ORDER NUMBER

G-359-21

 

IN THE MATTER OF

the Utilities Commission Act, RSBC 1996, Chapter 473

 

and

 

Coalition to Reduce Electropollution

Application for Reconsideration of the British Columbia Utilities Commission Exhibit A-14 in the

FortisBC Energy Inc. Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the

Advanced Metering Infrastructure Proceeding

 

BEFORE:

R. I. Mason, Panel Chair

C. Brewer, Commissioner

E. B Lockhart, Commissioner

 

on December 6, 2021

 

ORDER

WHEREAS:

 

A.      On November 12, 2021, the Coalition to Reduce Electropollution (CORE) submitted an application for reconsideration of the British Columbia Utilities Commission’s (BCUC) Exhibit A-14 in the FortisBC Energy Inc. (FEI) Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the AMI Metering Infrastructure (FEI AMI CPCN) Proceeding (Reconsideration Application);

B.      In the Reconsideration Application, CORE submits that the BCUC made an error of fact or law in its determination in Exhibit A-14 in the FEI AMI CPCN Proceeding (Original Decision) and requests the following relief:

•         An Order staying the operation of the Decision, pursuant to the BCUC’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, Rule 27.02, pending the BCUC’s determination of the Reconsideration Application;

•         An Order requiring FEI to publish the Public Notice in the FEI AMI CPCN proceeding again in four weekly intervals across all news publications identified Appendix E to the Reconsideration Application;

•         An Order granting an extension to the FEI AMI CPCN proceeding regulatory timetable for a period of five weeks from the date of the Order to allow further intervener registration;

•         An Order requiring FEI to conduct community information sessions in the areas where the FEI AMI CPCN proceeding public notice was published; and

•         An Order requiring FEI to publish the FEI AMI CPCN proceeding public notice in the footer section of the bills provided to their customers;

C.      On May 5, 2021, FEI filed an application with the BCUC for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) pursuant to sections 45 and 46 of the Utilities Commission Act (UCA) for FEI’s Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Project;

D.      By Order G-204-21 dated July 6, 2021, the BCUC established a public hearing and regulatory timetable for review of the FEI AMI CPCN application which included, among other things, public notice and intervener registration;

E.       By letter dated September 8, 2021, CORE applied to the BCUC for an extension to the regulatory timetable for five additional weeks of intervener registration and a repeat of public notice issued in the newspapers in the Penticton area (Original Request);

F.       By letter dated September 14, 2021, the BCUC issued the Original Decision denying CORE’s Original Request; and

G.      The BCUC has commenced its review of the Reconsideration Application and determines that the establishment of a public hearing and a regulatory timetable are warranted.

NOW THEREFORE the BCUC orders as follows:

 

1.       A public hearing is established for the review of the Reconsideration Application in accordance with the regulatory timetable as set out in Appendix A to this order.

2.       Persons who wish to actively participate in this proceeding must complete a Request to Intervene Form, available on the BCUC’s website at https://www.bcuc.com/get-involved/get-involved-proceeding.html by Tuesday, December 14, 2021 as established in the regulatory timetable attached as Appendix A to this order, and in accordance with the BCUC’s Rules of Practice and Procedure.

3.       CORE’s request for a stay of the Original Decision is denied, for the reasons outlined in Appendix B to this order.

 

DATED at the City of Vancouver, in the Province of British Columbia, this               6^th           day of December 2021.

 

BY ORDER

 

Original signed by:

 

R. I. Mason

Commissioner

 

 

Attachment

 

 

Coalition to Reduce Electropollution

Application for Reconsideration of the British Columbia Utilities Commission Exhibit A-14 in the

FortisBC Energy Inc. Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the

Advanced Metering Infrastructure Proceeding

 

 

 

Coalition to Reduce Electropollution

Application for Reconsideration of the British Columbia Utilities Commission Exhibit A-14 in the

FortisBC Energy Inc. Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the

Advanced Metering Infrastructure Proceeding

 

1.0              Introduction

The Coalition to Reduce Electropollution (CORE), an intervener in the FortisBC Energy Inc. (FEI) Certification of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Advanced Metering Infrastructure Proceeding (FEI AMI CPCN Proceeding), seeks a reconsideration of the British Columbia Utilities Commission’s (BCUC) Exhibit A-14 (Reconsideration Application).[1]

2.0              Background

On May 5, 2021, FEI filed an application with the BCUC for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) for FEI’s Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Project. On July 6, 2021, the BCUC established the public hearing process and regulatory timetable for review of the FEI AMI CPCN application. The regulatory timetable for the proceeding (FEI AMI CPCN Proceeding) included, among other things, public notice and intervener registration.[2]

 

On September 8, 2021, CORE applied for an extension to the regulatory timetable for at least five weeks to allow people to register as an intervener and the public notice to be published again in four weekly intervals in the main papers in the Penticton area: Penticton Herald and Penticton Western News (Original Request).[3]

 

By letter dated September 14, 2021, the BCUC denied the Original Request for an extension to the regulatory timetable and republication of the public notice (Original Decision). The BCUC stated it determined that FEI had met the directives for public notice specified in Order G-204-21 by publishing notice in appropriate news publications during the week of July 27, 2021, as well as weekly reminder notices on its social media platforms. The BCUC’s Original Decision in full is as follows:[4]

 

By letter dated September 8, 2021, you requested an extension to the regulatory timetable for at least five weeks for the above noted proceeding to allow people to register as an intervener and the public notice to be published again in four weekly intervals in the main papers in your area: Penticton Herald and Penticton Western News.

 

The Panel has reviewed your request and has determined that FortisBC Energy Inc. has met the directives for public notice specified in Order G-204-21 by publishing notice in appropriate news publications during the week of July 27, 2021, as well as weekly reminder notices on its social media platforms. The Panel notes that the intervener registration period was five weeks in duration, from August 3 to September 9, 2021.

 

For these reasons, the Panel declines to grant your request.

 

3.0              Applicable Law and BCUC Rules of Practice and Procedure Governing Reconsideration Applications

The framework that guides the process to determine whether to reconsider a BCUC decision includes both the Utilities Commission Act (UCA) and the BCUC Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules).[5]

Section 99 of the UCA provides “the commission, on application or on its own motion, may reconsider a decision, an order, a rule or a regulation of the commission and may confirm, vary or rescind the decision, order, rule or regulation.”

 

Rule 26.05 of the Rules provides that an application for reconsideration must contain a concise statement of the grounds for reconsideration and include one or more of the following grounds:

a.       the BCUC has made an error of fact, law, or jurisdiction which has a material bearing on the decision;

b.       facts material to the decision that existed prior to the issuance of the decision were not placed in evidence in the original proceeding and could not have been discovered by reasonable diligence at the time of the original proceeding;

c.       new fact(s) have arisen since the issuance of the decision which have material bearing on the decision;

d.       a change in circumstances material to the decision has occurred since the issuance of the decision; or

e.       where there is otherwise just cause.[6]

Rule 27.01 of the Rules provides that “An application for reconsideration of a decision does not automatically stay or suspend the operation of the decision.” Rule 27.02 provides that:[7]

 

The BCUC may, in its discretion or on application, stay the operation of the decision in the original proceeding, or part thereof, pending the outcome of the reconsideration on terms the BCUC considers appropriate.

4.0              CORE Reconsideration Application

In the Reconsideration Application, CORE requests the following relief:[8]

a.       An order staying the operation of the Original Decision pursuant to Rule 27.02 pending the BCUC’s determination of the Reconsideration Application;

b.       An Order requiring FEI to publish the Public Notice again in four weekly intervals across all news publications identified in Appendix E to the Reconsideration Application;

c.       An Order granting an extension to the regulatory timetable for a period of five weeks from the date of the Order to provide parties who may have an interest in or be affected by FEI's Application with the opportunity to submit intervenor requests;

d.       An Order requiring FEI to conduct community information sessions in the areas where the Public Notice was published; and

e.       An Order requiring FEI to publish the Public Notice in the footer section of the bills provided to their customers.

CORE submits that affected or interested parties were deprived of the opportunity to participate in the FEI AMI Proceeding, and therefore their interests are not before the Panel in the FEI AMI Proceeding. In addition, the Applicant submits that the Original Decision has a material impact on the outcome of the FEI AMI Proceeding because potential interveners may not have been informed of their right to meaningfully participate.

 

Panel Determination

The Panel considers two aspects of the Reconsideration Application. First, we address CORE’s request for an order staying the operation of the Original Decision, which we deny for the reasons outlined below. Second, we address CORE’s requests (b) through (e) listed in section 4 above, which we determine warrant a public hearing, for the reasons outlined below.

 

Request for a stay of the operation of the Original Decision

 

The Original Decision was made during an intermediate stage of the FEI AMI Proceeding. Thus, while CORE has applied for a stay of the Original Decision while that decision is being reconsidered, we also turn our minds in these Reasons to a broader interpretation of CORE’s request, namely a request for a stay of the FEI AMI Proceeding.

 

The Panel’s interpretation of CORE’s request for a stay of the Original Decision is that it is a request for a stay of the FEI AMI Proceeding. The effect of the Original Request, if it had been granted by the BCUC, would have been to delay the FEI AMI Proceeding for at least five weeks. By requesting that the BCUC stay the operation of the Original Decision, we infer that CORE is requesting that the Panel delay the FEI AMI Proceeding for at least five weeks.

 

The Panel does not consider that a stay of the Original Decision or the FEI AMI Proceeding is justified because we are not persuaded that prejudice or delay would result if the FEI AMI Application proceeds, for the following reasons.

 

The prejudice that CORE identifies, namely that the Original Decision means that affected or interested parties are being deprived of the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the FEI AMI Proceeding, is mitigated by the flexibility afforded by the BCUC’s Rules. First, notwithstanding the registration deadline for parties to request intervener status has passed, the BCUC has the discretion to allow late requests for intervener status. Further, letters of comment, which are intended to provide for any member of the public to contribute views, opinions, and impact or potential impact of an application, may be submitted in the proceeding prior to the submission of final arguments, for which a date has yet to be established. In other words, there continues to be avenues for meaningful participation in the FEI AMI Proceeding.

 

To the extent that the Original Decision may have caused the harm that CORE suggests, the Panel is not persuaded that such harm is irreparable and can only be addressed by a stay of operation of the Original Decision or the FEI AMI Proceeding.

 

Finally, our decision not to stay the Original Decision, or the FEI AMI Proceeding, does not preclude the Panel from amending the regulatory timetable for the FEI AMI Proceeding following the public hearing on the Reconsideration Application.

 

Requests (b) through (e)

 

The Panel determines that the remainder of the relief sought by CORE, requests (b) through (e) of the Reconsideration Application, warrant a public hearing, and for which we have outlined the attached regulatory timetable.

 

Submissions from FEI and others will provide the Panel the opportunity to evaluate the BCUC’s Original Decision in a fair and transparent manner.