A proposed gas plant in Tantramar continues to stir up controversy.
This time, NB Power is facing criticism after what’s been described by interveners as a non-transparent, last-minute attempt to keep the plant approval afloat at the expense of fairness, due process and public accountability.
According to a statement from the Atlantic Wildlife Institute and Protect the Chignecto Isthmus Coalition, NB Power filed a package of “late evidence” with the New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) just a week before an oral hearing is scheduled to begin on Feb. 9.
The AWI statement said the new evidence introduced a previously undisclosed commercial arrangement, a potential Expansion Tolling Agreement tied to the Tantramar project.
“The filing came after regulatory processes were effectively complete, including information requests, expert evidence and preparation for cross-examination,” the statement said.
“Rather than being disclosed openly and in a timely manner, the material was introduced without notice, emailed though (sic) while a RIGS motions hearing was in process and consists largely of redacted, confidential, and confidential-restricted documents.”
AWI’s statement accused NB Power of blindsiding interveners who have spent months reviewing what they thought was a complete application.
“Only to be confronted at the 11th hour with material that appears to fundamentally alter the project under construction,” the statement said.
Specifically, AWI said the new material suggests a potential expansion or restructuring of the project, adding an additional 100 megawatts of power in contract with the province of Nova Scotia.
AWI said the potential changes could have direct implications on several fronts, including:
- Project economics and risk allocation
- Ratepayer exposure
- The assessment of need
- Alternatives analysis
- NB Power’s least-cost planning obligations
But even with the significance of those implications, AWI said interveners haven’t been given the opportunity file information requests on the new material, submit responsive or expert evidence, review or challenge confidentiality claims, or prepare cross-examination based on a stable and complete evidentiary record.
“Compounding concerns, NB Power acknowledged that the agreement may have been signed as early as Dec. 31, 2025, raising serious questions about why it was withheld from interveners, the public and the (EUB), including during the January motions day,” AWI said.
AWI said the latest NB Power move follows the utility’s insistence on “an artificially rushed hearing schedule,” which NB Power said is necessary to meet an April 2 contract deadline with ProEnergy.
“That compressed timeline forced interveners into an accelerated process, a constraint now being used to justify the late introduction of material evidence,” AWI’s press release said, adding it creates chaos days before the hearing begins.
Interveners also argued a pattern is emerging, showing a lack of transparency and respect for the regulatory process by NB Power.
