-----Original Message-----
From: beaudry, raymond [mailto:wrf@manitoulin.net]
Sent: May 4, 2012 5:05 PM
To: BoardSec
Cc: Edik Zwarenstein; Michael Millar; Gordon Potts NP; Art Jacko; wrf@manitoulin.net; tom.adams.energy@gmail.com; cbayne@bayniche-conservancy.ca; action@lsarc.ca; neoskwes@hotmail.com; gusland@amtelecom.net; cbell@amtelecom.net; johnnicolesmith@xplornet.com; kodaisl@rogers.com; jane.wilson@ripnet.com; parker.gallant@sympatico.ca; ashnee52@hotmail.com
Subject: OEB EB-2011-0394 Procedural Order No. 6 Response


Dear Ms Walli May 4,2012

In response to Procedural Order No. 6, MCSEA wishes to present evidence
and supporting documentation revealing the true nature of the partnership
agreement between Northland Power Inc. (NPI) and Mnidoo Mnising Power
(MMP) which created McLean’s Mountain Wind Farm and the current
transmission application before the Board.

The evidence presented here demonstrates that the partnership agreement
between NPI and it’s partner MMP is not based on a legitimate foundation.
The agreement was signed by Shining Turtle Franklin Paibomsai, who was at
the time impersonating a public official and not a duly elected community
representative nor was he Tribal Chair of the United Chiefs and Councils
of Mnidoo Mnising (UCCMM). In addition, our evidence demonstrates that
one of the partners in UCCMM, Aundeck Omni Kaning First Nation (AOKFN),
opposes the project.

Either one of these facts raise fundamental concerns about NPI’s decision
to partner with MMP and the entire basis for the McLean’s Mountain Wind
Farm application before the Board.

Improper Partnership

In interrogatory number 6 MCSEA asked, “Who was the representative of
each of the First Nations at the time MMP was created and who represented
each First Nation at the time of the signing of the partnership agreement
between MMP and NPI?” The responsive portion of the reply was, “MMP was
formed in the summer of 2010 and the partnership agreement between MMP
and NPI was signed in December 2010.”

In interrogatory number 7 MCSEA asked, “Please confirm that the term of
office for chief and council of the Whitefish River First Nation ended on
January 7, 2011 and that the election of a new chief and council did not
occur until February 12, 2011. Please indicate the position of the person
who committed the Whitefish River First Nation to MMP at the time this
commitment was made.”

The entire response was:


“The Applicant confirms that the term of office for chief and council of
the Whitefish River First Nation ended on January 7, 2011 and that the
election of a new chief and council did not occur until February 12, 2011.

Prior to the signing of the McLean partnership in December 2011 (sic), a
Band Council Resolution was signed by the council of the Whitefish River
First Nation which authorized the Chief to commit the Whitefish River
Nation to MMP.”

Note that the December 2011 date in this response appears to be
incorrect. Other statements in the evidence in this proceeding submitted
by the applicant, including the response to MCSEA’s interrogatory #6 and
MCSEA’s questions of clarification on interrogatory #6 refer to the
signing of the partnership in December 2010. A similar confusing
erroneous date was included in the REA.

McLean‘s Mountain Wind Farm would have the Board believe that the
partnership agreement was signed in December 2010. However, there is no
reference or record documenting the signing of these documents that we
are aware of or have been able to obtain from the applicant despite
persistent requests in discoveries.

On December 10, 2010, partnership negotiations between NPI and MMP may
have taken place but the public record is clear that NPI and MMP signed
the agreement or agreements that created McLean’s Mountain Wind Farm in
Sudbury on February 10, 2011.

Attached is a “Community announcement” issued by MMP dated February 8,
2011 referring to the February 10th date. Another attached document is a
group of four photographs published in the UCCMM Winter 2011 newsletter
that claim to show NPI and MMP signing the partnership in Sudbury
February 10, 2011.

The signing of the partnership responsible for the application before
that Board took place on February 10, 2011. That partnership was signed
by Shining Turtle Franklin Paibomsai who was at the time claiming to be
Chief of the Whitefish River First Nation and Tribal Chair of the UCCMM.
However, Shining Turtle Franklin Paibomsai could not have acted in the
capacity of signing authority as the Whitefish River First Nation was in
the midst of an election at this time. The applicant states that the
WFRFN council was dissolved as of January 07, 2011 and that the election
of a new chief and council did not occur until February 12, 2011.

As per the UCCMM constitution, only a chief can be a tribal chair. In
this case, Shining Turtle Franklin Paibomsai was not a public official on
February 10, 2011 and had no authority to bind his community or represent
the UCCMM as Tribal Chair.

McLean’s interrogatory responses clearly indicate that Northland Power is
aware of this irregularity and yet submitted an application to the OEB
based on this flawed partnership.


Aundeck Omni Kaning (AOK) Is Not in Full Support of Application

AOK is a member of UCCMM and apparently also MMP but AOK has raised
several concerns with the project in the two Band Council Resolutions
(BCRs) attached.

In MCSEA’s question of clarification Question 6.1, we asked for “all of
the BCR's referred to in the reply to Question #6. If the information is
not included in the respective BCRs, please provide the dates the member
partner BCR’s were signed.” The applicant was unresponsive to this
request.

AOK is still in consultation with their community regarding the project.
This consultation does not have a definite time frame.

The two AOK (Aundeck Omni Kaning) Band Council Resolutions (BCR’S) 1528
and 1535 dated from July 18, 2009 and January 12, 2010 respectively are
attached. They express opposition to the project and identify certain
conditions that would require resolution before AOK would support the
project.

BCR’s in support of a project, should there be any, cannot be upheld
until the conditions of the previous BCR’s are met and those conditions
have to be proven. Northland Power did move some of their turbine
locations away from AOK lands as per some elements of the BCR
requirements. However, many of the BCR requirements have not yet been met.

MCSEA submits the above evidence. This new evidence, in addition to all
other evidence adduced in this proceeding, supports our respectfully
request that the Board reconsider its previous rulings and order an oral
hearing on this application.

Thank you

Raymond Beaudry
MCSEA