N.B. Power’s attempt to sidestep the Energy and Utilities Board review process for a proposed gas plant near Sackville faced rejection by the regulator on Thursday. In July, the utility engaged a private firm to handle the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of a natural gas plant for a 25-year term. Arguing that this arrangement exempts the project from N.B. Power’s capital projects, the Crown corporation petitioned the EUB.
However, the EUB disagreed with N.B. Power’s stance, as stated by board chair Christopher Stewart during a virtual decision announcement. The board determined that the project exposes N.B. Power to financial risks that the Electricity Act aims to address, warranting a comprehensive review. Stewart highlighted that this setup does not eliminate the risk to N.B. Power and could potentially burden ratepayers with costs.
Emphasizing the importance of reviews in assessing the financial prudence of capital projects and allowing stakeholders to voice their opinions, the EUB’s decision was welcomed by Moe Qureshi from the Conservation Council of New Brunswick. Qureshi expressed satisfaction with the prospect of the project undergoing a thorough review, citing it as a victory for accountability, ratepayers, and climate responsibility.
Although the review dates are pending, N.B. Power intends to submit its application by Monday’s end, as confirmed by counsel John G. Furey. While questioning the necessity of the customary 20-day waiting period for a pre-hearing conference, Stewart emphasized the need to provide ample time for interested parties to consider intervention opportunities.
The proposed gas plant, deemed crucial by N.B. Power due to anticipated energy shortages from 2027 onwards, has sparked debates within the community. The Tantramar council recently passed a motion urging increased engagement from government officials and the project’s developer, ProEnergy Canada, along with a full environmental impact assessment. Despite vocal opposition from Green Party MLA Megan Mitton, concerns about environmental and health impacts were raised during a ProEnergy open house that attracted around 170 community members.
An earlier environmental assessment highlighted potential discharge of “liquid effluents” into nearby wetlands and expected impacts on groundwater and surface water quality and quantity.
This article was originally published on [Source].