| |
|
|
|
Frequently Asked Questions |
|
|
|
Much of the information below is
specific to the pipelines regulated by National Energy Board
(NEB). Similar information, however, with respect to provincially
regulated pipelines can be obtained directly from the
provincial regulators. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is regulatory approval
needed to construct and operate a pipeline? |
|
|
|
Yes. All pipeline companies that intend to
construct and operate inter-provincial pipelines require approval
from the National Energy Board (NEB) in Calgary. As well, most provinces have
their own energy boards such as the Alberta Energy Board (AEB)
and Ontario Energy Board (OEB), which regulate pipelines that are
located wholly within provincial boundaries.
Upon receipt of an application from a pipeline
company for approval to construct a new inter-provincial pipeline,
the NEB is required to hold a
public hearing (the "Certificate Hearing") to determine whether
the proposed project is in the public convenience and necessity.
The NEB will consider a variety of issues at the hearing,
including the economic feasibility of the project, the existence
of markets for the oil or gas, pipeline design, construction
procedures, public safety and potential adverse environmental
impacts, but not compensation. While any interested landowner can
apply for intervenor status to participate in the Certificate
Hearing, there is no provision in the legislation for
reimbursement of costs incurred by the landowner to participate in
the proceedings. Therefore, it is extremely difficult as a single
landowner to bring an intervention; however, some landowners have
been able to successfully participate at the Certificate Hearing
as part of a larger group of affected landowners (see
Landowner
Organizations).
If a pipeline company has been granted a
Certificate of Convenience and Public Necessity authorizing
construction of a new pipeline and you are not happy with the
proposed pipeline route, you have a right under section 35 of the
NEB Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-7 to request
a Detailed Route Hearing. The purpose of the Detailed Route
Hearing is to determine, on a site-specific basis, the best
possible route of the pipeline and the most appropriate methods of
timing and construction of the pipeline. The NEB may, after a
public hearing, alter the proposed route and/or impose conditions
on the timing and method of construction to minimize any potential
adverse environmental impacts. While landowners are entitled to be
reimbursed by the pipeline company for their reasonable costs of
participating in the Detailed Route Hearing, there have been very
few Detailed Route Hearings held under the Act. |
|
|
|
What is a right-of-way or
easement agreement? |
|
|
|
A right-of-way or easement agreement is a
legally-binding agreement between a landowner and pipeline company
which gives the company the right to use a defined area of the
landowner’s property (the "easement") for the purpose of
constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing and, in some
cases, relocating and moving a pipeline or pipelines. The
right-of-way or easement agreement is the main document governing
the rights and responsibilities of the landowner and the pipeline
company, and usually sets out the landowner’s right to damages,
the pipeline company’s right of access, obligation to restore the
land after construction, and responsibility for tile drains. Any
easement agreements entered into after March 1, 1983 with respect
to federally regulated pipelines must include, at a minimum,
provision for:
|
|
● |
the option to have the compensation for the
acquisition of the lands paid in one lump sum or by annual or
periodic payments over time; |
|
● |
review every five years of the amount of any
compensation payable in respect of which annual or other
periodic payments have been selected; |
|
● |
compensation for all damages suffered as a result
of the operations of the company; |
|
● |
indemnification from all liabilities, damages,
claims, suits and actions arising out of the operations of the
company other than liabilities, damages, claims, suits and
actions resulting from the gross negligence or willful
misconduct of the landowner; and, |
|
● |
restricting the use of the lands to the line of
pipe or other facility for which the lands are, by the
agreement, specified to be required. |
|
|
|
|
Does the pipeline company
have the right to access my property without
my consent? |
|
|
|
If you have already granted an right-of-way or
easement to the pipeline company, they may have the right to enter
onto your property without your consent. The rights and
responsibilities of the parties are set out in the easement
agreement which can be obtained from your local registry office or
the pipeline company, if you do not have a copy. The first
paragraph, known as the "granting clause", often provides a right
of ingress and egress on the easement lands at any time. The
easement lands are defined in the agreement and usually comprise a
strip of land 18-feet to 40-feet in width. This means that the
company can enter upon those lands at any time without your prior
consent. However, most easement agreements require the pipeline
company to obtain your consent prior to entering upon the
remainder of your off-easement property except in the case of
emergency.
If there is no easement agreement, a federally
regulated pipeline company generally does not have any right to
enter upon your property without your consent unless it has
commenced an application with the NEB for leave
to construct a new pipeline. If the company is seeking approval to
construct a new pipeline, the company may have statutory authority
under the NEB Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-7
to enter your property without permission, if your property lies
within the intended pipeline route. However, the company is only
permitted to enter upon your lands for the purpose of surveying,
examining or fixing the proposed site of the pipeline. Some
landowners have taken the position that even this limited
right-of-entry is not available to the pipeline company until
after the Board has determined the pipeline is the public
convenience and necessity. |
|
|
|
What if I
refuse to grant the pipeline company access to my property? |
|
|
|
Unless the pipeline company has a contractual right
under its easement agreement or a statutory right, as in the case
of an application for regulatory approval to construct a new
pipeline described above, you are under no obligation to permit
entry to your property. If you do not wish to give the pipeline
company permission to enter upon your property, the company will
have to bring an application to the NEB for a
Right-of-Entry authorizing them to enter. You will receive notice
if the company commences an application for a Right-of-Entry and
be given an opportunity to respond. The NEB will
determine whether or not to authorize entry to your property and
the conditions, if any, under which the company can enter. While
landowners can object to the issuance of a Right-of-Entry,
pipeline companies have been successful in obtaining
Right-of-Entry orders with essentially identical terms as the
companies’ standard form right-of-way or easement agreement.
If the pipeline company proceeds to enter your
property without your consent, in the absence of any contractual
or statutory right, the company may be guilty of trespass. You are
within your rights to ask the company’s representatives to leave
or request police assistance to have them removed from your
property. |
|
|
|
Am I entitled to
compensation for damages caused by the pipeline company? |
|
|
|
All federal pipeline
landowners have a statutory right under the NEB
Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-7 to be compensated in full for all damages
sustained by them from the exercise of the pipeline company’s
powers under the Act.
In addition, all right-of-way or easement
agreements after March 1, 1983 with respect to federally regulated
pipelines (and some older agreements) also give the landowner a
contractual right to compensation for all damages caused as a
result of the pipeline company’s operations.
The
types of compensation that pipeline landowners can expect to
receive for construction of a new pipeline include:
|
|
● |
crop
loss: for present and future reductions in agricultural
productivity; |
|
● |
disturbance damages: for lost time, inconvenience,
interference with agricultural operations and aggravation
dealing with the pipeline company; |
|
● |
land
use: where the company does not already have an existing
easement agreement and/or requires the use of temporary lands
outside of the easement; |
|
● |
goring; |
|
● |
stone picking, paraploughing, etc. |
|
|
If you cannot agree on the amount of compensation,
you have a right under section 90 of the NEB Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-7 to have the matter determined by
arbitration. This is one of the few processes under the Act in
which landowners may recover his or her costs. The Act states
that, in the event the landowner is successful in recovering 85%
of the pipeline company’s offer, the company shall pay all
reasonable legal, appraisal and other costs incurred by the
landowner in connection with the arbitration. Even though the Act
provides for a cost award, this process can be expensive and time-
consuming for a landowner to pursue individually. Consequently, if
you are not happy with the compensation that the pipeline company
is offering, you should consider organizing your neighbours to
form an association (see below) to undertake arbitration
proceedings on behalf of all landowners. |
|
|
|
What
can I do if I'm not happy with the pipeline company's compensation
offer? |
|
|
|
If you are not happy with the pipeline company’s
compensation offer, you can: |
|
● |
try
negotiating a better offer; |
|
● |
apply
to have a negotiator appointed under the NEB
Act; and/or, |
|
● |
request the matter be determined by an
Arbitration Committee. |
|
|
Most landowners know that it is very difficult to
negotiate with the pipeline company’s land agent on their own, and
few landowners have had any success dealing with the company on an
individual one-to-one basis. Landowners that have achieved
satisfactory compensation packages have largely been successful by
forming an association (see Landowner Organizations). |
|
|
|
|