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.

The Atlantica Centre for Energy has submitted a written commentary to the NEB Modernization Expert Panel. We appreciate the opportunity to participate and assist the Panel with its mandate to raise the efficiency and effectiveness of Canada's National Energy Regulator for inter-jurisdictional pipelines, transmission lines and import/export of natural gas.

We support an efficient NEB regulatory approval process whereby proponents willing to make large capital investments on specific projects have a clear understanding of the timeframe and filing requirements, and the public has the opportunity to directly participate by making commentary and pose questions pertaining to each proposed project.

Included among our suggestions is greater use of existing technology to reduce costs to taxpayers and proponents, streamline the time required, and allow even greater participation.

A clear distinction is required to distinguish between the National Regulator and the elected federal government tasked with creating energy policy. The regulatory process must be free of policy creation and remain within its mandate of life-cycle project regulation.

Atlantica Centre for Energy about 2 years ago

Reforming the NEB really needs only a few simple steps:

- bring their head office back to Ottawa, where every federal regulator should be headquartered

- have a more open appointment process for the board that will require more scientists and civilians on it, rather than conflicted industry insiders. In fact, no one who has worked in the energy sector or held elected office should be regulating it as it is a clear conflict of interest.

- ensure environmental concerns trump economic considerations, no more coddling industry, a regulator is there to regulate, not pave the road and open doors. Discussions and hearings about proposed new projects should not be subjected to time limits on those wishing to speak to the matter.

- give it more teeth to enforce and punish violators, for example the ability to scuttle Site C until it meets all the preconditions it is failing to meet

Those alone would transform the organization in all the ways necessary to ensure it is open, transparent, accountable, and actually doing what it was created for.

Adam Smith about 2 years ago

Removed by moderator.

AngarRusy about 2 years ago

Give people that create green energy more incentives and support.

Yosh about 2 years ago

How is it that Calgary, a city of 1.2 million people and a city whose economy is deeply effected by government regulation of the energy sector, is being left out of this series of meetings ?
We remember the economic carnage inflicted on Alberta by the NEB under Trudeau the elder.
Perhaps Junior is tempted to repeat that treachery.
I suggest that all the buffoons who vilify the "dirty oil" you are currently partaking of thanks to Alberta, start walking.

Tim McNamara about 2 years ago

Thank you so much for all your comments so far. All these written comments are being shared with the Expert Panel regularly. Some of you have shared questions on here, so here is some additional information:

If you would like to upload a document (e.g. a letter on letterhead) click the "Share a Document" tab above and follow the instructions. You may also be interested in reviewing our discussion papers by clicking "Discussion Questions" and commenting there.

If you would prefer to mail in a comment to the Expert Panel, you can find our mailing address on the "Contact Us" page. On that page you'll also find our email address in case you have any questions.

If you would prefer to submit your comment or read the discussion papers in French, we invite you to visit the Expert Panel's French website here: http://www.modernisation-one.ca/one-bienvenue

Thank you for your interest in the NEB Modernization review! We look forward to your comments.

NEB Modernization Secretariat about 2 years ago

Rick Munroe, on behalf of the National Farmers Union, has shared a document to the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

National Farmers Union about 2 years ago

Rina Gemeinhardt, on behalf of Kitsumkalum Indian Band, has shared a document to the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Kitsumkalum Indian Band about 2 years ago

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

Steven Pacifico about 2 years ago

Thanks for the opportunity to make input into the NEBG modernization process. I would like to make the following points:
1. The recently announced Pan-Canadian Strategy for Clean Growth and Climate Change will not allow Canada to reach its goals for reducing carbon emissions to 30% lower than 2005 levels by 2030. Even those goals were too low as the sum of goals submitted at the Paris climate summit will not keep global warming below 2 degC much less the aspirational target of 1.5degC. So all NEB reviews must address Canada’s climate change targets and international obligations. These targets and plans for achieving them must be a part of considering any new fossil fuel infrastructure project.
2. No public dollars should go into new fossil fuel infrastructure. Fossil fuel investments are increasingly risky as the many parts of the world, including Canada, are transitioning to fossil-free, clean-energy technologies. This trend is irreversible. International energy agencies, banks, and pension funds have seen this and are changing their priorities accordingly. The NEB should do the same.
3. Energy planning should be done on the basis of independent information from knowledgeable, properly-funded third parties, from affected communities, and from indigenous peoples whose traditional lands are often a part of such projects.
4. National energy resources include more than oil and gas. Our country is in dire need of a national, smart electricity grid that can best take advantage of intermittent energy sources like wind and solar, and incorporate the latest in battery and other electricity storage techniques. The NEB ought to be comparing these infrastructure needs and benefits with any proposal for new fossil fuel infrastructure to assess which serves the long-term national interest best.

Doug Pritchard about 2 years ago

Rae and Company has shared a document to the National Energy Board Modernization Expert Panel website. To download it, click here.

Rae and Company about 2 years ago

I would like to speak to a person in NEB with respect to organization, logistics, and schedule for the planned meeting in Montreal on March 28. Please provide me with a name and telephone number of a person that can provide assistance. I have already registered fro the meeting, but have additional queries and comments.
Thank you.
Dr. Oskar Sigvaldason
President; SCMS Global
Past Project Manager; Trottier Energy Futures Project

oskar@sigvaldason.com about 2 years ago

Lots of good points in the comments, but what about actual solutions to the “pipelines” problem?

People don’t want pipelines because of the possibilities that exist and the event’s we’ve seen. But the facts remain, the energy sector is required for human development, which is required to solve our problems. We can’t get rid of fossil fuels yet, and we can’t get rid of pipelines.

Can’t we introduce 110% secondary containment? Sure it seriously increases the cost of the pipelines and oil, but so does a Carbon Tax. In some places it might be a good idea to use a pipeline inside of a pipeline, and in some places, maybe a double HDPE-lined containment bund and larger bunds in the sag slopes.

There have been recent advances in externally-based leak detection systems, especially with fibre optics and computer pattern recognition. These systems can pinpoint the tiniest leaks on the longest pipelines.

Why are we burying pipelines? Especially under large bodies of water or aquifers? I think it might be in the best interest of the people to keep the pipelines largely above ground, where they can be easily accessed and repaired if/when leaks form.

For relatively large-diameter pipelines, the ability to isolate every kilometre or few hundred metres or something, with mandatory automation upon Computational Pipeline Monitoring-based signals, would be good for mitigation.

More public awareness or advertising of the cleanup work that happens, and how prepared energy companies are to mobilize and clean up spills, and the subsequent treatment of the soil and remediation of the land and reconciliation with the locals.

In any case, better public awareness is necessary for the pipeline industry. Explain the benefits and debunk misinformation with referenced scientific publications.

Maybe if more money is spent on solutions to the problems, the government will make all kinds of money in income taxes and GST and they won’t be so concerned with increasing taxes. People will still be paying more at the pumps because of the increased capital costs. At least this way, we wouldn’t have the “deadweight loss” associated with taxes and production capping. Capital can be used more efficiently to solve the problems we face. It can be invested into solutions. If substantial proof arises that CO2 emissions causes global warming, there will be more available capital in the economy to focus on, for example, research of a catalyst that converts CO2 into some kind of solid after combustion that can be shoveled into a land fill.

Sure this means huge changes to regulations and the creation of standards or recommended practices, but as long as these things are well-planned and reflect the ideas and decisions of smart people (professors, engineers, industry leaders, economists, etc.) who understand and uphold the interests of the people, regulations are the way to go, not taxes which can be grossly mismanaged and wasted. Especially when nobody really knows for sure what’s going on with carbon dioxide. If Canada wants to lead, here is the way.

Blindly taxing the people is not the way to be more environmentally responsible. Coming up with solutions and implementing them is.

Have a nice day.

jb33 about 2 years ago

I believe we should defend nuclear energy plants. They pose a long term rush at high cost. I support digesting from coal.
We need to move to solar systems. Working with home owners to use urban roofs. Along with developing solar plants.

We have seen an increase in us companies putting up wind turbines in Canada. We need to invest in. Our own green infrastructure.

The government needs to increase incentives to fund green energy programs and stop giving subsidies to the oil and gas industry. Canadian workers in green industry rose to rates higher than these outdated and non sustainable industries.

Heidisud about 2 years ago

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

R. Kryszko about 2 years ago

After the fiasco of this government, that used the Prime Minister's authority to cancel in November 2016 the NEB approved Northern Gateway pipeline project, the energy industry is outright refusing to champion anymore energy projects in Canada. The energy industry told Mr. Carr at the Feb 5, 2016 Calgary Chamber of Commerce address it was sidelining $80 billion dollars in energy project investment due to the new government's lack of clarity on energy pipeline projects and NEB regulations. The energy industry will focus energy projects in Mexico where the regulations for pipeline projects are clear. On August 30, Mr. Carr, the Energy Minister returned to the Calgary Chamber of Commerce with the Environment Minister Catherine McKenna, only to state that if the energy companies in Alberta were not making any money, then there is no money to transfer back to Ontario and Quebec. Royal Dutch Shell has pulled out of investing in Canada, selling a significant portion of its assets. Shell's executive told its management team Canada is unstable in its energy regulations, and the executive team would look again at Canada after the next election in 2019. Now there is a NEB review panel led solely by environmentalists and special interest groups. The NEB is completely ineffective after this government approved Trans Mountain, approved Line 3 and cancelled Northern Gateway which was approved previously by the NEB. The government's Trans Mountain decision will be challenged in court and eventually over turned by the Supreme Court of Canada. Environment Minter Catherine McKenna will speak again to the Calgary Chamber on March 9, 2017 in an attempt to convince energy executives to release the $80 billion of investment into energy projects. After nearly losing $1.1 billion on Keystone XL, which was restored by President Trump and losing 0.5 billion on Northern Gateway the energy industry is refusing to invest any more money in energy projects through the NEB and this government as is a waste of capital. The repair of the crumbling road and bridge infrastructure in Montreal is on hold as $80 billion dollars has been removed from the Canadian Economy. Where is Canada going to get another $80 billion dollars? As Mr. Carr stated on Feb 5, 2016 "Pipeline approval is a political decision and the energy executives were muzzling scientists. We won the election! Ha Ha Ha." What an absolute MESS created by this new government on the NEB, pipeline approvals and energy industry projects. Pipelines in Canada are approved solely by the Prime Minister of Canada, and rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada.

Jennifer Kirby about 2 years ago

I would like to give my time by continuous improvement of expert analytics givin by land owners complaints from a committee i intend to help deveolop

darren christopher cota about 2 years ago

Thank you for you pannel visiting. Us and hearing our thoughts and feelings

darren christopher cota about 2 years ago

Removed by moderator.

ArmonPt about 2 years ago

Removed by moderator.

Dolokol about 2 years ago