Â

Â

From: Aaron Detlor [mailto:aarondetlor@gmail.com]
Sent: October-02-12 11:36 AM
To: Lillian Ing; BoardSec
Cc: Aaron Detlor; 'Regulatory@hydroone.com'; 'mengelberg@hydroone.com'; 'maia.chase@ieso.ca'; 'Miriam.Heinz@powerauthority.on.ca'; 'relijah@cottfn.com'; 'scott.smith@gowlings.com'
Subject: Re: Hydro One Networks Inc. - Leave to construct Transmission Facilities - Procedural Order No. 5

Â

Dear Ms. Walli:

Â

I am in receipt of Procedural Order No. 5 dated September 27, 2012 which relates to the failure of the Board to provide us with a copy of Procedural Order No. 4. Â Â

Â

I would like to formally object to the time lines imposed by the Order.

Â

The HCCC represent Six Nations which is a community of approximately 25,000 people all of whom hold and exercise treaty rights in that area prescribed by the Project. Â The HCCC also represent other citizens in other territories (all of which are 1701 rights holders) including Oneida of the Thames, Tyendinaga, Wahta, Akwesasne, Kahnawake etc. Â

Â

It is unreasonable to suggest that any meaningful information can be shared with the community(s) such that questions and/or concerns  can formulated into interrogatories that properly address the issues we have raised to date.

Â

I would respectfully suggest that the approach taken by the Board in this matter is part of a systematic failure on behalf of the Board to understand the realities and complexities of Indigenous Peoples in Ontario. Â The HCCC does not operate in the same manner as other market participants. Â The HCCC Â do not have clear or established lines of authority. Â This is an intentional structure. It is designed to foster and facilitate broad based consensual decision making. Â It means that instructions will not be provided in any meaningful manner in the time frames imposed and renders the entire process somewhat meaningless for my client where they are denied a manner to interface their concerns with Board process. Â

Â

As you are aware COTTFN first became involved in the process on or about September 1, 2011 (Exhibit B Tab Schedule 5 Page 3 of 4).  First Nations were given the opportunity to meet etc.  Procedural Order No.1 stated that their written interrogatories were due by June 6, 2012.  COTTFN was therefore provided approximately nine (9) months to review information, canvas internal positions and undertake meetings etc.  Instead of receiving nine (9) months of process time we learned of this Project on August 20, 2012 with the most recent Procedural Order allowing us to file interrogatories on or before October 1, 2012 - a span of  just over one (1) month.  We would respectfully suggest that the Board is advancing and supporting a profound unfairness where it has not offered the same opportunities to the HCCC as were provided to COTTFN, Chippewas of Kettle and Stoney Point, Munsee-Delaware First Nation, and Caldwell First Nation.

Â

We have also not been provided with the offer of information and/or meetings. Â

Â

We have reviewed Procedural Order No. 2 (dated June 15, 2012) as requested and when I explained the Board's comments in relation to  this to the Chiefs there first response was "why are we proceeding ..they have already made up their minds". Â

Â

I indicated that we were not raising the same issues as were canvassed in Yellow Falls Power Limited Partnership.  We are stating that it is in the interest of consumers with respect to price and reliability and quality of electricity service that rights be respected.  The failure to respect an engagement process consistent with the sacred and solemn nature of treaty commitments means that indigenous peoples will rightfully and legally take direct action to protect their rights .  This causes the price of electricity to increase and affects the stability of the system.  There is also the issue of 'quality of service'.  There is nothing preventing the Board from stating that the quality of electricity must respect treaty rights.  Put another way electricity service that does not reflect a deep and abiding respect for treaty commitments is of exceedingly poor quality especially where there is considerable evidence that it is now common place and standard industry practice to consider respect for indigenous concerns in the quality assurance and auditing process.

Â

I also raised with our Chiefs and Clanmothers the obligation to consider the application in regards to s.96(2) .  We have read and re-read s. 96(2) and we understand that  it creates a statutory presumption that the promotion of the use of renewable energy sources is in the public interest.  We understand that the Board is permitted to consider the promotion of renewable energy as a factor which would weigh in favour of a Project being in the  public interest subject to an inquiry into whether or not the Project has been advanced consistent with the policies of the Government of Ontario.

Â

In this case the Project is being advanced to promote renewable energy sources. Â We also know that the Government of Ontario has policies in relation to treaty engagement which have not been followed. Â Â The difficulty is that the timelines being imposed make it nearly impossible for us to marshall the necessary resources to make our arguments.

Â

I would respectfully encourage the Board to reconsider its approach. Â We are available at the Board's convenience to sit down and discuss these issues because we have serious concerns that the Board and HONI may not be understanding the gravity of the situation.

Â

Â

Â

Regards,

Â

Aaron Detlor

Â

Â





To All Parties in EB-2012-0082

Â

Please find attached Procedural Order No. 5 from the Board.

Â

Yours truly,

Lillian Ing

Case Administrator | Office of the Board SecretaryÂ

Ontario Energy Board | 2300 Yonge Street, Suite 2700 | Toronto ON M4P 1E4

Tel: 416-440-7621 | 1-800-632-6273

Â

Email:Â HYPERLINK "mailto:Lillian.Ing@ontarioenergyboard.ca"Lillian.Ing@ontarioenergyboard.ca

Regulatory filings:Â HYPERLINK "mailto:Boardsec@ontarioenergyboard.ca"Boardsec@ontarioenergyboard.ca


This electronic transmission, including any accompanying attachments, may contain information that is confidential, privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law, and is intended only for the recipient(s) named above. Any distribution, review, dissemination or copying of the contents of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete the copy you have received.

Ce message, transmis par courriel, y compris tout fichier joint, peut contenir des renseignements qui sont confidentiels, qui sont protégés par le secret professionnel ou qui ne peuvent être divulgués aux termes des lois applicables et s'adressent exclusivement au(x) destinataire(s) indiqué(s) ci-dessus. La distribution, la diffusion, l'examen ou la reproduction du contenu du courriel par une autre personne que le(s) destinataire(s) voulu(s) sont strictement interdits. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, veuillez le supprimer définitivement et en aviser l'expéditeur immédiatement par retour du courriel.

Â

Aaron DetlorÂ
Barrister & SolicitorÂ
16 Sunrise CourtÂ
Suite 417Â
P.O. Box 714Â
Ohsweken ON N0A 1M0Â

Tel:519 445-4225Â
Fax:519 445-2389Â
Cell:416 819 8583Â

HYPERLINK "mailto:aarondetlor@gmail.com"aarondetlor@gmail.comÂ

Â

Â

Â