Edmonton Journal

First Nation bails on pipeline hearing

Process blasted by Athabasca Chipewyan chief

- SHEILA PRATT spratt@edmontonjo­urnal.com

In a dramatic turn, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation abruptly pulled out of the Grand Rapids pipeline hearing late Tuesday saying the process favours industry and does not address concerns of First Nations and the environmen­t.

“The Grand Rapids hearings demonstrat­ed how the Alberta government is willing to put the cart before the horse,” said Chief Allan Adam in an release early Tuesday evening.

“TransCanad­a’s applicatio­n included incomplete studies and reports, yet the Alberta Energy Regulator still granted a fast-track hearing where TransCanad­a submitted last minute evidence ...”

The company has not completed a caribou protection plan and impacts of the pipeline on hunting and fishing, said Adam.

“The AER puts us in an impossible position,” said Adam, who called Grand Rapids the “mother of all pipelines” designed to feed into the Keyston XL to the U.S or Energy East, also a TransCanad­a proposal.

Earlier in the day, the band was unhappy that TransCanad­a was allowed to enter as evidence its final environmen­t protection plan, a document the band did not see until Tuesday mid morning as it was about to begin its presentati­on to the AER hearing panel.

That caused a dust-up at the hearing with the First Nation asking for more time to review the proposed protection plan while the company argued any delay would be unacceptab­le.

The protection plan reveals the 500-km, $3 billion twin pipelines from Edmonton to just west of Fort McMurray will cross 26 rivers and streams in the northern leg and outlines measures to protect the water ways and fish habitat during constructi­on which is slated to begin this fall.

The AFCN is “frustrated at having this sprung on us,” said lawyer Lorraine Land, adding this puts the band “at a severe disadvanta­ge” at the hearing.

She called for an 18-month delay of the hearing to give adequate time to review the final document and assess its recommenda­tions to protect the pipeline corridor.

The new document is crucial, “especially given the new scope of the AER” for decision-making on enforcemen­t of environmen­tal laws, she said.

But TransCanad­a objected strongly to any delay in the hearings, noting that the company has gone beyond regulatory requiremen­ts by producing this environmen­t protection report. Under provincial rules, TransCanad­a is not required to do an environmen­tal protection plan for a provincial pipeline in the so-called “green zone” in the north, company lawyer Dufferin Harper stressed.

“To adjourn a hearing for a document we are not required to provide, we think that is unacceptab­le,” Harper told the hearing.

“It’s ludicrous to say we should delay for 18 months” given the AFCN has had a copy of the draft plan since last fall and there are not substantia­l difference­s.”

In its ruling, the AER hearing panel gave the AFCN until Wednesday morning to review the company’s plans.

The panel requested the company produce the environmen­tal protection plan for the 900,000 barrel a day project which involves one pipeline to ship bitumen and a smaller parallel pipe for diluent.

The AER does require an environmen­tal protection plan for pipelines in the socalled southern “white zone” of the province, and that has also been submitted by the company, said Darin Barter, AER spokesman.

At this time, companies seeking approvals could be required to produce a different study, called an environmen­tal impact assessment, outlining the environmen­tal footprint of the project for Alberta Environmen­t.

But Alberta Environmen­t told TransCanad­a such a study was not required in this case, TransCanad­a confirmed.

Earlier in the day, the Alberta government came u nder f i re for tel l i ng TransCanad­a it did not have to consult with the AFCN — even though it designated other bands further from the proposed pipeline as required consultati­on.

The province’s fledgling Aboriginal Consultati­on Office made the ruling that the AFCN, with reserve land 100 km from the northern hub, did not have to be consulted while Saddle Lake First nation, more than 150 east of the pipeline route, must be consulted.

But TransCanad­a proceeded with consultati­on with the AFCN anyway “on the basis of our good neighbour policy,” spokesman Jeff Paquin told the hearing.

“We are in for the long haul and we want good relations,” said Paquin, noting the company has plans for three more projects in the area.

The Aboriginal Consultati­on Office, which is not giving evidence at the hearing, gave no reasons for its decision not to designate the Athabasca Chipewyan band for consultati­on.

Despite the government decision, the hearing panel gave the band standing at the hearing. The regulator is not bound by the decisions of the Aboriginal Consultati­on Office.

 ?? LARRY WONG/EDMONTON JOURNAL ?? Lorraine Land, left, the lawyer for the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, and Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Chief Allan Adam discuss matters during a break at the hearings in Edmonton into TransCanad­a’s proposed Grand Rapids pipeline
LARRY WONG/EDMONTON JOURNAL Lorraine Land, left, the lawyer for the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, and Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Chief Allan Adam discuss matters during a break at the hearings in Edmonton into TransCanad­a’s proposed Grand Rapids pipeline

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada