Submission kit for organisations
A draft your board can adopt, amend or reject in one agenda item — then file under your own name, in your own words, for your own reasons.
Hearings run to 4 September 2026. After that the Board reports to cabinet. A submission filed while the record is open is worth more than any amount of comment afterwards.
A Public Utilities Board weighs a submission from an organisation with standing differently from an individual letter. Your board can adopt, amend or reject the draft below in a single agenda item — the work is already done.
Take any of this and use it as your own. No credit, no permission, no notification required. Change the wording, drop what you disagree with, keep only the numbers. It is more useful filed under your name than cited under ours.
What a submission needs
- Who you are and how many people or members you speak for.
- Why this decision affects you specifically — the paragraph below is written for your kind of organisation.
- What you want the Board to do. Ask it to test something, not to reject something: testing is what the Board is for, and a request to test is far harder to set aside.
- Any facts you rely on, with a source. The registry is public and tested; cite it or check it first, whichever you prefer.
Find your organisation
Municipalities and councils
Your ratepayers carry the capital either way, and your council may already be planning district energy, a rebuild, or a service extension that a heat loop would change.
Draft resolution — adopt, amend or reject
Council resolves to ask the Public Utilities Board to require head-to-head modelling of recovered heat, storage and demand response against the proposed gas turbines before any capital certificate is granted, given the direct effect of the resulting rate path on our residents and municipal operations.
Farm and agricultural organisations
Nutrient loading in Lake Winnipeg is routinely laid at agriculture's door. This filing puts a number on how much the North End rebuild itself recovers — about 4% of the gap — which is a fact worth having on the record in your own words.
Draft resolution — adopt, amend or reject
Our members are asked to carry responsibility for nutrient loading while the largest single point source recovers roughly 4% of the provincial gap. We ask the Board to require that the phosphorus arithmetic be examined on the record alongside the capacity decision.
Co-ops and housing providers
You buy heat and power in bulk for people who cannot absorb a rate shock, and district heat is the kind of infrastructure co-ops were built to host.
Draft resolution — adopt, amend or reject
Our members are rate-takers with limited capacity to absorb increases. We ask the Board to test whether a lower-capital portfolio meets the same winter requirement before approving three billion dollars of rate-based capital.
Labour and union locals
The two plans build different things and employ different trades over different timeframes. That comparison belongs on the record, and your local is the credible source for it.
Draft resolution — adopt, amend or reject
We ask the Board to require that the employment and skills profile of each option be filed and compared, so that the labour consequences of the choice are on the record rather than assumed.
Faith and community organisations
Intergenerational responsibility is a claim your organisation can make with standing that a technical filing cannot.
Draft resolution — adopt, amend or reject
We ask the Board to weigh the intergenerational consequences of a thirty-year fossil commitment against alternatives that do not carry one, and to require that both be tested to the same standard.
Business and industry associations
Your members pay the rate and rely on the reliability. Both are decided here.
Draft resolution — adopt, amend or reject
Our members depend on both stable rates and firm winter capacity. We ask the Board to require machine-readable cost models from both parties so the comparison can be examined rather than asserted.
Environmental and community groups
You likely already have standing and a position. What this adds is a tested number set you can cite without producing it yourself.
Draft resolution — adopt, amend or reject
We adopt and cite the registry published at spirited.energy, and ask the Board to require an independent cold-weather reliability audit applying identical accreditation rules to every resource under consideration.
The facts you can cite
Every figure below sits in a public registry with its evidence class and source, pinned by automated tests anyone can run.
- Projected winter shortfall: about 600 MW by 2030 in a drought year.
- Proposal: roughly 750 MW of gas turbines at Brandon for about $3 billion, expected to run under 5% of an average year.
- Cold-weather record: Manitoba Hydro agreed at the Board that the existing Brandon turbines were derated during three of the top ten multi-day winter peak events of the past decade.
- Alternative portfolio: $1.5–1.8B net of ITC, domestic capital only, against $4.5–6.9B for gas. The hybrid bands do not include the 200 MW winter import. Those bands do not overlap.
- Lake Winnipeg: about 3,050 t P/yr reaching the lake against a 1,400 t binational objective; the North End rebuild recovers roughly 130 t.
The registry and the tests · What the project is · How the hearing works
Where to send it
Submissions go to the Public Utilities Board. The current applications page carries the live docket and the contact route.
Current applications before the Board
Interveners file evidence and question witnesses directly, and in major proceedings the Board has awarded costs to responsible interveners — so participating need not be a net cost to your organisation.
If you are a First Nation or the Red River Métis
There is no template here, deliberately. Your interest in this decision arises from treaty and section 35, not from being an interested party, and the duty to consult belongs to the Crown rather than to us. What we can offer is the underlying work — the registry, the geospatial layers and the phosphorus arithmetic — to your own technical staff, to use however you see fit. If that is useful, write and we will send it with no conditions attached.
Where to go next
The rest of this filing, in the order a stranger tends to need it: what is being proposed, whether it has already been decided, whether the case for it holds, and how to be heard before 4 September 2026.