Canadian Enviro Still Demands Review
The British Columbian environmentalist seeking a ruling from Canada’s National Energy Board (NEB) over whether the pipeline that will feed LNG Canada’s $40bn Kitimat project should be federally regulated says that nothing in TransCanada’s argument against such a ruling is valid. Therefore the board should proceed with a full jurisdictional review, he argues.
In comments filed September 5 replying to TransCanada’s initial August 24 comments, Michael Sawyer “respectfully submits that the board should reject [TransCanada’s] submissions, find that there is a prima facie case that the Coastal GasLink (CGL) project falls within federal jurisdiction, and establish a full jurisdictional process to determine the question.”
Sawyer’s letter points out that TransCanada’s case seems to rest on three major points: that he and his application are “bad in various ways”; that the NEB should abandon its prima facie test in favour of some alternative designed to preclude his application; or that a prima facie case of federal jurisdiction has not been established.
“None of these arguments withstands scrutiny,” Sawyer claims in his letter, filed on his behalf by Vancouver lawyer William Andrews.
Sawyer suggests that the bulk of TransCanada’s argument against his application “consists of repetitious attacks” on his integrity and the application. Those allegations, he says, are not warranted and do not justify the board failing to consider the jurisdictional question.
“Mr Sawyer has no ulterior motive for the application,” Andrews writes in his letter. “He believes it is constitutionally wrong that the project is not being regulated by the NEB. His opinions about other issues are not relevant to the application. It would be an error of law for the board to disqualify Mr Sawyer from bringing this constitutional application regarding the CGL project due to Mr Sawyer’s opinions regarding irrelevant topics.”
Sawyer says TransCanada’s claims that BC communities and First Nations would be placed at risk by a jurisdictional review is “grossly exaggerated speculation and irrelevant.” And he rejects TransCanada’s assertion that because he did not participate in the provincial review of CGL he is somehow not entitled to challenge provincial jurisdiction.
“There is no legally correct or incorrect time to ask the board to determine its jurisdiction over a pipeline project,” Andrews writes. “In any event, now is as good a time as any for the board to determine if the project is in federal jurisdiction. There is some prospect of the project moving forward, but no final investment decision has been announced.”
The joint venture participants in the LNG Canada project, led by Anglo-Dutch major Shell, are widely expected to take a final investment decision on the project before the end of November, when the BC government’s offer of new fiscal terms expires.
The full text of Sawyer’s reply comments is available here.