Pipeline proponent argues B.C. legislation only applies to Trans Mountain project

Environmental legislation proposed by British Columbia is targeting the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and would significantly impact it, says the proponent of the project.

Maureen Killoran, a lawyer for Trans Mountain ULC, is asking the B.C. Court of Appeal to reject proposed amendments to the province’s Environmental Management Act that would create a permitting system for heavy oil transporters.

B.C. has argued the proposed rules are not intended to block the project but instead aim to protect its environment from spills and would require companies to pay for any damages, but Killoran disagreed.

“Trans Mountain will be directly and significantly impacted by the proposed legislation. Indeed, we say it is the target of the proposed legislation,” she told a panel of five judges on Thursday.

Tweet This Click to share quote on Twitter: "Trans Mountain will be directly and significantly impacted by the proposed legislation. Indeed, we say it is the target of the proposed legislation," she told a panel of five judges on Thursday.

Killoran said Trans Mountain, which has operated since 1953, is the only pipeline that transports liquid petroleum to the West Coast and the only pipeline to which the legislation would apply.

The proposed law presented more risk than private-sector proponent Kinder Morgan was willing to accept, prompting it to sell the pipeline and related assets to Canada for $4.5 billion last year, she said.

READ MORE: Federal government says B.C. trying to impede Trans Mountain with pipeline legislation

Since the expansion project was first officially proposed in 2013, Killoran said it has been through the largest review in the National Energy Board’s history, a number of court challenges and faced protesters and blockades in B.C.

The energy board ruled the expansion, which would triple the capacity of the pipeline, is in the Canadian public interest because the country cannot get all its available energy resources to Pacific markets including Asia, she said.

Get weekly money news

Get expert insights, Q&A on markets, housing, inflation, and personal finance information delivered to you every Saturday.

Sign up for weekly money newsletter Sign Up

By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.

First Nations, the cities of Vancouver and Burnaby, and environmental group Ecojustice have delivered arguments in support of B.C.’s proposed rules, in part because of concerns about the local impacts of possible spills.

READ MORE: At Trans Mountain court hearing, B.C. says it won’t reject pipelines without cause

Killoran said the energy board recognized that there is a wealth of evidence about the fate and behaviour of diluted bitumen and there is further research underway.

The board also disputed the views of project opponents including Vancouver that the company hadn’t provided enough information about disaster-response plans, and recognized that spill prevention was a part of pipeline design, she said.

The Appeal Court is hearing a reference case filed by B.C. that asks whether the province has the authority to enact the amendments. Canada opposes the amendments because it says Ottawa — not provinces — has exclusive jurisdiction over inter-provincial infrastructure.

The Trans Mountain pipeline runs from the Edmonton area to Metro Vancouver and the expansion would increase the number of tankers in Burrard Inlet seven-fold.

Watch below: Some videos from Global News’ ongoing coverage of the Trans Mountain pipeline.

2:03 B.C. bid to control Trans Mountain shipments

• B.C. bid to control Trans Mountain shipments
• Alberta government ‘remains firm in their belief’ Trans Mountain will get built
• Trans Mountain pipeline battle back in court
• Murray says she represented her community over Trans Mountain, but PM and cabinet make final decision
• No community will have veto over Trans Mountain expansion: Sohi
• Future of the Trans Mountain Pipeline
• Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion given green light again
• B.C. government reacts to Trans Mountain pipeline approval
• Focus BC: Friday, February 22, 2019
• Alberta politicians react to NEB Trans Mountain recommendation
• What are the next steps in getting Trans Mountain built?
• NEB recommends approval of Trans Mountain pipeline
• Rachel Notley expects work to begin on Trans Mountain pipeline expansion before federal election
• Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says she will ‘hold the federal government’s feet to the fire’ on Trans Mountain expansion
• Alberta Premier Rachel Notley says Trans Mountain pipeline expansion will help bring Canadian oil to market
• ‘Today’s announcement doesn’t change anything’: Jason Kenney on NEB Trans Mountain ruling
• Chief Judy Wilson on the oppositon to the Trans Mountain Pipeline
• Chief Judy Wilson express concerns on how the NEB didn’t listen to First Nations concern
• West Coast Environmental Law opposes NEB’s latest decision
• NEB reconsideration report says expansion should be approved

Previous Video

Next Video

B.C.’s proposed permitting system would require companies that want to increase the amount of heavy oil they’re transporting through the province to apply for a permit. Companies would have to meet conditions, including but not limited to providing disaster response plans and agreeing to pay for accident cleanup.

Joseph Arvay, a lawyer representing B.C., has argued that if a project proponent finds a condition too onerous, it can appeal to the independent Environmental Appeal Board or, in the case of Trans Mountain, to the National Energy Board.

But Killoran said Thursday that the energy board only created the special process for Trans Mountain after the company asked for it, and the province opposed it.

“While Mr. Arvay talks about it being an efficient route to solve problems, it was not ideal and it was not a route that Trans Mountain felt it should have to take. It was one that it felt it ought to take given the amount of opposition it had received.”