National Energy Board

www.neb-one.gc.ca

Common menu bar

• Français
• Home
• Contact Us
• Help
• Search
• canada.gc.ca

Breadcrumb

LMCI Meeting Summary - Transport Canada - 13 May 2008

13 May 2008
Vancouver, British Columbia

Agenda:

• Overview of LMCI
• Discussion
• Next Steps

Stream 1 - Company Interactions with Landowners

• NEB requires companies to consult with Aboriginal groups prior to submitting an application and to provide information on the consultation process, resolved and unresolved issues (see the NEB's Filing Manual).

Stream 2 - Improving Access of NEB Processes

• Transport Canada (TC) is responsible for administering s.108 (pipelines) and s.58.29 (electrical transmission lines) of National Energy Board Act. Section 108 is also a Law List trigger of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEA Act). Due to the nature of making a regulatory decision, there can be Crown obligations to consult with potentially affected Aboriginal people related to the regulatory decision under s.108 of the NEB Act.
• TC's job is to do an assessment of navigability issues related to s.108 of NEB Act. TC only uses s.108 when the crossing involves an NEB-regulated pipeline. If a federally regulated pipeline is not involved in the watercourse crossing, TC exercises its power to protect navigable waters through the Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA) (i.e., if a bridge is involved in crossing a navigable waterway instead of a pipeline).
• TC's workload has increased related to administering s.108 of the NEB Act due to its obligations to do an environmental assessment under the CEA Act and due to the obligation to consult with Aboriginal people on behalf of the Crown. TC noted it does not have the required expertise in-house to support the added workload. TC only has ~100 specialists for the entire country to assess navigability issues.
• TC noted one solution could be for the NEB to complete the environmental assessment under the CEA Act and to carry out the Crown's duties to consult with potentially affected Aboriginal people with respect to s.108 of the NEB Act. Minister of Transport would still be responsible for issuing the final decision under s.108.
• If the NEB was not able to take over the CEA Act environmental assessment and the Crown's duties to consult from TC, the NEB may need to coordinate the timelines of its decisions with TC, so that a situation does not arise where the NEB is approving a project and TC is rejecting parts of the project under its mandate.
• TC suggested that the NEB could play a coordinating/facilitating role with Responsible Authorities for Crown consultation (i.e., a parallel or separate process to the hearing). The NEB would then prepare a "Consultation Assessment Report", similar to the BC EAO process, which would inform NEB decision makers and federal regulators on Crown consultation issues before any decision is made to issue permits/approvals.
• With respect to the NEB's hearing schedule, TC finds it difficult if not impossible to meet the deadlines of the hearing process with its current resources.
• TC may not always need to participate in the NEB's regulatory process; however, for larger projects, TC has noted that it needs to monitor the NEB's process to ensure that conditions are not placed on the project that would contradict the terms and conditions of TC's decision under s.108 of the NEB Act.
• TC also noted that the proponent might not have the detailed information required for a s.108 approval within the NEB's regulatory and environmental assessment (EA) process - different levels of detail are required for different types of decisions.
• TC has developed some best practice documents for different types of pipeline watercourse crossings under the NWPA. Could TC and NEB require companies to adhere to these best practices as a way to streamline the review process under s.108 of the NEB Act? Links to best practices:
  • Erosion protection works
  • Winter crossings
  • Submarine cables
  • Pipelines
  • Aerial cables
• TC noted a model for emergency management on the coast called the National Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime. The fund and the response team are managed by the federal government through TC and Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Link to information about the National Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime.

Stream 4 - Pipeline Abandonment - Physical Issues

• The term "abandonment" could be contradictory to the terminology Transport Canada uses in its terms and conditions of approvals under s.108 of NEB Act. Companies cannot "abandon" pipelines (or other associated works, such as access bridges) in waterways - Transport Canada noted companies are responsible for pipelines & works left in place in perpetuity.
• Transport Canada will submit written comments on Stream 4 after reviewing the discussion paper, particularly related to the principles concerning retirement and reclamation of pipeline watercourse crossings. mework - the Canol pipeline from Norman Wells, NWT to Whitehorse, Yukon.

Primary navigation (left column)

Date Modified:

2011-10-28