Oakville, September, 2007
Mr. Richard Carrier, B. Sc. Écon., M. A. Écon.,
Mr. Gilles Boulianne, B. Sc. Écon
Mr. Richard Lassonde
Commissionners
Régie de l’énergie
Tour de la Bourse
800, Place Victoria
Bureau 255
H4Z 1A2
Montréal (Québec)
Subject: R-3630-2007 Comments about responses to questions
Sirs,
After reading the transcripts of the hearings on August 31 st
in the case mentioned above, I feel compelled to comment on both the lack of factual information regarding the issues and the innuendoes regarding Novitherm Canada and our distributor.
Concerns are related to the entire Heat Reflector industry which includes the reputation of the
Régie, Gaz Métro, Novitherm and the EEF. The Heat Reflector industry is relatively small and will be easily tarnished by the introduction of dangerous and/or deficient products.
First and foremost, as clearly stated previously, the safety issues currently relate only to the white panel. Yet, it appears that only ‘silver’ panels were presented and discussed. As shown in our observations
1
, the white product has been offered to Gaz Métro customers, yet it is not mentioned. Polystyrene is a flammable material and it is clearly stated that the white product is made of polystyrene. If questionable products are offered by a supplier, within an EEF program, to Gaz Metro customers, is this not a concern?
Second, the EEF suggests that since the insulation and convection characteristics of the silver
Radmate panel have not been tested, the thermal reflectance results therefore are not so significant. In fact, if you go to the web site of the Office of Gas and Electric Markets ( OFGEM ) - quote “ If a panel is used which does not have a reflective surface, the energy savings should be taken as one half …” page 21, Radiator Panels, General Information 3.38 http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Sustainability/Environmnt/EnergyEff/Documents1/135-oct2002.pdf
Third, on page 237, in response to a question from the President that the products have been tested in the UK and are without danger …the response was that the products have been tested for safety in the U.K. by Atofina UK and that their energy performance has been recognized by
1
D -2-1-Novitherm Canada Inc. – Observations écrites, pages 23 and 26 of 26

the Office of Gas and Electric Markets. Where is the verifying documentation? The attached copy of a letter from the Chief Operating Officer of OFGEM, dated February 1, 2007, states that
Mr. Ensor (the manufacturer of the Radmate products in the EEF’s program) “is using incorrect
data to market his product”. The Energy Savings Trust (on behalf of OFGEM ) has repeatedly instructed the manufacturer of Radmate in the UK to cease using the organization’s name in association with “this Radmate product”. We have copies correspondence dated as early as
October 13, 2003 and as recently as April 30, 2007. Yet, the Radmate products continue to be promoted claiming that their energy performance has been recognized by the Office of Gas and
Electric Markets.
Fourth, Mr. Clermont showed 5 silver reflectors to the Régie at the hearings. Historically and currently, the only products available in Canada are Novitherm
TM
Heat Reflectors and Radmate panels. What is the relevance of the other products? The display did illustrate that even though products look the same, they can be quite different scientifically .
Fifth, Mr. Clermont admitted to infringing on the Novitherm ™ trade-mark. He said he corrected the situation by removing the Novitherm ™ name from the documentation. However, the Fonds en efficacité énergétique continued to use our copyright information after removing the attribution … “ source : Novitherm ”.
Sixth, the Novitherm
TM
Heat Reflectors were the highest volume product in the entire programs offered by the EEF from 2003 through 2006. For example, according to the Rapport D’Etape
2005 – 2006 submitted by Gaz Met covering the period between October 1, 2005 and February
28, 2006 - the four (Novitherm) reflector panel programmes PS220, PR360, PR360 and PC430 accounted for a total of 2014 participants, or 76% of the total number of participants of all of the
FEE programmes - some 574% over the FEE estimates. Similarly these programmes accounted for 1,051,684 m
3 or 69% of the energy savings recorded by the FEE over this period. On page
189 of the August 31 st
, 2007 transcripts, Mr. Clermont states that ... customer satisfaction was one of the strong points ... receiving no complaints". Yet on page 240 he states there was only one supplier for Heat Reflectors who did not give good customer service. This is contradictory.
We have numerous e-mails (that we would be happy to share) from EEF staff dated from 2003 through 2006 thanking the various staff at Matrix Energy for their support and good work.
In response to a question from the President, Mr. Clermont said that there was correspondence between the Fonds en efficacité énergétique and Novitherm Canada Inc. We would very willingly supply copies of all the documentation that we sent to Mr. Clermont and then to the
Management Board. We never complained about competition. Since November 16, 2006, the same issues have repeatedly been expressed to the EEF (with even more documentation) as we expressed to the Régie de l’énergie in our July 31 st
package. If the supplier of Radmate had provided ULC smoke and fire rating on both his products, that would have very quickly resolved any safety issues. When we received some actual panels, we suspected both products were deficient as heat reflectors and had them tested. As you have seen from the test results, we were correct. Again, at no cost to the EEF, the supplier should be providing Canadian product testing and Canadian performance testing.
2

On page 241 Mr. Clermont states that “In effect, to make a long story short, they’re upset for having lost a monopoly where they were charging a lot of money for their panels …”. Our
Novitherm
TM
Heat Reflectors are still offered across Canada at the same price today as they were in 2003, even though oil prices have increase dramatically and plastics are an oil based product. The Heat Reflector program in the residential, commercial and low income sectors have been the most cost effective programs run by the EEF, and, the highest volume of participants. How has the value changed that we are now charging a lot of money?
Throughout conversations and correspondence with Mr. Clermont, we have attempted to keep industry issues (such as safety and performance) separate from any customer service issues. I have repeatedly requested a face to face meeting in Montreal at his convenience to resolve any concerns. I have requested, both verbally and in writing, for documentation and specific details related to any poor customer service. We have received none. Mr. Clermont expressed that they were too busy to meet in March, but would be available in April. Then in April we received a letter that basically said “don’t call us, we’ll call you”. On May 16, 2007, we sent extensive documentation to the Management Board regarding safety and business practices and requested their involvement. We received only an acknowledgement of the receipt of the documents.
I can assure you that Novitherm Canada Inc. and Matrix Energy are in favor of fair competition.
The more legitimate products that help citizens conserve energy, the better future our country will have. We have worked very hard to introduce this unique product to Quebec and to support the programs of the EEF. We will continue to do so.
However, business practices that infringe on trade-marks by substituting potentially dangerous and inefficient products to customers are a risk to the industry and to the whole concept of energy conservation. Business practices that continue to abuse copyright information when it could easily be available by asking, are not acceptable. We regret having to bring these matters to your attention again, but the lack of full and accurate responses from the Fonds en efficacité énergétique compels us to do so.
Respectfully yours,
Frank Snyder, General Manager
Novitherm Canada Inc.
Tel: 1 800 871 0079
3