Topic:"Regulatory Oversight" in M12104

axy Original message From: David Maxwell Date: 2025-02-11 8:02 a.m. (GMT-04:00) To: rvlartin Tanne Subject: Re: safety concern power distribution lines You are absolutely r ght, and you have proceeded absolutely correctly, (other than look...

AI summary The message discusses a safety concern related to power distribution lines on a property in Middle Lahave. The sender, David Maxwell, acknowledges the concern and notes that Phil, who is responsible for the issue, may not have the authority to act immediately. The situation is expected to be addressed at a Board meeting on February 19. The sender also comments on broader governance and organizational issues within the new Board.

Ml2104 - Riverport Electric Light Commission - Power Pole complaint - Wendy and Martin Tanner This is in response to your direction to provide you with our response to the above-noted matter. On February 23, 2025, Wendy and Martin Tanner,...

AI summary Wendy and Martin Tanner filed a complaint with the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board regarding power pole clearances on their property. RELC responded, noting that its regulations do not address minimum clearance distances and that the issue likely resulted from post-construction changes. RELC is willing to work with the complainants but expects them to bear the costs of any changes.

(See Rules 26-302, 36-110, and Appendix B.) Maximum system voltage†, kV Clearance, m Not exceeding 46.0 3 69 3.7 \ See Appendix B.

AI summary The text provides a table with maximum system voltage levels and corresponding clearance requirements, referencing Rules 26-302, 36-110, and Appendix B for further details.

MINIMUM CONDUCTOR CLEARANCES FROM BUILDINGS (IN METRES) MINIMUM CLEARANCE IN METRES FROM CONDUCTOR TO: BUILDINGS SIGHS, BILLBOARDS, LAMP AND TRAFFI SIGH STANDARDS, AND SINILAR PLANT GUYS, COMMUNICATION HORIZONTAL VERTICAL HORIZONTAL VERTIC...

AI summary The document provides a table outlining the minimum conductor clearances from buildings and other structures in metres, categorized by voltage levels and types of structures such as buildings, signs, and similar plant. The clearances are specified for horizontal and vertical distances.

(See Rules 26-302, 36-110, and Appendix B.) Maximum system voltage†, kV Clearance, m Not exceeding 46.0 3 69 3.7 \ See Appendix B.

AI summary The text provides a table specifying maximum system voltage levels and corresponding clearance requirements, referencing Rules 26-302, 36-110, and Appendix B for further details.

Table 34 Vertical ground clearances for open line conductors\ (See Rules 36-110 and Appendix B.) Maximum system voltage†, kV Not exceeding 25.0 34.5 46 7 69 7.6 † See Appendix B. † For ungrounded systems, the maximum system voltage is the...

AI summary Table 34 outlines vertical ground clearances for open line conductors, referencing Rules 36-110 and Appendix B. It specifies maximum system voltages and minimum clearances, with additional details on horizontal clearance requirements from the NSPI 'Overhead Distribution Standard'.

MINIMUM CONDUCTOR CLEARANCES FROM BUILDINGS (IN METRES) L Þ HININ M CLEARANC RES FROM ( CONDUCTOR TO: BU 16011 res HLLBOARDS Andards, / ND TRAFFIC AR PLANT GUYS, COMMUNICATION HORIZONTAL VER VERTICAL HORIZONTAL VERTICAL CABLES, AND DROP WI...

AI summary The document outlines minimum conductor clearances from buildings in metres, specifying horizontal and vertical distances for different voltage levels and conductor types, referencing the Canadian Standards Association (CSA).

From the 7.2kV Conductor to: Measured Horizontal Distance 1. Front/Roadside Face of Front Steps/Landing Railing: 1.727m (5'-8") 2. Front/Roadside Face of the Bay Window Exterior Wall: 3.454m (11'-4") 3. Front/Roadside Face of the Porch Ext...

AI summary The document provides measurements of horizontal and vertical distances from a 7.2kV conductor to various parts of a building. It notes that, following remedial upgrades, the horizontal distances meet the minimum clearance requirements set by applicable codes and standards.

The vertical clearance was reduced slightly with the installation of the 32" epoxy arms, however the vertical clearance distance remains greater than the minimum clearance specified in the applicable Codes and Standards.

AI summary The installation of 32" epoxy arms slightly reduced vertical clearance, but it still exceeds the minimum clearance specified by applicable codes and standards.

4. Consideration for the Front Steps/Landing: The horizontal clearance distance from the RELC 7.2kV open/bare conductor to the railing on the Front Steps/Landing was measured to be 1.727m (5'-8") following the remedial work to relocate the...

AI summary The horizontal clearance between the RELC 7.2kV overhead line and the Tanner residence's Front Steps/Landing is 1.727m, which is below the required 3.0m. This situation is due to the historical placement of the overhead line and recent modifications to the residence that may have violated applicable codes and standards.

M12104 - Riverport Electric Light Commission - Power Pole Complaint - Martin and Wendy Tanner On February 23, 2025, you filed a complaint with the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board about the proximity of Riverport Electric Light Commiss...

AI summary A complaint was filed with the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board regarding the proximity of Riverport Electric Light Commission's power lines to a property owned by Martin and Wendy Tanner. The Board issued information requests to both parties, and responses were received in May and June 2025. The matter was transferred to the Nova Scotia Energy Board following the proclamation of the Energy and Regulatory Boards Act.

CONCLUSION After reviewing all the evidence before the Board, including the Strum June Report, the Board is satisfied that RELC has addressed the clearance issues raised in your complaint. The vertical clearance and all horizontal clearanc...

AI summary The Board concludes that RELC has adequately addressed the clearance issues raised in the complaint, except for one non-compliant horizontal line clearance. The Board dismisses the complaint but directs RELC to review similar situations in the area to ensure safety and compliance with the Act.

Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board Mailing ad:Jress PO Box 1692, Unit "M" Halifax, Nova Scota 83J 313 board@novascot a.ca hno//nsuarb.novascotia.ca Office 3rd Floor, 1601 Lower Water Street Hal fax, Nova Scota 83J 3P6 1855 442-4448 (toll...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board acknowledges receipt of a complaint regarding a power pole issue and clarifies its limited role in resolving customer complaints, emphasizing that it does not mediate or handle financial arrangements between parties. The Board also notes its jurisdiction is limited to the utility's actions up to the customer's meter.

the Board will redact all personal identifiers from its published documents, they can be accessed by others through the Board's public website and in an un-redacted format at the offices of the Board. The evidence you file in support of yo...

AI summary The Board informs complainants that evidence in their appeal will be public unless confidentiality is requested under Regulatory Rule 12. Riverport Electric Light Commission is directed to respond to the complaint by March 12, 2025, and complainants must file comments within 10 business days. The Board will review the information and issue a decision later.

NOVA SCOTIA ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF: THE PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT - and - IN THE MATTER OF: A COMPLAINT by MARTIN AND WENDY TANNER concerning the proximity of electrical, distribution and telecom lines to the main structure on their prop...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Energy Board is handling a complaint by Martin and Wendy Tanner regarding the proximity of electrical, distribution, and telecom lines to their property's main structure.

CONCLUSION After reviewing all the evidence before the Board, including the Strum June Report, the Board is satisfied that RELC has addressed the clearance issues raised in your complaint. The vertical clearance and all horizontal clearanc...

AI summary The Board dismissed the complaint against RELC, finding that the non-compliant horizontal line clearance is due to property modifications since 1960, not RELC's actions. The Board also directed RELC to review other properties for similar clearance issues and mitigate any safety risks.