Utilities panel accused of bias

Andrew A. Duffy
Times Colonist
January 25, 2005

COMMENT: Andrew Duffy's article reprinted here contains two factual errors, I believe, that I think it important to correct.

He is correct that cable systems deliver most of the power used on Vancouver Island, although it is always variable, the mix between on-island power from hydroelectric generating facilities on the island and Island Cogeneration, the existing gas-fired plant at Elk Falls.

Duffy says that all of that cable capacity will be gone in 2007, when BC Hydro "decommissions" the cable systems.

This statement is completely incorrect.

First, we have two sets of cable systems coming to Vancouver Island:

- the 500 kV, or Cheekye-Dunsmuir system, comes from Squamish, across the Sunshine Coast, over Texada Island, to Qualicum. This is the reliable backbone of mainland power that serves the island. It is not under discussion, not being taken out of service, certainly not for many years after 2007. Capacity on this system is rated at 1300 megawatts (MW)

- the HVDC systems, which are in question, leave the mainland south of Vancouver, and cross Galiano and Salt Spring Islands, coming ashore just north of Duncan. Originally, these were rated at a capacity above 600 MW. Today, because they are aging, they have been "de-rated" to 240 MW. By 2007, BC Hydro will de-rate them to zero.

An important point is that although the HVDC systems have been "de-rated" they are still capable of great capacity. On not infrequent occasions, the HVDC have been utilized at over 500 MW, especially on one prolonged instance in December 2003 when the 500 kV system was out of service.

Likewise, in 2007, the HVDC will be de-rated to zero, but will still be serviceable, and will still be able to deliver energy to the island. This is quite different than a hard decommissioning, in which the system is bang, gone.

By 2008, BC Transmission Corp plans to replace the HVDC with a new cable system with greatly increased capacity.

Our consistent argument has been that the Duke Point Power project, with a 25 year service agreement with BC Hydro, is a profoundly inappropriate "solution" to this very short term bridging requirement, when the HVDC is de-rated (once again, NOT of no further use), and before the new cable system is in place. - Arthur Caldicott

Power project opponents claim outcome of B.C. Hydro contract hearing has already been decided

A B.C. Utilities Commission panel was under fire Monday on charges of bias and the appearance it has already made up its mind on a contract B.C. Hydro has signed with Pristine Power to build a $280-million gas-fired generation plant on Vancouver Island.

The Georgia Strait Crossing Concerned Citizens Coalition (GSXCCC) filed a motion to disqualify the panel as a result of an in-camera discussion the panel had with B.C. Hydro representatives. That meeting shows the panel has prejudged the outcome of the hearing before receiving arguments and cross-examination from intervenors, the coalition says.

"The panel can not know the best option until it has heard the evidence and considered the options before it," said Tom Hackney, president of the umbrella organization of environmental groups and individuals opposed to the project. "The panel has made a decision and that is not proper. That is why we are asking that they disqualify themselves."

B.C. Hydro has said the plant is needed to meet Vancouver Island's increasing electricity needs. It will be especially necessary when undersea cables, carrying power from the mainland, are decommissioned in 2007 because of their age. Those cables provide about 80 per cent of Island needs.

The coalition is worried about pollution from the Duke Point project, and says more cost-effective ways of making up the electricity shortfall are available, such as conservation programs, replacing the undersea power cables, and renewable sources of energy.

"This is an application for an order that the commission panel disqualify itself on the grounds of a reasonable apprehension of bias and denial of procedural fairness and natural justice during the hearing," wrote coalition lawyer William Andrews in his application.

A transcript of the in-camera session shows panel chairman Robert Hobbs telling B.C. Hydro representatives he understood that while Hydro chose Pristine's project, they would have preferred to choose a slightly different Pristine option but the cost constraints of the call for tender process prohibited them.

And during a back-and-forth discussion, Hobbs suggests that value could be added for Hydro ratepayers by "moving us into the outcome that's in the customer's best interest. So you know what I want to try to do. I need your help in telling me how I can get there."

The coalition is arguing in its motion that, to the exclusion of other parties, the panel and Hydro have discussed how to approve a different option -- a variation of Pristine's Duke Point project -- even though it was not the winner of the call for tender process.

"It seems clear cut," said Peter Ronald, a coalition spokesman. "It appears the fix is in."

David Lewis, mayor of Gold River, said the actions of the panel and the fact it appears the commission has already made up its mind to approve the electricity purchase agreement between Hydro and Pristine, have him shaking his head.

"What you can't do as a chairperson is go in with a closed mind ... otherwise what the hell is the point of going (to a hearing)," he said.

The utilities commission hearings have adjourned until Wednesday morning in Vancouver to allow intervenors time to prepare arguments on the application for the disqualification of the commission panel. It is expected a ruling on that application will be issued the following day.

Hobbs could recuse himself leaving the commission panel with Lori Ann Boychuk as its lone remaining member; commission panelist Murray Birch recused himself Dec. 22 after the coalition suggested there was a possibility of bias because he was the acting president of Alliance Pipeline, a major natural gas transporter. Hobbs may also choose to dissolve the panel or rule there was no impropriety and continue.

If the hearings proceed they are likely to wrap up by the end of this week and a ruling on the electricity purchase agreement issued Feb. 17.

The counsel for the utilities commission panel did not return phone calls Monday, and B.C. Hydro was keeping its comments to itself.

"Just because they issue a press release doesn't mean we have to step up to the plate and debate it," said Hydro spokeswoman Elisha Moreno.

--