National Energy Board Coat of Arms
Symbol of the Government of Canada

National Energy Board

www.neb-one.gc.ca

Breadcrumb

Home > Public Participation and Land Matters > Land Matters Consultation Initiative (LMCI) > LMCI Consultation Schedule > LMCI Information Session and Site Visits - Members of the Public and Landowners - 1 April 2008

LMCI Information Session and Site Visits - Members of the Public and Landowners - 1 April 2008

1 April 2008
7:00 p.m. - 10:30 p.m.
Community: Montmartre, Saskatchewan
Number of Attendees: 63

Stream 1 - Company Interactions With Landowners

  • preference for senior company or landowner association representatives to negotiate with landowners
  • landowner associations don't want to lose right to provide advice to landowners
  • preference for land use agreements vs. easement agreements due to legal aspects related to both agreements
    • landowners loses more rights with easement agreements
    • companies can use easements for whatever purpose
    • easement agreements give companies more rights than necessary
  • lack of consistency of compensation between companies
  • concerned with companies coming onto land rights-of-way without notifying landowners and cleaning up
  • concerned with timeliness for resolutions of landowners' complaints by companies and the NEB - need to be as quick as possible
  • time of day or season when companies come to visit to deal with issues don't take into consideration that farming is very sensitive
  • need for fair compensation for damages
  • need for compensation for loss of 'quiet enjoyment of land'
  • require companies to start negotiating agreements before oral hearing
  • NEB should make information public about companies' ability to meet NEB goals
  • land agents make promises which companies have not given authority to make
  • need for annual payments to compensate for decreasing value of land
  • 30 m zone annual payments
  • need for liabilities
  • need for issues of drainage around pipelines to be addressed
    • filing
    • depth of cover (5 feet - standard in some U.S. states)
    • need for thicker gauge of pipe
  • landowners not knowing about construction practices that may impact their land
    • not knowing timing for construction
    • landowners should be compensated if construction is not completed within certain timelines
  • accountability of conduct of land agents - need for principles of conduct (when, how)
  • need for compensation for time landowners spend discussing agreements etc. with Land Agents, there are examples of some being compensated (not consistent, not common practice)
    • some landowners pressures to sign
    • Land Agents not operating in good faith (divide & conquer approach)

Stream 2 - Improving the Accessibility to NEB Processes

Transparency of Decision Making

  • interveners should receive copies of decisions
  • decisions in plain language
  • decisions to reflect arguments made (not necessarily names)
  • reasoned logic

Process Information

  • how do indirectly affected public learn about proposed detailed route?
  • Landowners/communities need to talk to someone about process
  • forms and templates could be provided for intervenors to more effectively participate
  • need information about steps in the process
  • getting accurate information about changes to project (route design) within process or between time of approval and trigger for detailed route hearing
  • how to appeal a Board decision? - under NEB Act and through federal courts

Capacity

  • funding to cover landowners' legal costs
    • to help make the case for landowners and the public
    • to ensure landowners and the public are knowledgeable about the process
    • so landowners and the public have a level playing field with companies
  • cost for opportunities lost and time taken up by process
  • funding for ombudsperson/public advocacy office so all public can access advice on process

Hearing Design

  • timing of the hearing needs to respect agricultural time windows
  • 30 days to voice objection to a detailed route is tight - 60 to 90 business days may be more appropriate
  • no detailed route hearing during busy times of the year - agricultural timelines, Christmas holidays, etc.

Complaint Process

  • landowners need to know who to call for immediate responses to issues, i.e. wet weather during shut-down construction, etc.

Stream 4 - Pipeline Abandonment - Physical Issues

  • pipeline must be removed
  • landowners should never be liable or have value of land affected
  • clarify who is responsible in the post-abandonment phase
  • need to be able to compel companies to abandon
  • liability for damage?
  • liability for future sale?
  • water in operations
  • will there be monitoring after abandonment?
  • what happens if a company changes hands?
  • what will happen in 5/10 years down the road?
  • how will a landowner know when a line is no more needed
  • collaboration between jurisdictions required so that standards are consistent
  • concerned about frost heave moving pipes
  • concerned about land shifts over time - who is responsible?
  • what impact will buried pipeline abandoned have on lender's perspective
  • concerned with changes in future laws - responsibility for landowners
  • orphan pipe fund needed to deal with bankruptcy
  • Environmental Farm Plans
    • no assurance that can be cleaned
    • could still be a liability even if cleaned

Other Issues

  • increasing proximity of lines to homesteads/farmsteads
  • loss of crop lands due to drainage issues
  • lack of compensation for pipes and ccess to pipes crossing yards
  • proposed location of new line crossing farm yard without compensation and increasing liability and safety issue
  • proposed location of new line impeding further growth and town development
  • spills and soil contamination

 

Footer

Date Modified:
2011-10-28