What took report so long?

Anyone expecting a call for an overhaul of pipeline safety in Alberta following a series of high-profile oil spills will have been underwhelmed by the muchanticipated review released by the province on Friday.

In fact, the report by Group 10 Engineering concluded “Alberta provides the most thorough regulatory regime” for oversight of the pipeline industry in Canada and recommended other jurisdictions harmonize their regulations to be consistent with Alberta.

However, due to the specific parameters of its mandate from the provincial government, the Calgarybased firm did not examine any of the spills that prompted the review, nor did it look at enforcement of rules by the regulator or hear from detractors of the industry.

The response was immediate and predictable.

“How many of the 54 groups that pushed for Alberta pipeline report were consulted before its release? Zero,” tweeted Mike Hudema of Greenpeace Canada.

Critics complained the now months-old report lacked substance.

Concluding there’s no single solution to resolve pipeline ruptures, Group 10 noted regulatory oversight is typically strengthened by evolution not revolution.

To a certain extent, the Alberta government and Energy Minister Ken Hughes laid the groundwork for much of the criticism of the 53-page technical report because they waited five months after receiving it from the regulator before releasing it.

The regulator — then the Energy Resources and Conservation Board but as of June the Alberta Energy Regulator — received the report from Group 10 on Dec. 7. It provided a 17-page assessment of the 17 recommendations and delivered them to Hughes in March.

In the interim, impatience with the delay and speculation about the report increased.

Ultimately, there was nothing that could not have been revealed months earlier.

The review found there were areas for improvement with consistency of regulations and standardized methodology to maintenance protocols as well as public communications about spills. It also reiterated concerns over the risk of pipelines sited under waterways.

One of the priorities is to define what constitutes a body of water — seriously.

They’ve been regulating oil and gas development in Alberta for 75 years, there is 400,000 kilometres of pipelines in the province that cross under tens of thousands of water courses that swell each spring with snow melt and rain and yet they can’t define one of the industry’s “high-risk, high-consequence” geographical challenges.

It would seem to confirm there are still a lot of unknowns about pipeline safety.

The AER paid $455,000 for the “independent” review (the emphasis added by the Alberta government in its news release) that Hughes said “assures Albertans we have a safe system.”

The public has 45 days to comment on the report, its recommendations or Hughes’ assessment.

Of course, what did people expect it would conclude?

When the pipeline industry can boast that 99.9998 per cent of the crude oil and natural gas — and Canada is among the world’s biggest producers of both commodities — that is transported across the country is delivered safely, there’s little need to overhaul the entire pipeline network.

But the 0.0002 per cent is a big deal.

And regardless of the advances in technology, safety performance and various “target zero” campaigns by companies and regulators, pipeline ruptures aren’t going away.

“Unfortunately, there will be spills,” said Theo Abels, a principal at Group 10 Engineering, adding he’s confident in the overall safety of Alberta’s pipeline system.

The impressive safety statistics aside, Albertans know very well there will be spills.

Opposition politicians, rural landowners and environmental groups pushed the province to investigate pipeline safety following several spills in 2012.

Hughes announced the thirdparty review last July after three high-profile oil spills, including the leak of up to 3,000 barrels of sour crude oil by Plains Midstream Canada last June into the Red Deer River system. This spring about 60,000 barrels of oily wastewater leaked in northern Alberta from a pipeline owned by Apache Canada.

“We really need an assessment of the real-world performance,” Jennifer Grant of The Pembina Institute told The Canadian Press on Friday.

Hughes cautioned it’s the role of the newly establish AER — he blamed the transition to the new regulator for the delays in releasing the report — to investigate pipeline spills. He said Group 10 was asked to assess the appropriateness of regulatory regime to oversee oil and gas development but not enforcement of penalties.

He made the point companies have enhanced safety procedures but put the onus on the industry to improve performance.

“There’s no question our reputation is on the line every single day,” Hughes said. “I’ve conveyed that to industry regularly, both the oil and gas industry and the pipeline industry … (if) companies do not comply, they will find Alberta to be a very difficult place in which to do business.”

The AER will update Hughes on its progress implementing the recommendations next March.

To help performance and improve communications, Hughes shouldn’t wait five months to make that status report public.