Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s November proposal to ban oil tanker traffic from B.C.’s north coast received kind reception on the west coast of Canada where the Heiltusk First Nation was still busy responding to a devastating diesel spill from the Nathan E. Stewart, a sunken fuel barge tug that was leaking fuel into shellfish harvest grounds near Bella Bella.

The tanker ban, however, won’t protect the coast from incidents like the Nathan E. Stewart from happening again, nor from the threat of future refined oil tankers passing through the same waters, according to a new analysis by West Coast Environmental Law.

Reviewing the tanker ban proposal, which has yet to be passed as legislation, West Coast identified numerous loopholes and exclusions that allow for the continued transport of oil on B.C.’s north coast via foreign fuel barges and even, potentially, in supertankers full of refined oil products like jet fuel.

Tanker Ban Leaves Door Wide Open for Refined Fuel Supertankers

“I would describe the bill as sort of a mixed bag,” Gavin smith, staff counsel with West Coast, told DeSmog Canada.

“It’s very positive in that it is strong enough to prevent projects like Northern Gateway from proceeding in the region, but it is not strong enough to prevent oil refinery and refined oil supertanker projects in the region.”

As it stands the proposed legislation does nothing to prevent the movement of supertankers laden with refined oil from traversing north coast waters.

And that’s of significant concern, Smith said, “because those projects are currently proposed and those applications have been submitted to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.”

There are currently two major oil refinery projects proposed for the Kitimat area.

Kitimat Clean, which is undergoing review with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (although that review was temporarily suspended in October), would refine 400,000 barrels of oil per day during it’s projected 50-year lifespan.

Kitimat Clean proposes to refine oil into products such as gasoline, jet fuel and propane for export in Very Large Crude Carriers or supertankers.

The Pacific Future Energy Refinery Project, proposed for 32 kilometres north of Kitimat, would refine 200,000 barrels of oil per day for a project lifespan of 60 years. The Pacific Future refinery is in the final stages of review with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

Tanker Ban Maintains Current Situation, Introduces New Risks

The tanker ban does restrict vessels larger than 12,500 tonnes from carrying crude oil products but not refined oil products.

Smith said Transport Canada was previously considering a 2,000 tonne threshold, but dramatically increased that figure to 12,500 tonnes.

“The 2,000 tonne was raised up in a Transport Canada discussion paper that was made public earlier this summer,” Smith said.

That 2,000 threshold really walks the line because it allows community shipments of fuel products to continue while not being so high as to allow for large-scale shipments of bulk oil products, he said.

West Coast has asked the federal government to provide an explanation for the increase in threshold.

“We recommend they provide a rational because from our perspective it came from nowhere.”

The 12,500 threshold is slightly higher than the highest recorded shipments in the regions, Smith said, “so they’ve tried to cap it at the highest level of shipments that have been occurring there.”

Jess Housty, council member of the Heiltsuk First Nation and responder to the sunken Nathan E. Stewart, said the current tanker ban is “simply inadequate” because it changes nothing.

“I think it’s important to note the tanker ban wouldn’t have prevented the Queen of the North from sinking and that’s still polluting waters. It wouldn’t have prevented the Nathan E. Stewart. It won’t prevent this kind of incident from happening again.”

The tanker ban as proposed is frustrating, Housty said, because Transport Minister Marc Garneau traveled to Heiltsuk territory to witness the diesel spill in November.

Housty said the tanker ban actually doesn’t affect any current vessel traffic on the North Coast, meaning all ongoing fuel barge traffic remains entirely untouched.

“I would challenge the federal government to give me a list of vessels that are actually impacted by this legislation. I can’t think of one.”

Housty concedes the tanker ban is significant in light of the rejected Northern Gateway pipeline proposal.

But she added, “I think it’s important to note for the Heiltsuk, we weren’t just fighting Northern Gateway because it was crude oil. There were a million reasons why we had issues with that project.”

And many of those issues will still be relevant if those supertankers were carrying refined projects, Housty said.

“This tanker ban, not only does it not help us minimize the current risks we face, it gives permission for massive new risks that we don’t fully understand and I don’t think the general public would be comfortable with.”

Although a Voluntary Tanker Exclusion Zone already exists off the coast of British Columbia to prevent international transport of oil from entering internal coastal waters, U.S. shipments of oil have maintained a ‘right of innocent passage.’

That right has been the subject of criticism, which was renewed after the grounding of the Nathan E. Stewart, an American fuel barge tug (which was pushing an empty fuel barge at the time of grounding). 

To avoid provoking international tensions, the tanker ban does not alter this right and limits its cover to only import and export marine facilities.

North Coast Oil Tanker Ban Won’t Actually Ban Tankers Full of Oil Products on B.C.’s North Coast https://t.co/UDhLH6cZ1Y @dogwoodbc #bcpoli pic.twitter.com/wSg3h4sJM9

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) February 7, 2017

Tanker Ban to Be Locked in But Details Subject to Change

Smith said the federal government did not include a sunset clause in the tanker ban, which means the legislation is not likely to be undone going forward unless by act of Parliament.

However, the types of oil covered in the ban are subject to a definition that has yet to be determined and could change over time.

“The federal government has to answer this question of what do you want covered or encompassed in the oil tanker ban,” Smith said. “In the legislation itself it will say any crude oil cannot be carried in an oil tanker and crude oil will have a definition that will include things that you would expect like bitumen and so on.”

A ‘schedule’ appending the legislation will list other types of products, known as persistent oil products, will also be included in the ban. The types of oil products listed on that schedule can be changed however.

“That approach give the federal government some flexibility to decide what it does and does not want to include in the moratorium,” Smith said.

The federal government has not disclosed what types of fuels will listed on the schedule but did note that products such as jet fuel, propane and LNG will be permanently excluded from the ban.

Tanker Ban Could Still Be Strengthened

The tanker ban feels like another one of Justin Trudeau’s broken promises, Housty said.

“ I think this is a case were they have ticked a box and completely ignored the sprit of what needs to be done,” Housty said.

“I hoped there could have been more trust on this file.”

Smith said the federal government has plans to pass the tanker ban bill by March.

“In terms of what types of improvements, we feel the 2,000 threshold would ensure a good balance between community supply and preventing large-scale bulk shipments,” he said.

“We also think the types of oil kinds should be refined and crude oils writ large. It shouldn’t be quite as narrow as the federal government set out. And we propose the ban cover the entire Hecate Strait, Dixon Exit and Queen Charlotte Sound.”

Smith said ultimately the North Coast Tanker Ban is meant to protect the North Coast from oil tanker spills.

“These are the changes we feel would make the act the strongest legislation possible.”

Image: Sunken Nathan E. Stewart tug near Bella Bella, B.C. Photo: April Bencze/Heiltsuk Tribal Council

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

I’m irritated today. Maybe it’s a case of the Mondays. Maybe it’s because B.C.’s pipeline incident webpage has been down for over a month. Or maybe it’s because the amount of oil spilled from a pipeline into an Alberta wetland, first reported on October 6, remains undetermined.

But I think the real reason is that a media request I placed with the B.C. government on Thursday last week — to speak with a scientist about the barge that ran aground on the central coast last week and its tug that’s leaking diesel into Heiltsuk territory— has yet to be fulfilled.

Not that I’ve been ignored. No, on the contrary, I’ve received helpful messages along the lines of ‘don’t lose hope, Carol! We’re going to connect you with a real, live scientist soon. Very soon!’

Yeah, um, not holding my breath.

Maybe I’ve become a little too accustomed to the improved access journalists now have to federal scientists. But in B.C. it remains a different story.

Although I knew the name and e-mail address of the scientist I needed to speak to about the diesel spill and was able to contact him directly on the day of the incident, he said my interview request had to be routed through communications staff.

And so it was.

What will likely happen now, in an all-too-familiar fashion, is the interview will be delayed until after the media wave — which has raised questions about the hazards of oil transport on the coast and government’s inadequate spill response measures — has all but passed.

That's a shame, because local community members and the public would benefit from knowing what a taxpayer-funded Ministry of Environment expert could tell us about the nature of the spill and efforts to clean it up.

In the meantime, the Heiltsuk First Nation, which has already borne the burden of being first responders to the spill, is also playing the role of chief information outpost, fielding calls from journalists like me amid generating press releases, taking media calls and keeping their community informed.

Huge concern for our animal relatives as this unfolds. Orcas spotted near contamination site this morning. #NathanEStewart

— Jess Housty (@heiltsukvoice) October 17, 2016

Jess Housty, a Heiltsuk elected tribal councillor, has been tirelessly informing journalists, the public and her community through Twitter and Facebook.

Along with her brother, William Housty, who is leading containment and clean up efforts, chief tribal councillor Marilyn Slett and other members of the community, Housty has been saddled with the important work of describing what is happening in the area — like where the sunken tug and lingering diesel fuel are, what is being done to contain the damage and what is at stake for local wildlife and the community.

The Heiltsuk reported the spill occurred in an area critical for 25 marine species. Indeed, the spill has directly impacted the Heiltsuk’s clams beds that were just about to open for fall harvest.

#Heiltsuk lead #NathanEStewart #fuelspill cleanup & public communications where govt’s fail https://t.co/4TIiaEux9v @heiltsukvoice #bcpoli

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) October 18, 2016

The Heiltsuk aren’t strangers to natural resource tragedy. The community was at the centre of a major battle with the federal government over its right to fish for herring, a tradition it had relied on since time immemorial.

By the time the nation’s case had made it through the courts, the commercial fishing industry, with the sanction of the federal government and their exorbitantly expensive licences, had all but decimated the herring stocks.

That fishery only partially reopened earlier this year.

Now, with the ongoing spill containment and clean up in Heiltsuk territory, the community is once again bearing a disproportionate burden, stepping in where the federal and provincial governments have failed.

Premier Christy Clark used the diesel spill as an opportunity to blame the federal government for not protecting coastal waters.

But Clark’s own government put off the release of a provincial marine oil spill plan until after the 2017 election.

Go figure.

Image: The tug of the Nathan E. Stewart barge partially submerged and leaking diesel fuel in Heiltsuk water. Photo: West Coast Marine Response Corporation handout

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

The grounding of a fuel barge near Bella Bella is raising fresh concerns about B.C.’s ability to respond to marine oil spills as a tug releases diesel fuel into the traditional waters of the Heiltsuk First Nation — and oil spill response crews have still not arrived on scene more than 15 hours after the accident.

The Nathan E. Stewart, a 10,000-ton tanker barge owned by Texas-based Kirby Corporation, ran aground around 1 a.m. Thursday in Seaforth Channel near Gale Pass on Athlone Island.

Although the barge itself was empty, three fuel tanks for the 100-foot tug powering the vessel were damaged and hold an estimated 60,000 gallons of diesel fuel, according to a statement from the Heiltsuk First Nation.

“A spill in this area is problematic because it’s an area where our clam harvesters do a lot of commercial digging,” Jess Housty, councillor for the Heiltsuk First Nation, told DeSmog Canada.

Diesel Spill ‘Not Even Close to Being Contained’

Five Heiltsuk vessels responded to the grounded tug in the early hours of Thursday morning and three Coast Guard vessels are also at the spill site working to contain the release.

Emergency responders from the Western Canadian Marine Corporation, a private oil spill response company, are en route to the spill location from Prince Rupert. The response crews include a mobile skimming vessel, two boom skiffs and a response barge which spokesperson Michael Lowry, told DeSmog Canada will arrive around 6pm this evening.

“We have equipment caches all along the coast and we train local contractors along the coast,” Lowry said, adding some emergency responders were on scene before 11am this morning.

Housty told DeSmog Canada she worries the primary oil spill response vessels, which are traveling from more than 300 kilometres away, won’t arrive soon enough to protect marine life from uncontained diesel fuel.

Housty said her community set up a containment boom from the community dock to try to limit the spread of fuel to sensitive clam beds.

She added the Nathan E. Stewart tug had a spill kit on board but that the containment boom it carried was barely large enough to encircle the tug. Coast Guard vessels had ten sections of boom measuring 50 feet each.

That is far from enough to manage the spill, Housty said. “It’s not even close to being contained.”

Housty said U.S.-based barges like the Nathan E. Stewart are exempt from some regulatory standards if they carry less than 10,000 tons of fuel, including a requirement to have a pilot on board while traversing Canadian waters.

“It doesn’t sound like this vessel was regulated strongly enough,” Housty said.

Regulation for marine oil spill response rests with the federal government, Karen Wristen, executive director of Living Oceans Society, told DeSmog Canada. But much of that responsibility has been shirked off to industry itself, she said.

“The owner of the vessel is responsible to have a spill response service in place,” Wristen said. “But that’s a real problem on most of the coast because the current caches of marine response equipment are either in Prince Rupert or Vancouver and there’s a heck of a lot of coast in between.”

Wristen said poor response time in instances like this allows for oil to dissipate in marine environments.

“This is diesel, it’s a very light fuel. Oil spreads very quickly on the surface of water and unless a ship itself is carrying enough equipment to boom the area — which is rare — it’s very unlikely you can protect shoreline.”

Lack of Emergency Response Strain on Community

According to Heiltsuk Integrated Resource Management Department director Kelly Brown diesel fuel from the spill has already made its way to land.

“It’s really bad out here. A lot of fuel is on the beach already, and fuel is in the water,” she said.

“The initial spill response has been totally inadequate. The first responding vessels were not equipped to deal with a spill, and had to return to town to gather more gear. The Heiltsuk are providing our own equipment because what responders have been able to provide so far is insufficient.”

Wristen said there is an urgent need for industry to coordinate oil spill response with communities along the west coast.

“This highlights the need to do spill response planning that involves communities that are sufficiently trained.”

Wristen said there is a big role for government to play in integrating industry and community spill response capabilities.

“We don’t have any of that kind of planning in B.C.” she said, adding, “It’s very different in the States, though.”

Wristen said the Exxon Valdez disaster dramatically changed the way industry and communities in the U.S. cooperate in the planning and supervision of oil operations.

“People realized they needed to be involved in the planning,” Wristen said. “It took many years but they have an active advisory council that involves community and industry stakeholders to talk through these issues to ensure industry is properly regulated and supervised so those regulations are followed.”

Fuel Spill in Heiltsuk Marine Breadbasket

Heiltsuk Chief Councillor Marilyn Slett told DeSmog Canada diesel fuel is notoriously difficult to clean up.

“Looking at this, we know from our neighbours to the north, the Gitga’at are still affected 10 years later from the sinking of the Queen of the North,” Slett said.

“This spill is in a breadbasket for our community and going forward this is going to have a long term impact on our community sustenance.”

The fuel spill has contaminated water that is home to 25 important species the Heiltsuk harvest, according to a Heiltsuk Traditional Use Study that is currently being conducted by the nation.

Manila clam beds in the area provide the Heiltsuk with an estimated $150,000 annual income.

Housty told DeSmog Canada the spill is precisely what her community has been fighting for years to prevent but without success.

“It’s infuriating that you have levels of government who are making decisions from Victoria or Ottawa who are treating this like an academic or political exercise when there are communities who have so much more at stake than anyone realizes,” Housty said.

“This is a place where we’re three weeks from the opening of a commercial clam fishery where our community members are expecting to participate in commercial clam harvest to get their families through Christmas.”

“None of these realities are understood by these decision makers in government or industry offices.”

Diesel Spill Near Bella Bella Exposes BC’s Deficient Spill Response Regime https://t.co/hlcE2Z1s6l @JustinTrudeau @christyclarkbc #bcpoli

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) October 14, 2016

Chief Councillor: ‘Complete Nightmare for Our Community’

Slett said the emergency responders will now be focused on a salvage operation “because the tug has completely sunk.”

“This is a complete nightmare for our community,” Slett told DeSmog Canada. “We’re working to mitigate what we can but the damage has been done.”

Slett said this kind of incident is precisely what her community raise concerns about at the joint review panel hearings for the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline.

Those hearings brought the issue of increased oil tanker traffic off the rugged coast of B.C. to the public’s attention. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau campaigned on a promise to ban oil tanker traffic on B.C.’s north coast — something he has been dragging his feet on doing.

Housty said this fuel spill has reignited calls for a legislated tanker ban on the coast, but said that won’t be enough to prevent accidents like the one unfolding in Heiltsuk waters.

“A lot of the feedback that we’re getting on social media is this is why we need a tanker ban on the coast but that wouldn’t even prevent this kind of thing from happening.”

“This tanker ban is being legislated to protect the coast but there are people actively lobbying to limit what that ban includes,” Housty said.

Housty said that ban, as it’s currently being discussed, won’t cover fuel barges like the Nathan E. Stewart, which ferries petroleum products between B.C. and Alaska.

Slett said more has to be done to protect the communities impacted by the movement of petroleum products off the B.C. coast.

“We’ve been talking a lot about this oil tanker moratorium and I know there’s been a lot of discussion on what it will cover but this incident proves that anything we do here has to protect the integrity of the ecosystems, of the marine life, of the coast,” Slett said.

“It must protect the lives of the people who live here and derive their sustenance from the natural environment.”

Image credit: West Coast Marine Response Corporation

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.