Participate

There are three ways to participate:

  1. Register for a Session in Your Region/City
  2. Read and Provide Input on up to 12 Discussion Papers
  3. Provide General Comments

This review is an opportunity to strengthen the regulatory process and ensure that Canada continues to have a modern, efficient and effective regulator.

Specifically, this review will focus on:

  1. Governance and structure
  2. Mandate and future opportunities
  3. Decision-making roles, including on major projects
  4. Compliance, enforcement, and ongoing monitoring
  5. Engagement with Indigenous peoples
  6. Public participation

Background information on these issues will be posted to this website throughout the review process.

Provide Comments

The Panel is interested in your thoughts and opinions on modernizing the NEB. We encourage you to provide your comments in the space below or by attaching a file. The deadline for submitting comments is March 31, 2017.


There are three ways to participate:

  1. Register for a Session in Your Region/City
  2. Read and Provide Input on up to 12 Discussion Papers
  3. Provide General Comments

This review is an opportunity to strengthen the regulatory process and ensure that Canada continues to have a modern, efficient and effective regulator.

Specifically, this review will focus on:

  1. Governance and structure
  2. Mandate and future opportunities
  3. Decision-making roles, including on major projects
  4. Compliance, enforcement, and ongoing monitoring
  5. Engagement with Indigenous peoples
  6. Public participation

Background information on these issues will be posted to this website throughout the review process.

Provide Comments

The Panel is interested in your thoughts and opinions on modernizing the NEB. We encourage you to provide your comments in the space below or by attaching a file. The deadline for submitting comments is March 31, 2017.


The Panel is interested in your thoughts and opinions on modernizing the NEB. We encourage you to provide your comments in the box below before clicking the Submit button. You can also share your views by uploading a file by clicking the Share a Document tab above. Please note that your screenname and comments typed into the box will be made public. Please consult the Privacy Notice for more information.

If you wish to make a private comment, please upload a document by clicking the Share a Document tab above and choosing the option to not have your submission posted to the Panel’s website.
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

Removed by moderator.

Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM) over 2 years ago

Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM) over 2 years ago

Mushkegowuk Council has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Mushkegowuk Council over 2 years ago

Canada West Foundation has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Canada West Foundation (CWF) over 2 years ago

Dr. Thomas Gunton and Katherine Zmuda have shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Dr. Thomas Gunton and Katherine Zmuda over 2 years ago

Makivik Corporation has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Makivik Corporation over 2 years ago

Amnesty International Canada has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Amnesty International Canada over 2 years ago

Aamjiwnaang First Nation has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Aamjiwnaang First Nation over 2 years ago

Maliseet Nation of New Brunswick has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Maliseet Nation of New Brunswick over 2 years ago

Suncor Energy has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Suncor Energy over 2 years ago

ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp. has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp. over 2 years ago

Business Council of Canada has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Business Council of Canada over 2 years ago

Fort Nelson First Nation has shared four documents on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click below:- Document 1- Document 2- Document 3- Document 4

Fort Nelson First Nation over 2 years ago

Xaxli'p First Nation has shared a document on the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here(External link).

Xaxli'p First Nation over 2 years ago

I strongly support the recommendations of the Pembina Institute, as proposed in its document titled "Good governance in the era of low carbon; A vision for a modernized National Energy Board". Further to that document, modernization of the NEB needs to include a national accounting of GHG emissions (including carbon dioxide AND methane, and other heat-trapping GHGs) in its consideration of energy projects. To meet Canada's Paris commitments, the Canadian government needs to set a strict carbon budget, and limit emissions to equal or less than what the budget allows.

K Tait over 2 years ago

In 2016 I wrote my Master's thesis about the lived experiences of people who engaged with Canada's recent pipeline issues. The NEB process was obviously a major part of what I wrote about, and I feel that I have something uniquely valuable to share with the Panel regarding how to improving the NEB review process. I have uploaded my thesis to the documents section and I strongly encourage the Panel to read and consider it as they move forward in this. In this document I discuss in detail the distrust that many Canadians have expressed for the NEB: the causes for this distrust, the impact it is having on the NEB as an institution, and some ways the NEB and federal government might begin to address this issue. I am eager to share my thoughts on this matter and urge the Panel or others to contact me for a discussion. I only wish I had known about this process sooner so that I could have participated to a greater extent. Thank you.

Leah Solveig Hayward over 2 years ago

In this day and age as we recognize that climate change is unequivocally the greatest single threat facing the world. The NEB must do it's part and halt any new fossil fuel related infrastructure projects that will lock us into using these fuels for the foreseeable future and instead push us in the direction that our Paris commitments and conscious demands. Carbon free energy, carbon taxation, and carbon sinks. Tar sands does not have to equal energy for Canada any longer, and it is time for us to recognize that modernization requires that we dispense with antiquated approaches to energy involving fossil fuels that are permenantly harming our planet.

JP Morgan over 2 years ago

I apologize for the length of this comment, but the document upload isn't working for me! I appreciate the opportunity to comment.Discussion Paper 2:NEB Mandate and Regulatory Framework:My views on NEB’s existing mandate:Currently, the NEB’s mandate and regulatory framework seems situated pretty squarely within the context of fossil fuel energy projects (pipelines but also electricity). This focus creates a disjunct between current national and international energy needs and this disjunct widens even more because the mandate and regulatory framework does not encompass overarching climate concerns. At this point in history, it is imperative that we forefront climate change. Thus, we need to see a steady and immediate decline in the fossil fuel industries for the sake of overall emissions. In fact, two-thirds to four-fifths of known oil and gas reserves must remain unexploited in order to give us a chance to address climate change and protect our families’ futures. These considerations are not included in the NEB's current scope. As is, the NEB seems ill-equipped to deal with up-to-date environmental and economic directions. The NEB should be given the funding, resources and policy updates needed to transform itself extensively and to become an effective partner in national and international efforts to reduce carbon output in the timely manner that science dictates.The areas where the NEB’s mandate should change:In line with the above statements, a modernized NEB mandate and regulatory framework must lead to an energy review and regulation process that clearly and accountably aligns with Canada’s climate goals including Alberta’s cap on tar sands emissions, the Paris Agreement to limit climate change to 1.5 degrees and the need to phase out fossil fuels by mid-century. If an energy project does not support national and international climate goals, it should be rejected (or not recommended). Currently accepted projects should also be subjected to a review which includes an account of all associated emissions to make sure they support the goals that climate science dictates. Without the addition of climate-change related considerations, the NEB can not truly ensure the health and safety of people and the environment. Therefore, climate considerations need to be a legislated part of the NEB’s mandate and focus.In order to accomplish this link to science-dictated climate goals, all GHG emissions (upstream and downstream) must be included in NEB considerations. It is commendable that the NEB imposed the condition on Trans Mountain that they offset their construction related GHGs. However, the NEB stance written in the National Energy Board Report Trans Mountain Expansion Project, that “The Board does not intend to consider the environmental and socio-economic effects associated with upstream activities, the development of oil sands, or the downstream use of the oil transported by pipeline” is unacceptable, given the existential threat climate change poses for us all. The NEB mandate and regulatory framework needs to encompass the overall effects a project will have on the climate and environment.Secondly, the NEB should not conduct environmental assessments (EA). Comprehensive EA should be required and conducted by a separate body, with substantial expertise in climate and environmental science and operating within a repaired and strengthened system of environmental laws (ex. restored Navigable Water's and Fisheries Act). The NEB would then conduct energy project review and regulation (in the context of science-dictated climate goals and up-to-date policies) separate from but strongly linked to and informed by the EA.Emerging areas for which the NEB’s mandate should be expanded:The NEB’s mandate should expand into the emerging areas of renewable, sustainable infrastructure. Perhaps there is a real opportunity here, for a modernized NEB to take in a full spectrum of fact-based information, accounting for changing global energy supply and demand scenarios that foreground renewables (wind, solar, bio-fuels, geo-thermal, hydro, storage) in order to review and regulate energy projects/products in a manner that helps reduce our carbon emissions and strengthens our economy long term. The NEB could then also play a significant role in safely winding down and retiring existing pipeline infrastructure and easing a transition to renewable energy infrastructure.Just as we depend on all the interconnected parts of our ecosystem to survive, we need all parts of our country’s governance to work together in order to mitigate climate change, protect our health and safety and prepare us economically for the transition away from fossil fuels. The NEB must work closely with other decision making bodies to move toward a low carbon and ultimately, a decarbonized Canada.Determining the Canadian Public Interest:1. The Canadian public interest means to me that decisions related to energy project review, regulation and abandonment protect Canadian's health, quality of life, safety and the future of our families. The biggest part of this task has shifted rather quickly over the last few years and includes, first and foremost, preserving a habitable environment.2. The factors a modernized NEB should take into account when assessing public interest related to energy projects are (with the first three, climate, ecology and Indigenous Rights, in need of more foregrounding):1)Climate change mitigation (human health) a) GHG emissions (upstream and downstream) and their effect on national and international carbon reduction efforts. b)International climate goals and initiatives (ex. keeping global temperatures below 1.5C and 2C degree limits). c)Science-dictated targets (ex. up to four-fifths of current fossil fuel reserves need to remain unexploited). d)National climate goals (ex. Alberta's cap on tar sands emissions, reducing emissions to a minimum of 30% below 2005 levels by 2030; 80% by 2050).2)Ecological sustainability, preserving wildlife, ecosystems and habitat a)Clean water, breathable air (ex. don't take any chances on spills that may cause irreparable damage and/or for which the clean-up methods are uncertain). b)Arable land and forest growth (soil productivity, vegetation). c)Fish, wildlife and their habitat (ex. consider if a project is worth risking irretrievable loss of endangered species).In general, the NEB should reduce risk-taking that makes our ecology shoulder most of the risk.3)Cultural uses of the land and water (social and cultural wellbeing, traditional land and water use, heritage resources). a)Indigenous sovereignty (recognize and respect all associated rights). b)Indigenous cultural ties to and care-taking of the land (ex. sacred practises tied to water). c)Indigenous consultation (ex. Indigenous consent before decisions and developments are made).4)Economic needs and benefits a)Availability of commodity (no longer focus on new sources of fossil fuel; include renewables). b)Existence of market (based on comprehensive, broad-based data and projections including oil and gas supply and demand scenarios that reflect a low carbon objective). c)Job creation (considering long-term stability in the context of winding down fossil fuel industries). d)Economic feasibility and other economic benefits (clearly divulging who will receive benefits and accounting for the real social cost of carbon).The climate and environmental considerations should take precedence over the availability of oil or gas resources and other economic directives listed in the discussion papers from the NEB act. In addition, the focus should move away from approving projects despite environmental risks, and toward determining whether a project, given the threats it poses to the environment, should be approved at all. The climate and environment-related factors should be officially written in to the NEB act and evaluation process, linking the NEBs role meaningfully and accountably with national and international climate realities, polices and goals. The energy regulator should then be provided with the funding, tools and expertise to fulfill the new aspects of their role that the above changes entail.I agree with intervenors and commenters in the National Energy Board Report Trans Mountain Expansion Project review, who suggested that the energy industry should look to clean, non-GHG polluting projects and that to further new fossil fuel extraction projects at this point in human history is unconscionable and ill-considered. Climate facts show it is imperative to begin the move away from fossil fuels immediately. In the case of the Trans Mountain review, one of the economic justifications for approval is that the capacity of the Trans Mountain pipeline system will likely triple. Tripling the capacity of a pipeline is not in the public’s best interest at this point, especially given the fact that we are already, even without Kinder Morgan, expected to go significantly over our emissions targets for 2030. I would go even further and assert that we need to focus our resources, for the public interest, on reducing operation of our existing pipelines. I also agree with those who suggested in the Trans Mountain review that the project wasn’t as objectively evaluated without the addition of comprehensive projections, data and statistics from other competing forms of energy (hydro, solar, wind, biomass, biogas, geothermal, storage etc.) including supply and demand scenarios that reflect a low carbon future. I question using up resources to build new fossil fuel infrastructure instead of adapting our economy and maximizing renewables. Canada has the opportunity to catch-up with the international energy transition and become an economic leader in clean, renewable energy.Basically, economic considerations, while important, will mean nothing if we don't make the changes needed to sustain ourselves long term. Creating a sustainable long term includes catching up with current global needs and investing ourselves in a low carbon future. It is not in the public interest to let ever-shakier economic benefits outweigh life itself. Let nature lead decisions at this point, and the NEB will serve the public interest both economically and environmentally.

Colleen over 2 years ago

We need climate science to guide what we do and NEB MUST take into account that science - which says no more pipelines, this is the national ENERGY board after all - we could be making it look at energy needs overall, not be a pipeline approval body. And we must respect indigenous rights to veto projects that would cross their land (and pollute their atmosphere, and kill the planet too). So the first step must be climate targets for the country that are set by the scientists. NEB hearings must be open to submissions from all who will be affected - which is everyone one of us, if we are looking at upstream and downstream emissions as well as the possibility of a pipeline leak. Project needs assessments should draw on up-to-date, independent energy forecasting data that examines the implications of domestic and international climate action on the economic viability of proposed projects. We must respect our Paris Agreement commitment to try to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees and to achieve greenhouse gas emissions neutrality by the second half of the century.

Lyn Adamson over 2 years ago

The NEB must absolutely be modernized! For one thing, we must make certain that it is free from conflicts of interest. Secondly, we must make sure that its decisions take into account the fact that all Canadians, and, indeed, all people around the globe, have rights to clean water, clean air, and land that is not contaminated by petrochemical production or spillage. Thirdly, though in many ways this is truly first, we must make sure that the NEB's decisions respect the rights of Indigenous communities to decide, and indeed have the final say as to what kind of development projects they do or do not want on their lands. And lastly, the NEB's decisions must look to the future, not be stuck in the past. And the future is in renewable energy - solar and wind!

Sarah S.M. over 2 years ago