Oil spill responders overstating containment capability: B.C. conservation group

A B.C. conservation groupis challenging statements made by thecompany responsible for containingoilspills on the South Coast, saying ithas overstated itsspill responsecapability.

"I would echo what the Ministry of Environment says,that weare not ready for a spill on this coast," said Lori Waterswith theRaincoastConservation Foundation, pointing to Western Canada Marine Response Corporation(WCMRC).

• NEB launches public review into pipeline emergency response plans
• Vancouver oil spill response 'embarrassing,' says international expert

As National Energy Board hearings continue on the proposed expansion toKinder Morgan'sTrans Mountain Pipeline,WCMRC says it could successfully containa 10,000 ton oil spill within 10 days,as required by the federal government.

"Today we have in place equipment that well exceeds that number," Michael Lowry, communications manager forWCMRC,told CBC's On the Island on Friday.

But theRaincoastConservation Foundation finds that claim misleading.

"Their existing equipment is designed for floating oil, and bitumenbehaves differently than typical crude,"said Waters in an interview with CBC's On the Island. In a statement, Raincoastciteda report that found bitumen to be heavier than other oils, and therefore more likely to sink in water.

"If WCMRC can't respond to a small spill of traditionaloil such as the Marathassa which took 12 hours to get booms around itthen I have really no confidence that they would be able to respond to a larger spill, particularly of bitumen," she said.

In an effortcriticized by industry observers,WCMRC took 12 hours to contain the oil spilling from the MV Marathassa in Vancouver's English Bay in April 2015.

Redacted plans

Spill safety hasbeen a contentious issue sincebefore the Marathassaincident. As part of the federal review process of the proposedTrans Mountain expansion, Kinder Morgan which is a part owner of WCMRCwas required to submit an emergency spill response plan.

The plan they submitted was heavily redacted, with company leadership citing corporate security concerns as the cause.

"We're just wrapping up the final arguments in the TransMounain NEB hearing, it seems odd to me that that material isn't well on the table," saidWaters.

"That really should have been part and parcel of the hearings, we should have all been able to read that material and we should all know what it says so that we can make judgements about whether they are equipped to respond."