Public input on Kinder Morgan hearings will be 'restricted', critics argue

New online NEB application form expected to make process for submitting comments easier, but not less controversial.

A new online application form launched this week by the National Energy Board is not easing critics’ concerns that the regulator’s public hearing process for reviewing oil pipelines has become “undemocratic.”
 
For months, any member of the public who wanted to sign up to have a say about Kinder Morgan’s proposed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project had to fill out a lengthy, 10-page form and fax it in.
 
The NEB admits that form was too lengthy and confusing, so it was replaced by a simplified NEB website form on Wednesday that “takes minutes to complete” according to the board.
 
“It’s more succinct, it’s online, and it’s easier to fill out.  We’re hoping it’s a much smoother process,” said NEB spokesperson Sarah Kiley from Calgary on Thursday.
 
But the online change is only part of a major overhaul of how the public can apply to participate in NEB pipeline hearings. Several community and environmental groups still challenge the whole process as limiting public participation.
 
“They seem to be restricting public comments,” said Michael Hale, an Abbotsford resident and volunteer with PIPE UP Network – a community group of hundreds of Fraser Valley and coastal residents seeking to get more information about pipeline projects.
 
“Only people directly affected by the pipeline may be heard.  Our view is that this restricts public access,” Hale said Wednesday.
 
 
The NEB confirmed applicants should ideally be living along the pipeline route, or have relevant expertise on environmental and social impacts of the pipelines.  The hearing will also consider perspectives on potential marine oil spills.
 
But the board confirmed it would not consider submissions about climate change, the expansion of the Alberta tar sands, or the burning of the bitumen fuels in China.
 
“Our mandate is to regulate the pipelines, not the oil sands, or the downstream uses, [such as] how the product will be used after its been shipped to its destination,” said Kiley.
 
A copy of each person’s application will also be provided to Texas-headquartered pipeline giant Kinder Morgan, which can argue to have an applicant removed.
 
 
A Harper government omnibus bill called C-38 brought in the changes to the application to participate process two years ago.  The law requires people to apply to participate at the pipeline hearings, rather than just register.
 
ForestEthics, represented by lawyer Clayton Ruby, is suing the federal government over the changes, claiming the law represents a charter violation of freedom of speech.
 
Before the legislation was enacted, Federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said in 2011 that the changes to the application process were necessary because “foreign special interest groups" had "hijacked" the regulatory process," the Canadian Press reported.
 
The law did not initially affect the Northern Gateway hearings.  The joint review panel saw more than 1,179 people make oral statements, 47 aboriginal groups act as interveners, and more than 9,000 people sending in letters.

More in Environment

Ian McAllister tidal wolf photo - Great Bear Wild - used with permission

Great Bear Rainforest photographer urges a halt on tar sands oil

Spotting a pair of hungry wolves return to the same tidal spot on B.C.'s rainforest coast he's seen them come to for years, photographer Ian McAllister whipped into action: zipping up his dry suit,...

BC's lumber industry celebrates 40 years in Japan

Delegates from British Columbia's 2014 Forestry Asia Trade Mission helped celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Canada Wood Office and the BC Council of Forest Industries (COFI) establishing a...
Christy Clark photo

After Petronas' threats, BC tries to deliver LNG tax plan that pleases both industry and citizens

The B.C. government getting ready to announce the specifics of the LNG Income Tax.

Comments

Let NEBB Decide

Typically,the public has neither the organization or the funding to prepare quality EVIDENCE as required for evaluation by the NEB..Strangely,our PUBLICLY ELECTED  local governments are not eligible for PUBLIC funding .Our governments(local and Provincial),COULD  form groups  and retain THEIR experts,to prepare quality EVIDENCE—thus allowing the NEB to  hear ALL the EVIDENCE and protect the public interest .OR we need to call on   ultimate ORDER for decision making  --the NEBB—’National Election Ballot Box’... ...where the PUBLIC may DECIDE ...?    According to the  article  http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Probability+spill+risk+assessment+analysis+shows/9375990/story.html,    Kinder Morgan are told by their ‘world–leading risk analysts ‘  about the ‘low’ probability of a spill (once in 2300 years) .Another ‘federal government-commissioned study’ stated once every 15 years.. As Mark Twain once  said “Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable.”

 

Let’s restrict  bitumen to  common sense locations as  decided and agreed to by the BC public ?

There is a  Better Location-- Build ONE (joint venture)PIPELINE ,to the BC coast.,terminating  just north of Prince Rupert,(NOT Kitimat ; NOT Burrard Inlet), which would provide  open ocean access to  world markets..

BENEFITS;      ----reduced risk in the north;Douglas Channel,Hecate Strait fisheries, and myriad of  connecting channels/inlets  forming much of the Great Bear Rainforest habitat,; and       ---reduced risk in the south ;Burrard Inlet ,Strait of Georgia(Salish Sea),southern Gulf Islands( Boundary Pass, Haro Strait,etc.) .     ----likely other benefits