• Sign up for the Daily Digest E-mail
  • Facebook
  • X
  • LinkedIn

BOE Report

Sign up
  • Home
  • StackDX Intel
  • Headlines
    • Latest Headlines
    • Featured Companies
    • Columns
    • Discussions
  • Well Activity
    • Well Licences
    • Well Activity Map
  • Property Listings
  • Land Sales
  • M&A Activity
    • M&A Database
    • AER Transfers
  • Markets
  • Rig Counts/Data
    • CAOEC Rig Count
    • Baker Hughes Rig Count
    • USA Rig Count
    • Data
      • Canada Oil Market Data
      • Canada NG Market Data
      • USA Market Data
      • Data Downloads
  • Jobs

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

March 19, 201912:27 PM The Canadian Press0 Comments

Trans Mountains pipeline

VANCOUVER – A lawyer representing British Columbia says proposed changes to an environmental law won’t allow the province to refuse to provide a permit to a pipeline operator for no reason.

B.C.’s Court of Appeal is hearing a reference case that asks whether the province can create a permitting system for transporters of hazardous substances through its territory.

The governments of Canada, Alberta and Saskatchewan say Ottawa — not provinces — has jurisdiction over inter-provincial projects such as the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

Canada says in court documents that the proposed amendments to B.C.’s Environmental Management Act must be struck down because they give the province a “veto” over such projects.

Joseph Arvay, a lawyer for B.C., says the amendments only allow the province to refuse to issue a permit or revoke one in cases where the operator fails to follow conditions imposed upon it.

He adds that if the operator finds the conditions too onerous, it can appeal to the independent Environmental Appeal Board, or in the case of Trans Mountain, the National Energy Board.

The energy board has set up a process where Trans Mountain Corp. can argue that a condition is too burdensome and violates the special status of inter-provincial projects, he says.

“The NEB effectively gets the last word … but it’s going to be condition by condition, law by law,” Arvay told a panel of five judges on Tuesday.

Arvay says the law would be unconstitutional if it declared an absolute prohibition on pipelines in B.C., but the amendments only impose conditions on trans-boundary projects.

In order to obtain a permit, operators would have to provide disaster response plans and agree to compensate the province, municipalities and First Nations for any damages, among other conditions.

When Premier John Horgan announced the proposed changes last year, Alberta Premier Rachel Notley accused him of breaking the rules of Confederation and declared a short-lived ban on B.C. wines.

The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion would triple the capacity of the existing line from near Edmonton to Burnaby, B.C., and increase tanker traffic in Burrard Inlet seven-fold.

Trans Mountain Pipeline

Follow BOE Report
  • Facebook
  • X
  • LinkedIn

Sign up for the BOE Report Daily Digest E-mail

Successfully subscribed

Latest Headlines
  • New oil and gas jobs from BOE Report Jobs
  • Hemisphere Energy Announces Normal Course Issuer Bid Renewal
  • Trump says US to impose 50% tariff on copper imports, copper futures jump
  • Canada maps out widening strait to LNG riches
  • Discount on Western Canada Select narrows

Return to Home
Alberta GasMonthly Avg.
CAD/GJ
Market Data by TradingView

    Report Error







    Note: The page you are currently on will be sent with your report. If this report is about a different page, please specify.

    About
    • About BOEReport.com
    • In the News
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Editorial Policy
    Resources
    • Widgets
    • Notifications
    • Daily Digest E-mail
    Get In Touch
    • Advertise
    • Post a Job
    • Contact
    • Report Error
    BOE Network
    © 2025 Stack Technologies Ltd.