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.

Hello, I am a proud federal civil servant who has been proud of the NEB and I continue to be.

I have heard that there might be a desire to move the NEB to Ottawa. I would ask you "why". If the reason is that the perception is that that Board is "too close", I would remind interested persons that the bias allegations, which to a large degree, may be the reason for this modernization, came from unfortunate, though well intended, meetings held in Montreal which had nothing to do with the NEB being in Ottawa or Calgary.

Impartiality must be maintained where ever the NEB may be located. Being in Ottawa would not change that nor would it help it further.

Also, I believe that when the NEB performs its operation compliance activities, being in Calgary gives operation staff better access to control centers, etc.

In my experience, staff have the highest ethics and would not compromise the integrity of the Board no matter where the NEB is located. We are bound by a code of conduct.

Energy East is the biggest hearing the NEB will have ever seen and there will likely never be another one like that. Please don't relocate the NEB on the account of how polarizing Energy East may appear to be.

A move would be very costly, and mostly, it would affect staff moral immensely. You may also lose a high number of experienced professionals who are here to implement the law, whatever the law may be, now or in the future. The NEB is a creature of statute and will implement the government's laws and policies, if they are to change. Change is often good and necessary and expert staff here at the NEB can readily handle new legislative changes, if any are imposed. But please consider letting the NEB stay in Calgary.

Sincerely,

Cybele

Cybele almost 2 years ago

I am very sorry to have been unaware of the local NEB hearing held recently in Fort St. John. As a landowner harbouring a "pipeline thoroughfare" through my farm and woodlot and presently undergoing the very invasive process of an additional pipeline being constructed alongside the existing, extensive Right of Way, I certainly would have presented my experience based insights. Once these pipelines grow in your backyard (literally in my backyard) one has a lifelong, unasked for relationship with them and the companies that own, use and maintain them. Truly an arranged marriage fraught with lifelong challenges of all sorts! That aside, this summer, I will planting a Photo Voltaic Array in my front yard that will cover all my electricity use, and then some. Without any government incentives, I shall do this as a tangible representation of the direction we should be heading NOW!

Miep Burgerjon almost 2 years ago

Please let all stake-holders have a genuine representative on the board. Leave a position or two open for local people to rotate in and out of for all the sessions. Let the environmentalists and the oil companies BOTH have representatives at the table and be ruled by peer-reviewed science. Think 100 years ahead, not 5-10.

CHA almost 2 years ago

I made a presentation to the Panel march 21 here in Saint john,N B I wanted to send my written comments to the panel please advise ASAP what e mail address I need to use. Panel requested a copy of my oral presentation. Thank you Gordon w Dalzell 506 6963510

Gordon Dalzell almost 2 years ago

My name is Frances Hooker, I am Coast Sales First Nation Women, I am disappointed to see that Victoria has been left out. Seeing that we are the most Western point in Canada I would hope the Pacific Ocean could offer a few diferent fantastic renewable energy types. Please explain why this Island is left out. Thank you for your time.
Frances

Island Girl almost 2 years ago

The future depends on sustainability. This means moving away from a profit based model, and returning to completely government controlled energy as well as moving away from fossil fuels completely.

The NEB must focus on a move to that model, and allow energy providers who refuse to adhere to it to fail.


I will happily sacrifice whatever I need to, related to energy, to ensure the future of humanity. Will you?

Kristin Westersund almost 2 years ago

I find this absolutely mind boggling that something as important as a 'NEB Modernization' open for public opinion was not given the wide, Federal and Provincial Public Notice. This is not right and certainly not fair to all citizens. I would have loved to have known and attended the BC meeting, now long gone. I only now can participate in a collaborative review of the papers. With that said, how are we the people of Canada, truly able to know...just how our educated, professional and public opinions are actually considered? I am widely known by a large social network and have posted this NEB modernization call. It's a little too late for most so you may want to reconsider an extension and secondary dates for all the provinces....with a loud Public Notice.

Marie Vander Heiden almost 2 years ago

In it’s present configuration, the NEB is walking a very narrow tightrope strung up between the politicians, the energy providers and the public, but the politicians are anchoring the rope with the help of the energy providers. Governors are appointed by the government, particularly the cabinet, and have a very comprehensive mandate to oversee all aspects of international and inter-provincial pipelines and power lines, regulate imports of natural gas and exports of all fossil fuel products and electricity, monitor and assess energy supply and demand in the country, and conduct a science based environmental assessment. These governors report back to the government - the very same body that appointed them. Their credentials should be flawless. Any past or present investment in the hydrocarbon or electricity industry is unacceptable, as would be political involvement. Yet, it would be hard to find individuals capable of addressing the mandate of the NEB, as it stands, with a strong background in environmental and economic science and no connection with the energy or political community. There is a perceived(?) imbalance.
The NEB must also include the public interest when assessing projects, The public interest is defined in the discussion papers as “inclusive of all Canadians and refers to a balance of economic, environmental and social interests that change as society’s values and preferences evolve over time.” The time is now and the evidence indicates that fossil fuel consumption must be cut back dramatically in order to preserve our biosphere. Our whole energy needs are turning toward sustainable sources - this is the future. The NEB must respond to the new realities of the time .

Citizens climate lobby almost 2 years ago

Arthur H. has shared a document to the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel. To download it, click here.

Arthur H. almost 2 years ago

Ecojustice has shared a document to the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel. To download it, click here.

Ecojustice almost 2 years ago

The Atlantica Centre for Energy has shared a document to the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel. To download it, click here.

Atlantica Energy almost 2 years ago

Dr. Brian L. Horejsi, on behalf of the Speak up for Wildlife Foundation has shared a document to the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel. To download it, click here.

Speak up for Wildlife Foundation almost 2 years ago

Energy east makes 100% sense. It will eliminate using foreign oil and use Canadian. The producers will not get discounted prising. More tax $ four our government. It helps all provinces with royalties. Adds jobs which is needed. Showed the world Canada has findly made a decision. Will create new investment. So I'm a big time YES

Scott almost 2 years ago

The energy of the future is sustainable energy. The mandate of the NEB needs to be modernized to make sustainable energy its priority. Currently the NEB is accurately understood to be little more than a shill for the fossil fuel sector and by extrapolation, a threat to the future of the planet's climate. I offer these thoughts as a father, grandfather and a Canadian with a career in government service.

Rex Eaton almost 2 years ago

The Canadian Energy Pipeline Association has shared a document to the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

CEPA about 2 years ago

I believe that the rules governing atomic energy need to be updated for the new generation of reactors being developed. Liquid fuel in solution with the moderator. These molton salt reactors are being developed privately here in Canada, and the USA, however China is most likely to bring the first generation of these reactors to market in the next decade. If thorium is chosen for its fuel, it would also help with the waste problem in mining for rare earth elements. These reactors are inherently safer, have a much smaller footprint, and can be produced in a factory, ensuring a high level of accuracy in manufacturing. There are many advantages to these reactors over the old generation currently waiting for safe decommission.

Thorium Energy about 2 years ago

I suggest to decrease the electricity usage from Grids and switch to clean energy. An act of making the Consumers into Prosumers.
People can install solar, wind panels & flatters on their building and let them generate electricity on their own and simultaneously with a Grid connection. In this case, Most of the energy consuming will be from generated electricity and if excess they can sell it to next building or area.

gokulshrinivas about 2 years ago

We need to stop making more pipelines because they are always spilling (as seen in America how one of the pipelines spilt in the river and killed some elephants who drank the water). We need to learn to use cleaner energy, or partner up with Bill Nye & Berny Sanders and start advancing our electricity and car powering sources to cleaner sources (like hydro, solar, or wind)

Unknown.university.student about 2 years ago

An everything-and-the-kitchen-sink energy strategy might have been feasible in the 1970s or 1980s. Unfortunately, anthropogenic climate change is already so far out of hand that only cutting back our fossil fuel consumption dramatically will let us preserve a reasonable fraction of the biodiversity we enjoy at present. If Canada reformed its NEB and overall energy policy to derive power from perpetual resources like the sun, wind, and geological heat, it would enjoy extended livability rather than a few years of luxury followed by impoverishment. Fossil fuels are a sunset industry that rely too heavily on government subsidies. A twenty-first-century NEB must respond to the twenty-first century’s energy realities.

MBagamery about 2 years ago

During the NEB hearing for the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project, Trans Mountain was negotiating "Community Benefits" deals with local governments. Some were worth over a million dollars. These deals of course hinged on a successful hearing outcome for Trans Mountain.

Local governments who register as commenters or intervenors in an NEB hearing are there to represent the interests of their residents. Would knowing that their mayor and council had signed such a deal weigh on the minds of staff as they prepared questions and evidence for the hearing? In an ideal world, no. However it is a fact that two communities that were intervenors in the Trans Mountain hearing (Hope and Clearwater, BC) signed deals with Trans Mountain and filed no documents in the NEB hearing. Kamloops, BC was also an intervenor, signed a Community Benefits deal and only filed one document in the hearing. That document failed to mention that the city was about to build an emergency water intake on the North Thompson River, a river the Trans Mountain pipeline crosses multiple times. That omission despite an earlier staff report that highlighted the risk posed by the pipeline to the new water intake. How robustly could residents interests have been represented where little or nothing was filed in the hearing? Were the Community Benefits offers a factor? The public have no way to know.

These sort of dealings cast a shadow over the process, leaving room for doubt in the minds of residents as to the integrity of the NEB process. They should not be allowed until the hearing for the project concludes.

Ian Stephen about 2 years ago