ABSTRACT 7th International Symposium on Environmental Concerns in Rights-of-Way Management
TITLE:	Environmental Considerations and Federal Pipeline Regulatory Decisions in Canada
AUTHOR(S):	Richard D. Revel - revel@ucalgary.ca Environmental Science Program Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary Calgary, AB, Canada
Regulatory decision making concerning the approval, construction, operation and abandonment of pipelines in Canada must, by legislative mandate, give due consideration to matters related to the environment; specifically any matters which may be affected by such RoWs and activities conducted in those RoWs. Federally regulated pipelines in Canada fall under the jurisdiction of the National Energy Board of Canada and all decisions are made by The Board by a majority decision. The Board, may, and usually does, assign a subset of itself to hear and decide on any matter related to the Board’s business. Most Federal regulatory matters concerning pipelines with an environmental component must address at least two federal Acts, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) and the National Energy Board Act (NEBA), both of which have strong environmental mandates. A Board Member in the process of hearing and deciding must apply, broadly speaking, separate tests under each Act. Under the CEAA (s.37) the test may be summarised in the following question: ‘Taking into account any mitigation measures, is the project likely to cause significant environmental effects which cannot be justified under the circumstances?’ Under the NEBA (s.52) The Board, in issuing a certificate, must apply a test which may be summarised in the following question: ‘Is and will this pipeline be required by the present and future public convenience and necessity?’. No definition is offered concerning the phrases ‘significant environmental effects’ or ‘public convenience and necessity’ and, based upon evidence presented, each Member must hear and decide on these matters solely and alone although, in the interests of comity and collegiality, Board Members may share their views with each other. Scrupulous care must be taken during such sharing to ensure that no effort is made to persuade a colleague toward a particular decision. In considering environmental matters associated with ‘greenfield’ pipeline applications, many impacts and effects are easily mitigated through ‘best practice’ construction and operation measures however some questions concerning environmental impacts are much more difficult for a Member to decide upon as they may have inconclusive scientific evidence, may not lend themselves to scientific or rational analysis or may be driven more by human values, legal considerations or policy directives. This paper explores several environmental matters from a regulatory decision making and ecological perspective including: greenhouse gas emissions, rare and endangered species concerns, scope of enquiry, cumulative environmental effects, ecosystem change, habitat fragmentation and species diversity. Ref#: Abs-1-073