses, we obtain this rate, directly from the utility finance folks," said Gilbert.
"And as long as that rate is being broadly used in say an IRP (integrated resource plan) or in other proceedings, long range planning and so on, then we consider it reasonable.".
EUB lawyer Ellen Desmond asked Gilbert if he had investigated why the rate was selected or if he looked into whether NB Power typically uses the 5.25 per cent rate. He hadn't.
Nova Scotia Power and BC Hydro used financing rates in their smart meter planning significantly higher than NB Power - a multi million dollar difference boosting the NB Power plan that is raising questions at the EUB. (CBC)
"I did not personally review the IRP," he said
"Every utility has different discount rates and different factors. And so we didn't consider the 5.25 to be an outlier, it was just low."
NB Power's most recent integrated resource plan, which was updated in 2017 and is on file in a separate EUB matter, states the company generally uses a discount rate of 5.9 per cent "for all present value analysis."
Gilbert's own work showed that Nova Scotia Power recently used a discount rate of 6.96 per cent in its own smart meter application in 2017 and BC Hydro used a discount rate of eight per cent.
EUB lawyer Ellen Desmond has been digging deep into the numbers behind NB Power's smart meter business plan. In addition to questions about the discount rate NB Power is using for the project, there have been $4.7 million in other claimed benefits called into question. (Graham Thompson/CBC)
According to Gilbert's report every one per cent swing in the discount rate used in NB Power's smart meter plan would add or subtract about $7 million in net benefits, depending if it was moved higher or lower.
"It is important. It is an important factor yes," said Gilbert.
Although hired by NB Power, Gilbert said he was asked to evaluate the company's application, not support it, and he was free to criticize any faults he found.
He said overall he found the business case professional and reasonable and "on the balance" built using conservative assumptions.
"We were retained to do an independent and impartial review of NB Power's business case and their benefit cost analysis, and that is how I view the role," said Gilbert.
Universite de Moncton economics professor Francis Tatoutchoup questioned the discount rate NB Power is using in its smart meter business case Thursday, the second day in a row it was raised as an issue. (Roger Cosman/CBC)
"To provide input to the Board, expert opinion to the Board, and the evidence that we have introduced as an impartial expert and to help the Board make an appropriate decision for New Brunswick."
NB Power has insisted from the start of hearings that it used conservative estimates and assumptions in building its business case that smart meters will generate a $31.1 million net benefit over 15 years.
But interveners, especially EUB lawyer Ellen Desmond, have been chipping away at that number.
In addition to questions about the discount rate, interveners earlier raised questions about $4.7 million in benefits NB Power has claimed in its business case will flow from replacing inefficient older meters that undercount electricity consumption with newer, more accurate smart meters.
About the Author
28 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.
David Raymond Amos
Methinks a lot of folks should thank my friend Roger Richard After all Mikey Holland and his political cohorts cannot deny that Francis Tatoutchoup is just one of the expert witnesses that Roger went to a great deal of effort and expense to bring before the EUB and speak in defense of our interests N'esy Pas?
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @David Raymond Amos: Methinks there was some very interesting things missing from this news item about NB Power N'esy Pas?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-catch-22-1.5428720
---------- Original message ----------
From: Philippe Dunsky <philippe@dunsky.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:39:01 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks Minister Mikey Holland should pay
more attention to whats going with NB Power within the EUB and the CBC
N'esy Pas Higgy?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
[le français suit]
I'm out of the office Wednesday and Thursday this week, testifying at
a regulatory proceeding. I'll check emails occasionally, but my
response time will be longer than usual. If your email is urgent,
please let me know by resending with "URGENT" in the subject, and I'll
make sure to prioritize a quick response.
Philippe
------------------------------
Bonjour, je suis à l'extérieur mercredi et jeudi de cette semaine pour
témoigner devant un organisme de régulation économique. Je vérifierai
mes courriels de temps en temps, mais mon délai de réponse sera
assurément plus long qu'à l'habitude. Si votre courriel est urgent,
SVP me renvoyer un message en inscrivant "URGENT" dans l'Objet; je
prioriserai alors une réponse plus rapide.
Philippe
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-catch-22-1.5428720
Expert says true smart meter value won't emerge until after they're approved
Day three of rate hearings concluded Wednesday
· CBC News · Posted: Jan 15, 2020 10:04 PM AT
A three person panel from the Energy and Utilities Board headed by Vice Chairman Francois Beaulieu is hearing NB Power's second application to acquire smart meters. The first application was rejected two years ago for not being cost effective. (Graham Thompson/CBC)
NB Power's application to buy and deploy advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) has been handicapped into presenting only a fraction of the benefits the devices can deliver, a hearing was told Wednesday.
An expert said the Energy and Utilities Board should look beyond NB Power's limited business case in deciding on the technology, which includes smart meters.
"One of the challenges inherent in assessing the value of AMI metering infrastructure is that only a portion of future benefits may be known at the time of initial investment," said Philippe Dunsky, a Montreal based energy expert hired by NB Power to testify about potential "unquantified benefits" of smart meters.
"Many of those (AMI) services and capabilities are difficult to quantify" he added. "Some are not yet even known and I would argue probably most are not yet known."
As an example Dunsky said if NB Power uses smart meters in the future to introduce different prices for electricity at different times of the day it could nudge enough power consumption away from expensive peak hours in the winter to save itself $52 million over 15 years.
"This is a classic catch 22," said Dunsky.
"NB Power cannot propose a specific rate design until it knows what metering infrastructure it is working with and the EUB is reluctant to account for benefits for a rate design not yet proposed."
"While valued at zero in the business case I would encourage the EUB to give this benefit - with $52 million in potential rate payer savings in play, due consideration."
NB Power is in front of the Energy and Utilities Board seeking permission to spend $92 million to buy 360,000 smart meters and deploy them with most of its customer base.
Montreal based energy expert Philippe Dunsky listens to questions from NB Power lawyer John Furey. Dunsky testified Wednesday that millions of dollars in benefits NB Power will gain from smart meters are not in its business case, but the EUB should consider them when it renders a decision. (Robert Jones/CBC)
But it has been limited to presenting "quantified benefits" of the switch in its business case to try and win approval, like money it will save on meter reading and other efficiencies.
On that narrow basis it has claimed the meters will generate a net benefit to the utility of $31.1 million over 15 years but the hearing has been chipping away at that number.
Dunsky prepared a report suggesting there are at least 13 lucrative but currently unquantified benefits - like time varying rates - NB Power is prevented from counting. He said that is making the case for smart meters seem less financially attractive than it really is.
Two years ago in its decision to reject NB Power's first application for smart meters the EUB explained it had decided against including possible future benefits of smart meters in its evaluation.
"The Board acknowledges that there may be a number of non-quantifiable benefits that AMI would accrue to ratepayers and the utility," read the decision.
Staff of the Energy and Utilities Board led by its lawyer Ellen Desmond listen to testimony about smart meters. Desmond questioned Wednesday how the EUB could consider unquantified benefits as an argument in favour of smart meters if there is no evidence to support what they are. (Graham Thompson/CBC)
"For the purposes of this application, however, the Board does not consider non-quantifiable benefits as a factor that would overcome a negative business case."
Under questioning from EUB lawyer Ellen Desmond, Dunsky acknowledged some of his examples were being given without evidence the hearing could look at and evaluate including a claim that a combination of time varying rates and expanding electric vehicle sales and charging would save NB Power another $51 million if smart meters were approved.
"Is there anything on the record that would allow interveners to test that ($51 million) evaluation," asked Desmond
"Could you point us to something where we could look at the details of that calculation, or anything of that nature?"
"I can't point to something that's currently in the record," said Dunsky, "I apologise. I put it in there. I probably shouldn't have."
NB Power senior vice president Lori Clark told the EUB Monday that it's application for smart meters is based on "quantified benefits" of the technology but made a point of noting there are "many" unquantified benefits as well. (Graham Thompson/CBC)
Despite the EUB's ruling two years ago that unquantified benefits did not count in its decision on smart meters the issue has again become a significant matter of discussion.
Scott Stoll, a lawyer representing New Brunswick's municipal utilities has been asking witnesses whether, in a close call, the EUB should take potential but unquantified benefits into consideration.
And in its opening statement of the hearing NB Power made it a point to mention them prominently.
"Our business case is built on quantified benefits;" said senior NB Power vice president Lori Clark.
"However, we also noted the many non-quantified benefits that make AMI a worthy investment."
About the Author
NEW BRUNSWICK ENERGY and UTILITIES BOARD
COMMISSION DE L’ENERGIE ET DES SERVICES PUBLICS N.-B.
Matter 452
IN THE MATTER OF an application by New Brunswick Power Corporation for approval and Advanced Metering Infrastructure capital project
Held at the Delta Hotel Saint John, N.B. on January 15th 2020.
Henneberry Reporting Service 24
INDEX
Mr. Erik Gilbert
Direct by Mr. Furey - page 395
Cross by Mr. Stoll - page 412
Cross by Ms. Black - page 420
Mr. Philippe Dunsky
Direct by Mr. Furey - page 444
Cross by Dr. Richard - page 471
Cross by Mr. Stoll - page 477
Cross by Ms. Black - page 487
Cross by Ms. Desmond - page 499
By the Board - page 504
Redirect by Mr. Furey - page 500
NBP
15.01 - Response to undertaking number 3
15.02 - Response to undertaking number 4
NEW BRUNSWICK ENERGY and UTILITIES BOARD 1
COMMISSION DE L’ENERGIE ET DES SERVICES PUBLICS N.-B.
Matter 452
IN THE MATTER OF an application by New Brunswick Power Corporation for approval and Advanced Metering Infrastructure capital project
Held at the Delta Hotel, Saint John, N.B. on January 15th 2020.
Members of the Board:
Mr. Francois Beaulieu - Vice-Chairman
Mr. Michael Costello - Member
Mr. Patrick Ervin - Member
NB Energy and Utilities Board:
Ms. Ellen Desmond, Q.C.
Mr. David Young
Mr. John Lawton
Mr. Michael Dickie
Chief Clerk: Ms. Kathleen Mitchell
Page 395
ERIK GILBERT, duly sworn.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: So for the record, Mr. Gilbert has been sworn. So maybe just take your place there, Mr. Gilbert, and I think your counsel will have a few questions to ask you.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. FUREY:
Q. - Good morning, Mr. Gilbert.
A. Good morning.
Q. - I wonder if I could ask you to briefly introduce yourself to the Board, please?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: So, Mr. Gilbert, you need to push on the button in front of you so -- and you are going to see a red light.
WITNESS: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: So that enables Mrs. Farris to understand what you are saying.
WITNESS: Okay. Can you hear me? Good morning. My name is Erik Gilbert. I am a director at Navigant Guidehouse Consulting firm that deals with a broad range of energy consulting world-wide. I specialize in benefit cost analysis of grid modernization and AMI investments.
Page 395
VICE-CHAIRMAN: So any objections regarding the 2 qualification of Mr. Gilbert in the area of expertise 3 that Mr. Furey just raised? So hearing no objection, 4 Mr. Gilbert will be qualified as an expert.
DR. RICHARD: Monsieur président?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Docteur Richard?
DR. RICHARD: Oui. Je me demandais comment impartiale est Monsieur Gilbert?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: C’est une très bonne question. Mr. Furey, Dr. Richard is asking if Mr. -- before his qualification, if Mr. Gilbert is impartial, and I don’t think you asked that question.
MR. FUREY: Certainly. I was going to ask it after he was qualified, but I can ask it now.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: It’s an important question to ask, Mr. Furey, before we --
MR. FUREY: Sure. Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: -- qualify him, because I think the case law is quite clear that that’s something that any court or tribunal needs to consider if Mr. -- whomever we are going to declare --
MR. FUREY: Absolutely.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: -- will provide and objective non-partisan evidence.
MR. FUREY: I have no problem. I have no problem asking the question now.
Q. - So, Mr. Gilbert, under the rules under which this Board operates there is a specific rule that states that an expert shall assist the Board by giving evidence that is impartial, fair and objective. And I wonder if you could describe for the Board how you see your role as an expert witness?
A. Yes. We were retained to do an independent and impartial review of NB Power’s business case and their benefit cost analysis, and that is how I view the role is to provide input to the Board, expert opinion to the Board, and the evidence that we have introduced as an impartial expert and to help the Board make an appropriate decision for New Brunswick.
MR. FUREY: So with that, Mr. Vice-Chair, I would again ask that Mr. Gilbert be qualified as requested.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Est-ce que ça répond à votre question Docteur Richard?
DR. RICHARD : Comment est-ce qu’on définit impartialité?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: So he is asking how we define -- est-ce que vous objectez à la qualification Docteur Richard?
DR. RICHARD: Je sais que tous les experts ici sont, d’après moi, des experts, mais je ne peux pas concevoir que quelqu’un est totalement impartial. VICE-CHAIRMAN: So, Mr. Furey, there is a test that has been developed by the Supreme Court called the acid test. Are you familiar with that test?
MR. FUREY: I’m sorry. I didn’t quite hear you properly. The --
VICE-CHAIRMAN: It’s called the acid test.
MR. FUREY: This is the R. versus Mohan test for --
VICE-CHAIRMAN: No. There is another case law that comes from the Supreme Court and maybe you may want to have a reading of this case before we continue. It’s a case that comes -- that was issued by the Supreme Court. It’s called WBLI versus Abbott and Haliburton. It’s a 2015 case that comes out from the Supreme Court of Canada and they talk about it in this case, and also about the impartiality. So I’m wondering if you want to consider that before we continue.
MR. FUREY: Well I have no objection to -- you know, we will do as the Board pleases. I note that Dr. Richard took a motion in this matter to request having received appropriate notification under the rules that NB Power would challenge the qualification of his experts. He took a motion to request the basis on which NB Power was doing so and we provided him with that information in the context of the motion hearing. So Dr. Richard is well aware of the rules of this tribunal. So if the Board wants us to take an adjournment and go do that, we will absolutely do it. But I’m not sure where this is coming from. Dr. Richard is aware of the rules. He could have given us notification of this. But if it means an adjournment, we are prepared to take an adjournment. I will look up that case and we will come back and deal with it.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: So there is -- maybe what we will do, Mr. Furey, is if you can just have a look at that case that I just talked about. And as I was just reading the headnotes, the -- that test that I was referring to may come from the Mohan case. So you may want to have a look at what that test is all about for impartiality and maybe ask that question to your witness and maybe that will satisfy Dr. Richard once you ask that specific question to your witness.
MR. FUREY: Could you provide me with the cite for the Haliburton case again, Mr. Vice-Chair?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Yes. It’s 2015, 2 Supreme Court of Canada, and it’s at page 182.
MR. FUREY: Thank you.
MS. DESMOND: Mr. Vice-Chair, can I suggest that that case be circulated to all of the parties, just for the purposes of having all of the same information.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Yes. So we will take maybe 15 minutes and -- or a break, and whenever you are ready, Mr. -- and just maybe inform the Chief Clerk and we will come back to deal with this issue.
MR. FUREY: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Vice-Chair.
(Recess)
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Mr. Furey.
MR. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Vice-Chair. Thank you for the opportunity to review the case that has been referred to. Based on that I do -- I have a few questions for --
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MR. FUREY: -- for Mr. Gilbert.
Q. - So, Mr. Gilbert, I have provided you with a copy of the case just a few moments ago and I don’t expect you to have read it. So I am going to refer you to a couple of parts more for ease of reference than anything else.
So if we could go to page 206 of this decision where the Supreme Court of Canada is actually rendering its decision in the matter, at paragraph 46. So do you have that reference, Mr. Gilbert?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. - So here the Supreme Court is saying the duty -- they are describing the duty owed by an expert witness to the court, in this case to this tribunal, to be fair, objective and non-partisan. That’s very consistent with the rule that I read to you earlier. And the court expresses agreement with a lower court justice saying that the common law has come to accept that expert witnesses have a duty to assist the court that overrides their obligation to the party calling them. So do you recognize that as part of your duty?
A. Yes.
Q. - And can you describe for the Board how you see that in terms of this particular proceeding?
A. Yes. I believe this means that I need to bring the expertise of myself and my firm and including judgment -- expert judgment on various matters in evidence that we have brought to provide the best judgment that we -- that I possibly can on these issues without bias towards one party or another, and to use my expertise again to help inform the Board to make the best decision possible for New Brunswick.
Q. - And to be more specific, if that means that you agree with a point that would tend to reduce the ratio of the benefit cost analysis, would you agree that that means you have a duty to express that to the Board?
A. Yes. Yes. Absolutely.
Q. - Okay. Now the court, throughout the decision, talks about a couple of particular areas where courts have recognized that there is a problem with an expert’s qualification. I’m going to ask you a few questions around each of those.
The first is where the expert has some type of interest, financial or otherwise, in the outcome of the matter before the tribunal or court. So maybe you can start by telling me how large an organization Navigant is?
A. Navigant -- now Navigant Guidehouse, because we just merged, is I believe on the order of 7,000 people and approximately -- I would have to check for sure, but approximately a billion dollars U.S. in global revenues.
Q. - Thank you. And let’s presume for a moment -- NB Power hopes not, but let’s presume for a moment that this Board were to disallow this application and not approve the AMI capital investment, what impact, if any, does that have on you or Navigant?
A. I would think none.
Q. - And in particular some of the obvious concerns that have been expressed in the case law is a circumstance where there is a financial interest even from a fee
perspective. Obviously you are being paid a fee by NB Power, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. - And is that fee contingent on the outcome of this litigation?
A. No.
Q. - No. The other area where courts have expressed concern is where there is a close relationship between the expert and a litigant in the litigation or hearing. What connection, if any, do you have to NB Power?
A. Only through the work that I have done on this particular matter, that I have been engaged by NB Power. I have not done any other work for NB Power or in New Brunswick.
Q. - Okay. Thank you. Are you aware of any of the other 7,000 employees of Navigant who have done work for NB Power?
A. I am not aware of it. I would not be surprised if some of our -- in our Canadian operation has done work with NB Power, but I am not personally aware of that.
Q. - So you personally have -- have you ever met any of the NB Power witnesses in this matter?
A. No.
Q. - Before today?
A. Not before today.
Q. - Okay. Thank you. And finally the Vice-Chair, in his introduction to this case a little earlier, talked about the acid test. And if I could take you to page 184, I’m going to refer to the headnote of this case, and this is just a brief summary of the decision. The second paragraph -- do you see that -- starting with expert witnesses have a duty?
A. Yes.
Q. - And I’m not going to take you through all that, we have already talked about the duty, but toward the bottom the court refers to the acid test and says the acid test is whether the expert’s opinion would not change regardless of which party retained him or her. And I would just ask you to address that issue in the context of your duty.
A. Yes. My opinion in our analysis would not change regardless of who retained us. Part of our -- the reason people hire us is for impartial review and judgment, and if we lose that it’s -- frankly it’s bad for our business. But yes, the opinion and -- I want to say the evidence, I guess I can’t say that with 100 percent certainty -- but our opinion and our review would not change based on who hired us.
MR. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Gilbert. Those are all my questions, Mr. Vice-Chair, and I would ask that Mr. Gilbert be qualified as referenced earlier.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Furey. Dr. Richard, au point de vue de votre objection relativement à son impartialité est-ce que vous avez des questions relativement à ce témoin qui met en doute son impartialité envers la Commission?
DR. RICHARD: Les revenues de sa compagnie vienne d’où?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Are you able to answer that, Mr. Gilbert?
A. I can -- I can’t give you all the exact specifics, but yes, we are retained by energy companies, utilities, regulatory boards and other commercial entities to do consulting of various types in the field of energy and health care and financial services, and I could attempt to go into more detail but these are from memory. That’s -- is that sufficient or not? I can try and go into more detail.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Est-ce que ça répond à votre question Docteur Richard?
DR. RICHARD: Oui, je n’ai pas de problème, monsieur président.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Vous n’avez pas de problème que la Commission le déclare comme témoin expert?
DR. RICHARD: Oui, c’est correct avec moi.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Okay. Merci. So the Board has considered the questions and will declare Mr. Gilbert -- or will qualify Mr. Gilbert as an expert in benefit cost analysis for grid modernization and specifically for AMI. Mr. Furey.
MR. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Vice-Chair.
Q. - So, Mr. Gilbert, you have submitted two reports that have been filed in evidence in this matter. Could we bring up NBP 2.01. So this is a report dated August 1st 2019, and this report is a report on your initial review and assessment of the business case, is that correct?
A. Yes, that’s correct.
Q. - And did you prepare this report?
A. Yes. I prepared it. I had assistance from analysts at our firm. So together we prepared it but I reviewed it entirely.
Q. - So this is your evidence?
A. Yes.
Q. - And do you adopt it as your personal evidence?
A. Yes.
Q. - And to the best of your knowledge, information and belief, is that evidence true and accurate?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. - And in addition -- and if we could pull up NBP 13.01. In addition you filed some rebuttal evidence in this matter?
A. Yes.
Q. - And I will ask you the same questions. This is your evidence?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. - And you adopt it as your own personal evidence?
A. Yes.
Q. - And to the best of your knowledge, information and belief, that is true and accurate?
A. That’s correct.
Q. - And starting with the first report, your initial review report, I wonder if you could very briefly for the Board summarize your conclusions?
A. Yes. We reviewed the business case -- NB Power’s business case with a focus on benefit cost analysis. We performed an assessment of the structure of the business case, so the integrity of the business case, the financial parameters and so on. We performed an assessment of the benefits, the motivation for the benefits, the rationale, the scope, the calculation methodologies, input assumptions and accrual timeframes and so on. We performed an assessment of the costs, so the scope, the magnitude, the calculation approach, accrual timeframe and other various factors. We did a comparison with other business cases that we provided and we performed a sensitivity analysis for some of the benefits, the costs, the financial parameters.
And we concluded that the business -- the BCA methodology in the business case is technically sound and consistent with approaches used in -- broadly in the industry and AMI business cases that have been applied in other jurisdictions. We found that on the balance and in many of the -- especially in the benefits categories -- conservative assumptions were used which we think is appropriate. And I guess that’s -- that’s enough summary, I think.
Q. - Okay. And with respect to the second report, the rebuttal evidence at exhibit NBP 13.01, can you just again give the very briefest of summaries of what that evidence states?
A. Yes. This is our response to some of the analysis done during the proceeding on the meter accuracy benefit, and the various elements of that benefit and why we believe it is a valid benefit as a
part of the benefit cost analysis.
MR. FUREY: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Gilbert. I have no further questions, Mr. Vice-Chair. Mr. Gilbert is available for cross-examination.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Furey. Mr. Stewart, do you have any questions for this witness?
MR. STEWART: No, Mr. Vice-Chair.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Dr. Richard, est-ce que vous avez des questions pour ce témoin?
DR. RICHARD: Je pensais que je passerais demain matin?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: That’s right. Mr. Furey, I understand that Dr. Richard wants Dr. Tatoutchoup to be here when he questions and that we would go out of order with the questioning. Is that my -- is that a fair understanding?
MR. FUREY: Yes. I believe all parties have agreed to that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Stoll?
MR. STOLL: I have a few questions, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Maybe you could just move forward. Thank you.
Page 455
Q. - Okay. Thank you. And finally, Mr. Dunsky, you have been qualified, by my knowledge anyway, at least twice in this jurisdiction to testify before this Board. You were qualified in Matter 430 last year and in Matter 307. Have you -- do you know if you have been qualified before that in New Brunswick?
A. Frankly I’m trying to remember when you say twice, I believe it’s actually my third time here but I can’t say for sure. My memory is --
Q. - Okay. Thank you.
A. -- plays tricks sometimes.
MR. FUREY: So with that, Mr. Vice-Chair, I would ask that Mr. Dunsky be qualified as an expert in demand side management strategies and regulation.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Furey. Is there any objections to having Mr. Dunsky qualified in the areas of expertise that was just relayed by Mr. Furey? Aucune objection?
DR. RICHARD: J’avais juste des clarifications que j’aurais aimé demander.
VICE-CHAIRMAN : Vas-y Docteur Richard.
DR. RICHARD : Est-ce qu’on peut revenir au C.V. de Monsieur Dunsky?
VICE-CHAIRMAN: I don’t know if he understands French?
WITNESS: I do.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: You do, okay.
DR. RICHARD: À la page . En haut. Vous êtes co-chair de Efficiency Canada? C’est bien ça?
WITNESS: Oui.
DR. RICHARD: C’est quoi Efficiency Canada?
WITNESSS: Efficiency Canada…. Je réponds en français? Efficiency Canada ou Efficacité énergétique Canada est une organisation non-lucrative qui réalise des recherches et la représentation au niveau des politiques en efficacité énergétique au Canada. Une organisation non-lucrative je siège comme co-chair. C’est-à-dire que c’est une organisation qui est basé et qui fait partie de l’Université Carleton également.
DR. RICHARD: Ok. L’inauguration à lieu le premier novembre 2018?
WITNESS: Je présume que vous avez raison. C’est dans ces eaux-là.
DR. RICHARD: La ministre Morneau à dit que « We are going to spend less on energy and have more money on other stuff ». Ça m’inquiète un peu cet atomisations-
là. J’ai peur qu’on nous poste dans des dépenses extraordinaire.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Docteur Richard la raison de vos questions c’est pour soit vous objectez à la qualification et non d’aller dans la substance que… la question que vous avez demandée, je pense que c’est une question que vous pouvez demander une fois que Monsieur Dunsky est déclaré au nom expert. Je pense que vos questions devraient être reliées envers l’expertise ou envers l’impartialité, si vous avez un problème relativement à ça. Je pense que c’est là que vous devriez diriger vos questions.
DR. RICHARD: Oui, je suis d’accord.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Donc, vous êtes d’accord qu’on qualifie Monsieur Dunsky en l’expertise que Maître Furey a indiqué?
DR. RICHARD: Oui.
Q. - So, Mr. Dunsky, there are three reports which you have authored that have been filed in evidence in this matter and I’m just going to quickly -- I’m not going to ask you anything on the substance of them, I’m just going to get you to identify them. The first one is marked as exhibit 1.11, it’s on the screen now, and it’s dated July 29th 2019, and it relates to AMI high bill alert savings. That is your report?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. - And you prepared that report?
A. I did, with the assistance of my staff, yes.
Q. - And do you adopt that report as your evidence today?
A. I do.
Q. - And to the best of your knowledge, information and belief, is that report true and accurate?
A. Yes.
Q. - Thank you. Ms. Mitchell, could we go to exhibit NBP 1.19. So this report, Mr. Dunsky, is dated August 1st 2019, and it relates to -- it’s a memo you prepared on AMI non-quantified benefits. Again this is your report and you adopt it as your evidence?
A. I do indeed.
Q. - And to the best of your knowledge, information and 16 belief, is this evidence true and accurate?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. - Thank you. And finally, Ms. Mitchell, could we go to NBP 1.18. Thank you. So, Mr. Dunsky, this is a report prepared -- that was presented to NB Power in April of 2017 with respect to projected solar adoption in New Brunswick. This is your report as well?
A. It is. That of my team at least.
Q. - Okay. And do you adopt -- well I will ask you both questions before you answer. A, I’m going to ask you do you adopt it as your evidence in this matter, and B, is the report to the best of your knowledge, information and belief, true and accurate?
A. So it certainly is a report that my firm prepared under my direction. It is -- it would be unfair to call it perfectly accurate in that we have since conducted an update of this study and the update provides -- or arrives at values that differ somewhat from this. So I believe that there are -- I believe the more recent version is the more accurate.
Q. - So maybe we can approach it this way. Would you agree that at the time the report was presented, it was true and accurate, to the best of your information and belief at that time?
A. Yes.
Q. - And subject to the changes that you have identified in an updated report that is not in evidence at this moment, you would say it is still true and accurate subject to those changes?
A. It is still true and accurate subject to those changes. I will provide a little caveat to that in that there was a minor anomaly in this report that was corrected in the updated version other than simply updating information and inputs. So to that extent -- you know -- there is a little caveat there.
MR. FUREY: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. And so again, Mr. Vice-Chair, now that Mr. Dunsky has been qualified, I am assuming that these are now properly marked as exhibits and I do not need to request a marking at this stage.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, sir.
Q. - Thank you. Mr. Dunsky, I understand you have an opening statement or I guess opening statements that appears two documents that -- which you will present as a single opening statement?
A. Yes.
Q. - Thank you. With leave of the Board, you may proceed.
A. Thank you. So I actually -- I wasn’t quite sure how the hearings would proceed. I prepared two opening statements, simply one for each of the two major topics that I was asked to testify on here. So if I may, I will start with high bill alert savings. So my firm was tasked with estimating the benefits that NB Power’s ratepayers would derive from an AMI enabled high bill alert system. Currently as you know, customers receive their invoice once a month and after the fact, and of course bills evolve significantly from month to month in large part they are not exclusively because of weather, as all Canadians know all too well. With HBA NB Power will be able to alert customers when their bills are trending higher than usual and that will prompt customers to pay closer attention to their consumption, and depending on their sensitivity to higher bills, to adjust accordingly -- adjust consumption accordingly. Our analysis of the benefits of HBA took a very conservative approach. Savings -- the savings estimates are essentially a function of two factors. Very simply savings per participant and the number of participants anticipated. I would like to take the opportunity to walk you through each of those assumptions. On savings per participant, we assumed 0.7 percent savings on average for New Brunswick -- for New Brunswick households, I should say. So this applies only to residential. This is at the very low end of the range of observed and accepted values. First of all, average savings from three independently evaluated HBA projects is 1.2 percent. That includes savings verified and evaluated in Maine for Central Maine Power at 1.8 23 percent, Southern California Gas 1.3 and Xcel Energy in
Minnesota at 0.6. And of course as you know, New Brunswick’s immediate neighbour to the east, Nova Scotia, assumes 0.75 percent savings, a level accepted by the UARB in its AMI case. That of course is a projected savings value, not an after the fact evaluated value.
Page 471
MR. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Dunsky. Mr. Vice-Chair, with that Mr. Dunsky is available for cross-examination.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Furey. Thank you, Mr. Dunsky. Mr. Stewart, any questions for this witness?
MR. STEWART: No, Mr. Vice-Chair.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Dr. Richard, est-ce que vous avez des questions pour ce témoin?
DR. RICHARD: Oui, j’en aurais une couple.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Pouvez-vous avancer dans la table en avant s’il vous plait?
DR. RICHARD: Oui.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY DR. RICHARD:
Q. - Madame Mitchell, si vous voulez ouvrir l’opening statement.
A. Je m’excuse. C’est peut-être mes oreilles. J’ai la difficulté à vous entendre.
Q. - Parler plus fort?
A. S’il vous plait. Merci.
Q. - Oui. Au deuxième paragraphe. Some are not yet even known. Pouvez-vous élaborer un peu?
A. Oui. Évidemment sans préciser… mais la question est bonne dans la sensé ou…. Présentement avec l’arrivée de AMI, avec l’arrivée de compteurs intelligents et les données que ces compteurs offrent il y a de plus en plus d’entreprises qui développent des services, qui développent des … soit des applications, soit des services aux consommateurs… soit directement aux consommateurs soit via les entreprises énergétiques qui permettent aux consommateurs d’avoir beaucoup plus – un, de visibilité, et deux, de contrôle de leur charge, de leur consommation. Ces outils, ces services, ces applications sont en constante évolution. Je peux vous dire, par exemple, littéralement hier j’ai installé chez nous une nouvelle outille, qu’une nouvelle entreprise vient de créer, qui me permet de voir sur mon téléphone intelligent non seulement ma consommation à la seconde près, en temps réel, mais également l’algorithme derrière leur application leur permit de me dire précisément laquelle de mes équipements consomment quoi à quel moment. Et donc je peux recevoir des alertes m’indiquant que mon système de chauffage, par exemple, semble avoir un problème. Peut-être ça prendrait un service call, ou encore, comme je mentionnais tantôt, mon véhicule, j’ai un véhicule électrique, mon véhicule électrique charge durant une période de pointe, est-ce que je devrais considérer le charger hors pointe ainsi de suite. Donc ça c’est le genre de nouveaux services qu’ils sont en train de développer. Je peux vous dire que je reçois probablement au moins une fois par mois, si non plus régulièrement, des appels, des invitations, du outreach de développeurs de nouvelles solutions. C’est constant. Et tout ça grâce aux données que AMI leurs permets d’obtenir et évidemment que les progrès en traitement informatique permet également.
Q. - Combien qu’Énergie Nouveau-Brunswick peut s’attendre de recevoir en revenue quand ils vont vendre ces données là?
A. Premièrement, je ne pourrais pas vous dire, mais je peux vous dire une chose – généralement ces données là ne sont pas vendues par les utilities. La plupart du temps il y a des lois, il y a des régulateurs premièrement, il y a des lois par ailleurs qui empêche la vente de ces informations. Par contre, il existe des outils, j’ai un exemple en Ontario, il existe un outil qui s’applique à travers de l’Amérique du Nord qui s’appelle Green Button. Green Button c’est un outil qui permet aux entreprises énergétiques qui ont ces données de partager les données d’une façon qui non… comment pourrais-je dire le nom…. Non nominatives… si le consommateur le demande. En Ontario, par exemple, ils ont passé une loi qui leur oblige les entreprises électriques de participer au programme Green Button et si un consommateur demande, dit que moi j’aimerais que un tel parti un développeur d’application de solution ait accès à ma consommation, là le distributeur est obligé d’envoyer l’information personnaliser de ce consommateur. Mais également l’information non- personnaliser de toute sa base de consommateur permettant à la tierce partie, une entreprise par exemple, de faire des calculs, de développer des algorithmes d’offrir des services, d’offrir d’information personnaliser pour ce client… pour ce consommateur, pour l’aider à mieux gérer sa consommation. C’est un exemple. Mais, est-ce que… je sache que c’est jamais arriver qu’une entreprise d’électricité ait ni l’intérêt ni le droit de vendre cet information….
Q. - Ils font ça gratuitement comme ça?
A. Ils font ça gratuitement dans le sens suivant. Parfois parce qu’ils sont obligés par les lois, comme j’ai mentionné, en Ontario c’est une loi qui les oblige, souvent c’est les lois qui les oblige. Mais dans d’autres cas ils font volontairement, gratuitement, parce que c’est des tierce parties qui aident leurs clients à réduire leur consommation et réduire leur consommation économise l’argent, réduit le revenue requirement, le revenu requis, de l’entreprise d’électricité et donc c’est tout à fait dans leur intérêt de permettre, de faciliter ces genres de services.
Q. - Est-ce que ces appareils vont mesurer la reactive power?
A. Là je vous avoue…. Mon père était prof de physique et, comme on dit en anglais, the apple fell far from the tree dans ce cas-là. Je ne pourrais pas vous dire.
Q. - Savez-vous ce qui est reactive power?
A. Oui, mais je ne pourrais pas prétendre d’être un expert de reactive power.
Q. - Madame Mitchell pouvez-vous allez à la page 3. Comment est-ce qu’un Smart Meter fait pour détecter un frigidaire qui prend l’âge.
A. Par l’analyse des données. Donc, chaque type d’appareil a une, si vous voulez, un footprint, une empreinte différente. Pour prendre l’exemple d’un frigidaire, un frigidaire suive un cycle normal qui est commun aux frigidaires. Sa consomme pas d’électricité en tout temps. Sa consomme pour faire actionner le
compresseur pour envoyer un peu de froid et s’arrête. Après ça, à l’intervalle X, ça repart. Ainsi de suite. Chaque usage à son empreint spécifique, et une entreprise qui est spécialisée dans ce domaine est capable de regarder la consommation globale d’une maison et statistiquement séparé les usages, parce qu’on voit dans la consommation… je vous dis sincèrement si je pouvais, je vous montrerais ma consommation présentement c’est temps réel dans ma maison aujourd’hui à cette instance, et vous verrez, si on gardait les 24 dernières heures vous verrez exactement les modifications à la seconde près et ces modifications permettent, comme je mentionnais, de détecter si c’est un frigo, si c’est un véhicule électrique, si c’est un système de chauffage. C’est essentiellement comme ça.
Q. - Est-ce que, d’après vous, que l’Énergie Nouveau Brunswick a un intérêt… est intéressé à participer dans le transfert d’information qui va se faire avec l’internet of things?
A. Je m’excuse je ne suis pas certain si je comprends la question.
Q. - On parle de l’internet of things? Dans ces transferts d’information là, est-ce que, d’après vous, que NB Power s’intéresse dans ce domaine-là? Dans la vente des
données?
A. Dans la vente des données?
Q. - De vendre les données. Partager les données.
A. Premièrement, je ne peux pas parler au nom de NB Power. Je peux vous dire comme conseiller à différentes entreprises énergétiques que, je vais simplement répéter ce que j’ai dit tantôt. Je n’ai jamais vu ça être faites, ou même être contemplé de façon important parmi mes clients. Oui.
DR. RICHARD: Merci. C’est tout monsieur président.
WITNESS: Merci.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Merci Docteur Richard.
http://davidamos.blogspot.com/2006/10/for-record.html
David Amos wrote:
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 07:29:13 -0800 (PST)
From: David Amos
Subject: Good talking to you You should find this email interesting Mr Wells
To: dwells@hwlblaw.com
David Amos wrote:
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:20:38 -0800 (PST)
From: David Amos
Subject: I just tried to call you people to ask some very serious questions and I was dismissed? Rest assured I will call back
To: RFischer@navigantconsulting.com, KKruska@navigantconsulting.com
David Amos wrote:
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:12:26 -0800 (PST)
From: David Amos
Subject: I waited nearly two weeks for your lawyer to call me Paulette now I will email and post this as i promised
To: Paulette.Delaney-Smith@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Louis.Lefebvre@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
oldmaison@yahoo.com, lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca
CC: NWilliams@perkinscoie.com, info@dennis4president.com,
info@mittromney.com, Barry.MacKnight@fredericton.ca,
Danny.Copp@fredericton.ca, ninkster@navigantconsulting.com
I understood your hints about KPMG and the ex RCMP dudes It was kinda a nobrainer to me after you selected that one email to respond too after all that I had sent but why should I help you people with your pensions while you people work hard to falsely imprison me once again?
This contains a true verison of he email I sent you over a month ago about the crooked KPMG crowd
You complain of the RCMP treatment of you and your family yet you take a new job trying to recruit new people for the RCMP to abuse. what gives with that? I thought you were more honest and professional than that. What do you tell the kids about your concerns with the the lack of integrity of the RCMP as you suggest that they join the force?
Norman Inkster
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Inkster
Norman David Inkster, OC, BA (hons.), Commander of the C.St.J., LL.D. (born August 19, 1938) served as 18th Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, from September 1, 1987 to June 24, 1994. From 1992 until 1994 he also served as President of Interpol. Born in Winnipeg, Manitoba, he was educated at the University of New Brunswick, where he studied sociology and psychology; during his studies he was continuously employed in the Human Resources department of the RCMP.
From 1994 to 2003 he was a partner with KPMG in Toronto, the latter part of which he was global managing partner of the forensic practice. In 1995 he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada. In 2003 he retired from KPMG and started Inkster Group. He was the President of the Inkster Group, which provides various security and policing services to a list of international clients, including the Province of Ontario. In 2006 Inkster Group was acquired by Navigant Consulting where Inkster is now a managing director.
David Amos myson333@yahoo.com wrote:
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 10:57:48 -0800 (PST)
From: David Amos
Subject: What kind of Bullshit Response is that Paulette
To: Paulette Delaney-Smith Paulette.Delaney-Smith@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
We also talked at least twice recently because your fellow cops directed me to you instead of the dudes I wanted to speak to. You told me that you gave my material to Kevin Jackson and commented that you had not received any emails from me lately ( you never respnded to the ones I sent in the past anyway) and I told you that they had been blocked by your pals and I suggested that you talk to your incompetent lawyer Gilmour. Remember lady? Anyway I was so pissed off by your pals stalking me and putting the proof of their malice in Youtube that i sent you some emails from my son's email address (your cop pals killed my other email accounts) just to see if they would get through. Surprise surprise some did and some did not. However Iknew that you got yours Methinks there is some defections in your ranks. Perhaps you and your fellow whisleblowers who cry alot in the Media should pick up the phone and make a deal with a honest whistleblower and then tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth for the benefit of all Canadians EH? Everybody and his dog knows that the RCMP are as crooked as hell and they only care about the RCMP and their pensions not the interests of the people they were hired to serve and protect.
Vertias Vincit
David Raymond Amos
P.S. I will keep this email in confidence for one day then email it to politicians and the media and then post it on the web. Quit playing games and call me will ya? they may be a very importenat election in the near future and our affairs may become of interest to some smiling bastards loooking to get relected. Obviously nobody can deny that you and I did not cross paths before the 39th Parliament sat on April 4th, 2006 and you refused to act within the scope of your employment for some strange reason and shortly thereafter your former lawyer Richard Bell whom I had crossed paths with in 2004 became the first judge Stevey boy Harper appointed Surprise Surprise N'est Pas? 506 434 1379 Please use it tomorrow before I file my first complaints in Federal Court.
Paulette Delaney-Smith Paulette.Delaney-Smith@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
David,
I received your voice mail, I have been transferred to another unit and I am unaware of who is dealing with your complaints at this time.
Paulette Delaney-Smith, Cpl.
RCMPolice "J" DIvision HQ
David Amos 01/03/08 12:49 AM
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 20:49:27 -0800 (PST)
From: David Amos
Subject: Fwd: Response to your emails
To: oldmaison@yahoo.com, lou.lafleur@fredericton.ca,
Paulette.Delaney-Smith@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Louis.Lefebvre@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
CC: NWilliams@perkinscoie.com, info@dennis4president.com,
info@mittromney.com, Barry.MacKnight@fredericton.ca,
Danny.Copp@fredericton.ca
Whereas you RCMP people refused to act within the scope of your employment and investigate major crimes Tis time for me to sue many bankers too N'est Pas Ms. Paulette Delaney-Smith and your old buddy Louie Lefebvre?
US-KPMG FW Ombudsman Office us-ogcombudsman848@kpmg.com wrote:
Subject: Response to your emails
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 10:16:12 -0500
From: "US-KPMG FW Ombudsman Office"
To: ,
Dear Mr. Amos,
Thank you for contacting us. We have reviewed the information that you provided in your emails, and are not able to determine what specific issues you are raising that we should consider investigating. Thus, in order to conduct an investigation, we need to gather more specific information. Would you be willing to have a confidential conversation with me, the Ombudsman here at KPMG LLP (US) or would you be willing to provide me with a summary of your allegations as they relate to KPMG LLP or its clients and any evidence to support those allegations? Thank you for your continued assistance with this matter.
Thanks,
Michael Plansky
Ombudsman
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter.
Just Dave
By Location Visit Detail
Visit 3,428
Domain Name gc.ca ? (Canada)
IP Address 198.103.108.# (Solicitor General Canada)
ISP GTIS
Location Continent : North America
Country : Canada (Facts)
State/Region : Ontario
City : Ottawa
Lat/Long : 45.4167, -75.7 (Map)
Language English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System Microsoft WinXP
Browser Firefox
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11
Javascript version 1.5
Monitor Resolution : 1152 x 864
Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit Feb 4 2008 2:34:42 pm
Last Page View Feb 4 2008 2:34:42 pm
Visit Length 0 seconds
Page Views 1
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page http://davidamos.blogspot.com/
Visit Exit Page http://davidamos.blogspot.com/
Out Click
Time Zone UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time Feb 4 2008 1:34:42 pm
Visit Number 3,428
Just Dave
By Location Visit Detail
Visit 3,427
Domain Name gc.ca ? (Canada)
IP Address 198.103.108.# (Solicitor General Canada)
ISP GTIS
Location Continent : North America
Country : Canada (Facts)
State/Region : Ontario
City : Ottawa
Lat/Long : 45.4167, -75.7 (Map)
Language English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System Microsoft WinXP
Browser Firefox
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11
Javascript version 1.5
Monitor Resolution : 1152 x 864
Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit Feb 4 2008 12:23:34 pm
Last Page View Feb 4 2008 12:42:51 pm
Visit Length 19 minutes 17 seconds
Page Views 6
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page http://davidamos.blogspot.com/
Visit Exit Page http://davidamos.blogspot.com/
Out Click View my complete profile
http://www.blogger.c...15428735081915360609
Time Zone UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time Feb 4 2008 11:23:34 am
Visit Number 3,427
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1019737/000095013103001359/dex231.htm
EX-23.1 5 dex231.htm CONSENT OF KPMG LLP
Exhibit 23.1
Consent of KPMG LLP
The Board of Directors
Navigant Consulting, Inc.
We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 333-53506, 333-81680, 333-30267 and 333-103405) on Form S-8 of Navigant Consulting, Inc. of our report dated February 7, 2003 relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Navigant Consulting, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2002 and 2001 and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2002, which report appears in the December 31, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K of Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Our report refers to a change in accounting for goodwill in the year ended December 31, 2002.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Chicago, Illinois
March 13, 2003
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/former-rcmp-head-finds-a-new-beat/article1017209/
Former RCMP head finds a new beat
Norman Inkster, RCMP-boss-turned-corporate-sleuth, is taking his gumshoe act to a new stage -- a national law firm.
Mr.
Inkster, who built the Canadian forensic practice of accounting giant
KPMG, recently joined law firm Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP in Toronto
to launch a new division with, at first, only two other colleagues.
But
his aggressive prediction is that this department of corporate security
and intelligence could bring in new revenue of $100-million over five
years.
He believes it will attract a
high-end corporate clientele vexed by concerns of computer fraud,
physical security of businesses and corporate intelligence, particularly
in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and scandals
on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border.
"There
will be no dumpster-diving and no surveillance on divorce cases," says
Mr. Inkster, 64, a 36-year RCMP veteran whose résumé includes a stint as
president of the international police agency Interpol.
Now retired from KPMG after nine years,
Mr. Inkster is once again starting something from scratch. This time,
there are no precedents -- it is rare to find a law firm with corporate
security as an entire line of business.
His
challenge, he says, will be enlisting Gowlings' more than 650 lawyers
to help him in his cause. "I'm trying to turn lawyers into salesmen, a
bit," he says, referring to his need to have his new colleagues
cross-sell his services to clients.
But he also believes it's a natural fit, given the role of lawyers as corporate advisers and litigators.
Scott
Jolliffe, managing partner at Gowlings, says he expects the firm's
lawyers will want to promote security services -- because their clients
are asking for them.
Indeed, the recruitment of Mr. Inkster is part of a broader trend to turn
major law firms into professional services firms with diverse revenue
sources. "Law firms are slowly looking at other areas that are
complementary," says Mr. Jolliffe, who says Gowlings' long history as a
patent agent makes it open to such ideas.
He says Gowlings' initiative is also
spurred by heightened corporate concern over international transactions
and intelligence following scandals, such as the one involving YBM Magnex International Inc., a Toronto Stock Exchange-listed company that was a front for Russian mobsters.
"After YBM, there is a lot more concern [in companies]about who they do business with," Mr. Jolliffe says.
Mr.
Inkster expects to work particularly closely with Gowling's
intellectual property practice as well as with litigation and corporate
and commercial law divisions.
He
will overlap somewhat with the forensic practice at KPMG -- except that
Gowlings will offer legal services but not forensic accounting. He
expects to find himself teaming up with his old KPMG colleagues on some
cases.
Mr. Inkster has somewhat
mixed feelings about the revenue potential for his division. He feels
the primary reason why private security is a growth industry is that law
enforcement resources have been increasingly cut over the years, while
the risks to people and organizations have become more complex.
Mr. Inkster watched that process
close-up, joining the RCMP at 18 in his home province of Saskatchewan,
where his father was a Canadian Pacific Railway employee, and rising to
becoming commissioner in 1987.
He
believes he created change there, particularly with his support for
visible minorities, such as allowing Sikh officers to wear turbans. His
greatest achievement, he says, was "making an organization change into a
multifaceted multiethnic group."
He
notes that the force realized it had to broaden its recruiting 18 years
ago, when in its investigation of the Air India bombing, it found it
had no officers available who could speak Punjabi.
After
retiring from the force in 1994, he joined KPMG to build a business in
forensic consulting, rising to become head of the firm's global
practice.
He found corporate life somewhat easier
than life in a public police force because success is clearly measured
in terms of profit. Also, he had tired of the mindless across-the-board
budget cuts at a time when Canadians, he says, were crying out for more
law enforcement.
But he left the
accounting firm at the end of April, when, he says, he ran up against
the retirement-age barrier. He felt he had lots of energy left to build
something new. He had worked with the corporate security people at
Gowlings, and the conversation took off.
Gowlings isn't Mr. Inkster's only new initiative. He has joined the board of Dot Com Entertainment Group Inc., a small Internet gambling software company that is moving into the on-line bingo market.
It
seems an odd fit for an ex-RCMP commissioner, and Mr. Inkster concedes
that the gambling market has a reputation for attracting bad people. But
"I'm not one of those who has a natural bias against gaming," he says.
He says he believes he can help add
value around corporate governance in a business where, he says, "the
rules aren't written." He knows Dot Com chief executive officer David
Outhwaite from a past association with another Internet gambling
technology firm.
Ever the sleuth,
Mr. Inkster feels he can, for example, advise the company in checking
out people it does business with, including potential licensees. "You
want to know where the money comes from, and what their backgrounds
might be. My philosophy is compliance before commerce."
Mr.
Inkster, who clearly views himself as an entrepreneur inside big
organizations, sees kindred spirits in the Internet gambling industry.
"It is pretty exciting to see young people make a business out of
nothing."
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20031003005299/en/dot-Entertainment-Group-Announces-Plans-SEC-De-Registration
dot com Entertainment Group, Inc. Announces Plans for SEC De-Registration
TORONTO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 3, 2003--
dot com Entertainment Group, Inc. ("DCEG" or the "Company"), a leading supplier of software and services to the e-gaming industry, announced today that it intends to de-register its common stock pursuant to a Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") rule that allows companies with a limited number of shareholders to de-register, thereby avoiding costly SEC filing requirements. As a result of the de-registration the Company's shares will no longer be quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board. The Company's shares will continue to be quoted on the Pink Sheet Electronic Quotation Service under the present DCEG symbol. Market activity may be accessed at the PinkSheets.com website.
"This step is being taken to control costs and to permit the Company to concentrate its efforts and resources on serving its customer base and increasing sales, thereby enhancing profitability and growth," said Scott White, President and Chief Operating Officer. "Management believes this is the best way to build value for the long term".
The cost savings resulting from de-registration, including the reduction of legal, audit, registration, governance and related public-company fees, is part of the Company's overall corporate cost reduction plan to reduce its break-even point, conserve cash and adjust expenses. The Company believes that any benefits of continued SEC compliance are outweighed by the significant costs associated therewith.
The Company plans to file a Form 15. The Form 15 filing immediately suspends the Company's obligation to file periodic reports with the SEC, including Forms 10-KSB and 10-QSB. The de-registration is expected to be effective ninety (90) days after the filing of the Form 15. DCEG has also postponed its application for a listing on the TSX Venture Exchange in Canada. Shareholders may access information about the Company on the Company's website at www.dceg.com.
At a Board of Directors meeting held on October 1, 2003, the resignations of the following Board members were accepted: Mr. Robert Olsen (Chairman), Mr. David Outhwaite (Chief Executive Officer), Mr. Michael Lipton (Director), Mr. Norman Inkster (Director) and Mr. John Reilly (Director). The Company would very much like to thank all of these directors for their contributions.
The Board now consists of Mr. Perry Malone (Founder and Chief Technology Officer), Mr. Ted Colivas (Founder and Director of Strategic Business Planning), Mr. Scott White (Founder and President) and Mr. Tony De Werth (Chairman and Director). Mr. David Callander (Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary) and Mr. Andrew Branscombe (Director of Sales) remain incumbent in their positions.
About DCEG
DCEG is a leading software development company specializing in the creation and support of Internet gaming products and related services, which neither operates nor participates in its customers' on-line gaming sites. As one of the first companies to develop and license, multi-player, pay-for-play bingo technology on the Internet, DCEG is a leader in the on-line bingo market, and also offers a comprehensive suite of Java and Flash-based casino and lottery products.
There are presently approximately 10.9 million shares outstanding.
Certain statements in this news release, including, but not limited to, statements containing the words "anticipates", "believes", "expects", 'intends", "will", "may" and similar words constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements are based on the Company's current expectations and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results or performance to differ materially from any future results or performance expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These risks, uncertainties and other factors include the uncertainty relating to the lawfulness of Internet gaming, dceg's ability to profitably expand its products and services to new markets and customers, continued industry acceptance of, and the risk of technological obsolescence related to, dceg's game systems and the risk associated with the generation by individual customers of a significant percentage of dceg's revenue, including the risk of non-payment of outstanding receivables, among others.
Contacts
dot com Entertainment Group, Inc.Scott White, 905-337-8524
or
dot com Entertainment Group, Inc.
David Callander, 888-250-3312
No comments:
Post a Comment