Marking 20 years
of bold journalism,
reader supported.
Federal Politics
BC Politics

BC’s LNG Industry Dealt Another Blow as Regulator Forced to Re-Review Gas Pipeline

Federal appeal court rules National Energy Board erred in earlier ruling.

Andrew Nikiforuk 21 Jul

Andrew Nikiforuk is an award-winning journalist who has been writing about the energy industry for two decades and is a contributing editor to The Tyee. Find his previous stories here.

British Columbia’s failing liquefied natural gas industry has just received another major setback.

A unanimous decision of the Federal Court of Appeal has ruled that the National Energy Board erred in law by designating the proposed Prince Rupert Gas Transmission pipeline as under provincial jurisdiction.

The pipeline would start near Hudson Hope, B.C. and transport fracked natural gas collected from across western Canada to the Pacific NorthWest LNG project terminal on Lelu Island in the province’s northwest.

The matter of the pipeline’s jurisdiction has now been sent back to the NEB for further deliberation.

Under Canadian constitution law there are very clear guidelines and legal tests about what constitutes a provincial or federal pipeline.

Whenever a pipeline crosses international or provincial boundaries, it is deemed a federal project.

Pipelines that are “functionally integrated” with other federally regulated pipelines or operated by companies that fall under federal regulations can also fall under federal purview.

In 2013 Progress Energy, a subsidiary of Malaysian oil giant Petronas, selected TransCanada, a Calgary firm that operates federally regulated gas systems in Alberta, to design and build the gas pipeline in northern B.C.

But the pipeline has not been built because Pacific NorthWest LNG, owned by Petronas, has not yet made a final investment decision due to volatile global energy markets, First Nation challenges and other factors.

After the NEB classified the pipeline as a provincial project, Mike Sawyer, a retired environmental consultant living in Smithers, B.C., asked that the NEB explain and revisit its decision.

Sawyers argued that the pipeline fell under federal jurisdiction because it was an export line, and because it was fully operated and owned by TransCanada, a firm that exports oil and gas and is regulated by the NEB.

When the board dismissed Sawyer’s application twice — and his arguments were based on a recent Supreme Court decision about pipeline jurisdiction — Sawyer took his case to the courts.

The federal court decision not only agreed with many of Sawyer’s arguments but also strongly criticized the NEB for making a series of legal mistakes.

It noted that the pipeline would serve the purpose of moving gas from western Canada and be connected to a federally regulated gas pipelines and to an LNG facility.

As a consequence, the NEB “failed to consider that an enterprise can form part of federal undertaking and still be wholly situated within a province.”

The decision adds that there was “considerable evidence before the Board, none of which was in dispute, that the purpose of the [gas pipeline] was to move gas from the [Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin] for export to international markets. The Board looked at where the pipeline was, and did not ask what it did.”

“The NEB made a jurisdictional error,” said Sawyer. “It was done during the Harper years in 2015.”

Sawyer suspects that a political decision was made to declare the pipeline provincial so it would fall under weaker provincial environmental assessments.

“The LNG industry is now on its economic knees. This court decision may or may not have much of a significant effect. But it does provide a beneficial legal benchmark for other groups fighting bad government decisions,” Sawyer said.

A spokesperson for the NEB, Sarah Kiley, said, “We are still reviewing the Court decision. Once we have examined the decision, we will consider our next steps.”  [Tyee]

  • Share:

Get The Tyee's Daily Catch, our free daily newsletter.

Tyee Commenting Guidelines

Comments that violate guidelines risk being deleted, and violations may result in a temporary or permanent user ban. Maintain the spirit of good conversation to stay in the discussion.
*Please note The Tyee is not a forum for spreading misinformation about COVID-19, denying its existence or minimizing its risk to public health.


  • Be thoughtful about how your words may affect the communities you are addressing. Language matters
  • Challenge arguments, not commenters
  • Flag trolls and guideline violations
  • Treat all with respect and curiosity, learn from differences of opinion
  • Verify facts, debunk rumours, point out logical fallacies
  • Add context and background
  • Note typos and reporting blind spots
  • Stay on topic

Do not:

  • Use sexist, classist, racist, homophobic or transphobic language
  • Ridicule, misgender, bully, threaten, name call, troll or wish harm on others
  • Personally attack authors or contributors
  • Spread misinformation or perpetuate conspiracies
  • Libel, defame or publish falsehoods
  • Attempt to guess other commenters’ real-life identities
  • Post links without providing context

Most Popular

Most Commented

Most Emailed


The Barometer

Are You Concerned about Your Municipality’s Water Security?

Take this week's poll