A good review process ensures government agencies approve projects which are in the public's interest and reject those that are not. Recently, the Canadian review process for pipelines has undergone scrutiny with numerous studies pointing to major flaws. This report presents a case study evaluation of the regulatory review and approval process for the Trans Mountain Expansion Project. The Project review process led by the National Energy Board is evaluated relative to nine best practices based on a survey of intervenors in the hearings. The main conclusion is that the review process does not meet any of the best practices and is deficient. Even so, intervenors largely agreed on how it could be improved. The results are also compared to a similar study evaluating the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Joint Review Process, and the conclusions attained were similar. This report aims to contribute to improving the Canadian review process.
Copyright is held by the author.
This thesis may be printed or downloaded for non-commercial research and scholarly purposes.
Member of collection