Intervention should be
in hard copy as per the notice.
Peter
H. O'Dell
Assistant
Board Secretary
27th.
Floor
Tel:
416-440-7605
Fax:
416-440-7656
Email:
Peter.ODell@oeb.gov.on.ca
From: Marissa
Eser
Sent: 2007 September 24
16:16
To: BoardSec
Subject: FW: Your Comments Regarding the
Proposed Bruce to
From:
Aristides49@aol.com [mailto:Aristides49@aol.com]
Sent: September 21, 2007 4:35
PM
To: Kirsten
Walli
Cc: Nabih
Mikhail
Subject: Fwd: Your
Comments Regarding the Proposed Bruce to
TO:
FROM:
Kirsten
Walli
Chris A. Pappas
Board
Secretary
RR2
2300 Yonge
Street N4L
1W6
M4P
1E4
Application for Late
Intervenor Status
I did not
attempt to involve myself directly in this process earlier because I did not
feel it was necessary. I thought that if I could communicate the results of my
investigations to the Intervenors, they could bring these issues and information
to the attention of the Board. It appears that I was quite wrong. I have no
personal interest or agenda in this issue other than what is best for
There is another reason why I wished to refrain from
direct involvement with the hearings. I became ill in 2000, and , while I have
been slowly recovering, I am a client of the Ontario Disability Support Program.
Some of my secondary symptoms include anxiety and confusion in stressful
situations. While I have medication for those, when necessary, it interferes
with my thought processes. In other words “I’m damned if I do and damned if I
don’t”. However, since this issue is of such importance, I will simply have
to “buck up” and deal with this the best that I can. Since most of
my involvement is evidentiary documentation and interrogatories, this will not
be a problem. It is only in cross-examination that I may have some difficulty.
But this should be minimal since I am simply a messenger
and it is the message that is of prime importance. If they waste their
cross-examination on trying to shoot the messenger, their efforts will be in
vain. My pedigree is of no relevance. It is the standing of the authors of the
documentation that is of relevance. My “research” is simply “meta-research”,
that is the compilation of authoritative documentation in the field under
review. If I must cross-examine any of their witnesses, I will do so with
reference to the authoritative documentation. As this is informational and not
personal, I should not have much of a problem.
The simple fact is that
others have faced much greater consequences in their endeavours to protect their
societies. I cannot beg off over a matter of simple personal comfort. If I have
to deal with my anxiety for the period required to effect an appropriate
outcome, then that is simply the least effort that I can undertake as a citizen
of
My interest in
the proceedings and the grounds for my
intervention:
A.
Additional transmission capacity
- the transmission line project is an
unsatisfactory solution to
stated goals of additional capacity, achieved quickly.
B. An Alternate solution
(Capacitor Technology)
- Conservation - efficiency - higher % of power generation
to
consumers
- Voltage control
- Outage protection
- fast installation
- installed on existing lines - no expropriation, landowner,
environmental,
agricultural, woodlot, etc. issues.
- approximately 1/10th the cost of line installation, for the
same
gain in increased transmission capacity
- mature [53 years +] 2nd generation electrical transmission
technology, with the 3rd generation (which is installed in
conjunction with, and not instead of the 2nd generation - see
FACTS technology) already in use for almost a decade
now.
C. Lack
of due diligence.
While the Bruce to Milton project was under consideration for years, the
applicant and the OPA claim there was no time for the OPA to complete the due
diligence studies regarding the application of series compensation to the
existing Bruce to Milton Line, although they did have the time to do so for the
half dozen capacitor enhancement projects, elsewhere in the province, for which
they have received approval. Also, their near term measures include such
technology which seems to be in opposition to their claims.
D.
The project appears contrary to the stated general expressed direction of OPA,
IESO and the applicant regarding transmission and generation policy for
Affiliation:
I
have no affiliation and I speak only for the best interests of
Chris Aristides
Pappas
RR2
N4L 1W6
519-538-5551 phone
& fax
Aristides49@aol.com
The nature and
scope of my intended participation;
I
will introduce evidentiary documentation, arguments
and interrogatories derived from it, expert witnesses (if time and money
permit) and cross-examination where necessary.
My intention to seek
an award of costs:
I
wish to receive an award of costs for travel, documentation reproduction,
and any other reasonable cost that may accrue from my involvement as an
Intervenor, which includes the cost of bringing expert witnesses, if it is
possible to do so.
Also, I
have been given to understand that there may be some process by which
impecunious persons such as myself may be able to obtain funding, prior to the
hearings, with which to obtain such things as retainers for counsel or monies
for the obtaining and payment for expert witnesses. Please advise me as to the
reality of this.
Language
I intend to
participate in English.
Final
Please treat this as a
draft version, if necessary. Please advise me if there is anything unnecessary
in this application or if there are other requirements, not
addressed.
Please advise me
as to if, and how, I can file my application
electronically.
Can I also serve it
electronically, or is hard copy required in all these things?
Is there an actual
Intervenor's form or even a Late Intervenor's form that may be a more suitable
frame for my application?
I am sorry that it
took all week for me to reply with my application, but I really do not know what
I am doing,here. It took me I while to do this and to feel that I was
approaching this correctly (I hope).
Thank you for your
time and consideration,
Chris Aristides
Pappas
519-538-5551
RR2
N4L
1W6
-