November 8, 2000<br><br>

David Core, President<br>
Canadian Alliance of Pipeline Landowner Associations<br>
3316 Confederation Line, RR#1<br>
Wyoming, Ontario.<br>
N0N 1T0<br><br>

Mr. Michel L. Mantha, Board Secretary<br>
National Energy Board<br>
444- Seventh Avenue S. W.<br>
Calgary, Alberta..<br>
T2P 0X8<br><br>

Dear Sir:<br><br>

This letter is in acknowledgement of the letter dated October 27, 2000 from the National Energy Board (NEB) to The Canadian Alliance of Pipeline Landowner Associations (CAPLA). I would like to thank you for the acknowledgement of the telephone conversation with Mrs. Snider of Friday October 27, 2000 and the clarification of your letter dated October 25, 2000.<br><br>

I wish to begin CAPLA's response to Mrs. Sniders repeated requests to meet in Montreal by quoting our Vice President, Jerry Burns, " Peter Lewington's book, No Right of Way, goes back 40 plus years, identifying landowner concerns and many of them are still with us today. For the National Energy Board to invite CAPLA to Montreal to meet with Board and staff, without compensation for our tune, is an indication of the Board's continued refusal to recognize landowners as other than a continued obstacle to the energy industry. As long as right of entry is in force without a costs package available to landowners, to present their case, the NEB continues to take advantage of landowners." Obviously we are tired of repeating our story over and over with no real response or change.<br><br>

As you are aware CAPLA was organized last year as the result of landowner frustrations to the lack of serious response to our issues by the pipeline industry, the NEB and the Government of Canada. The organization decided the only way we could address our issues, due to inaction, was to attack our issues one at a time through the courts. As you are aware a ministerial response to one of our letters promised us that the system works and asked us for our confidence. In reply to that assurance we requested an arbitration hearing and recommended a responsible way to appoint arbitrators, concerning the 30 metre restrictive zone, even though we had already initiated a class action on the same issue. At this point in time our skepticism of the integrity of the system and how it works in favour of the industry and against landowners is supported by the inaction of the minister and the NEB.<br><br>	

It would be irresponsible for CAPLA's executive to address or consult with the board in Montreal under the terms described by Mrs. Snider, when in your forward to The Western Management Consultants and Purvin & Gertz report (April 6, 2000) the NEB states, " Other Recommendations in the consultants' report fall outside the boards mandate. In particular, strategies with respect to resolving legal uncertainties regarding jurisdiction, setting guidelines for landowner compensation, making determinations on intervenor funding, are the responsibility of the policy arm of the government, mainly Natural Resources Canada". Obviously it would be a waste of any further effort to address our issues without the NEB and Natural Resources Canada both being present and working in tandem. It has been reinforced many times by the executive of the NEB and staff that the board cannot initiate legislative change to the benefit of landowners, and yet, as pointed out in my previous letter the NEB has amended legislation in a way th
at is "at the threshold of acceptability", legislation that is detrimental to landowners.<br><br>

Further it is obvious that the NEB and the pipeline industry do not understated, in any way, the landowner perspective, how seriously we take our concerns and the concern of public safety or the costs that landowners incur by having pipelines crossing their property. When I spoke in Niagara Falls (May 2000), at the joint conference sponsored by the NEB and the API, I spoke passionately about our issues and how they affect landowners. I used analogies to take the people in the audience to a place where most could understand our perspective, overshadowing their bias for the moment. I explained that there are no personal benefits to having a pipeline enforced across our properties, only headaches, cost, worries and issues the average landowner does not have to deal with. I made the point very clear that we've heard that the industry says" all that landowners are after, is money," and I went on to explain that in a democratic, capitalist society, everything basically comes down to that issue. SAFETY, ENVIRONMENTA
L ISSUES, ABANDONMENT, THICKNESS OF PIPE, IMPOSITIONS etc. etc. etc. all cost money and cost analysis is involved. So yes all of our very important issues including our time have costs. Time from out businesses, our families, our chosen lifestyles, our hobbies, our communities and our well being. The NEB is mandated to be unbiased and functioning in the best interests of the Canadian public, and yet the NEB just does not get IT. CAPLA's passion for these issues are not fueled by just one or two individuals, but by the passions of the hundreds of landowners who have joined our landowner  groups over the years and the landowners who ask to join daily, as they start to understand the dynamics of pipeline easements and NEB hearings.<br><br>

In conclusion,<br><br>

..... If the NEB wants to solicit landowner input, it has been decided we require to be
reimbursed for our time, since we are business people who get no financial benefit from pipelines.  It needs to be recognized that the NEB hired consultants to make recommendations on Intervenor Funding and to address the Auditor General's report and we question the attitude towards landowners. It is important to understand that any issue addressed by our organization is to the <b>benefit and enhancement of the Pipeline Companies.</b><br><br>

..... We will only attend if a person from the policy arm of <b>Natural Resources
Canada ox the Minister himself is in attendance</b>. The NEB itself recognizes our
efforts are futile otherwise.<br><br>

..... Without legal counsel, all we can agree to do is identify the issues and their effects, the only <b>responsible</b> way to resolve them in the best interests of landowners and the NEB is to supply fees for us to hire <b>consultants and lawyers</b>, again it only benefits the pipeline companies to resolve these issues.<br><br>

..... We have very real concerns about how amendments are made to legislation
affecting landowners when landowners have not been consulted. The NEB's most recent effort to survey landowners on the impacts of the 30 metre zone is indeed a small effort to address this issue but is obviously window dressing to right a wrong. The NEB now has an organization available to it that is able to responsibly address landowner issues and sit down, and negotiate fair and equitable responses to the many issues of concern. An organization of organizations, who share a general knowledge of the issues, that no one landowner generally understands or wants to understand.<br><br>

..... The executive of CAPLA is very serious in our approach to our issues and we feel
that the only way we can continue to address our many issues is to proceed as we have in the past six months. If the NEB, the Government of Canada and the Pipeline Companies choose to take CAPLA seriously and design a funnding formula for our operations, negotiated settlements to all of the issues can be developed in the best interests of the Canadian Public and everyone else involved.<br><br>

..... In material landowners receive from the pipeline industry, landowners am considered
"<b>stakeholders</b>" and given the responsibility as the industry's and the public's <b>first line of defense</b>.  If the industry claims us as other than a special interest group and landowners themselves have proven that safety is at the forefront of their issues, as proven in past Line conversion hearings, why is it that the NEB and Natural Resources Canada ( the two government groups responsible for the public's best interests) find it so difficult to recognize landowners and their organizations as the players in the industry that can help enforce industry accountability by challenging industry data.  Finally, we question this treatment of landowners, from the perspective that we are stakeholders
who do not profit from this industry but will be left with the hardware and long-term
environmental impacts after everyone else has profited and left.<br><br>

Yours Truly<br><br>


David R. Core<br>
President<br><br>
<hr>

<b>Landowners and others concerned with the Georgia Strait Crossing
(GSX) pipeline route should get in touch with<br>
Dave Thomson, 3721 Telegraph Road, RR2, Cobble Hill, BC, V0R 1L0<br>
(250)743-5263</b><br><br>
<hr>