23.03.2013 Views

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Theft Deterrence Calculation Chart, Fortis BC, April 2012<br />

Files<br />

Opened Diversions<br />

High Load<br />

Paying<br />

total # <strong>of</strong><br />

sites<br />

2006 568 57 71 128 45%<br />

2007 254 21 21 42 50%<br />

2008 206 28 27 55 51%<br />

2009 189 13 32 45 29%<br />

2010 215 18 52 70 26%<br />

2011 262 12 49 61 20%<br />

2012 134 10 22 32 31%<br />

Ratio <strong>of</strong> Theft to<br />

Paid<br />

Appendix BCUC IR1 86.1<br />

What appears to be relevant to these figures is the absence <strong>of</strong> the operation <strong>of</strong> the Safety<br />

Standards Amendment Act <strong>of</strong> 2006. There are no local governments served by Fortis BC<br />

that require Fortis to disclose account in<strong>for</strong>mation <strong>of</strong> customers with high loads. It seems<br />

probable that marijuana producers served by Fortis have become aware that they will not<br />

be targeted by the energy authority unless they choose to steal, and, as a consequence,<br />

they appear to be less likely to steal.<br />

Consider, alternatively, the approach taken by Mission, B.C., Surrey, Abbots<strong>for</strong>d, and a<br />

number <strong>of</strong> other Lower Mainland municipalities. A 2011 report by Plecas, Chaisson,<br />

Garis and Snow notes that in the period from 2000 to 2005 only 13% <strong>of</strong> indoor grows<br />

discovered in the city <strong>of</strong> Mission had stolen electricity. In the period 2006 to 2010 the<br />

incidence <strong>of</strong> theft <strong>of</strong> electricity in uncovered grows in the city was almost five times<br />

higher; 57 per cent <strong>of</strong> these operations had evidence <strong>of</strong> theft: the grows were larger, with<br />

more plants, and a higher average number <strong>of</strong> lights. 3<br />

It is worth noting that we have a province-wide 2005 report <strong>of</strong> theft -- a highly reliable<br />

source <strong>of</strong> data, as it was based on 25,000 incidents <strong>of</strong> marijuana cultivation coming to the<br />

attention <strong>of</strong> the police in British Columbia between 1997 and 2003; that report found<br />

theft in an average <strong>of</strong> 20 per cent <strong>of</strong> these 25,000 cases. 4 It seems a reasonable<br />

hypothesis, given these circumstances, to suggest that the Act <strong>of</strong> 2006 has prompted more<br />

marijuana producers to steal electricity in order to avoid detection through the reporting<br />

<strong>of</strong> high levels <strong>of</strong> energy consumption.<br />

3 Darryl Plecas, Kristen Chaisson, Len Garis & Andrew Snow, The Nature and Extent<br />

<strong>of</strong> Marijuana Growing Operations in Mission, British Columbia: A 14 Year Review<br />

(1997-2010), University <strong>of</strong> the Fraser Valley, School <strong>of</strong> Criminology and Criminal<br />

Justice, 2011.<br />

4 Darryl Plecas, Aili Malm & Bryan Kinney, Marihuana Growing Operations in British<br />

Columbia, Revisited, 1997-2003, Abbots<strong>for</strong>d, B.C., University College <strong>of</strong> the Fraser<br />

Valley.<br />

5

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!