“The board’s decision enables Enbridge to react to market forces and provide benefits to Canadians, while at the same time implementing the project in a safe and environmentally sensitive manner,” read the release from the NEB.

“… The board’s conditions require Enbridge to undertake activities regarding pipeline integrity, emergency response and continued consultation. The board’s reasons for decision and conditions also make reference to Enbridge’s ongoing emergency response planning and consultation with municipalities, first responders and Aboriginal groups.”

Nicole Goodman, a Burlington resident and an assistant political science professor at McMaster University, questioned whose best interest is truly served by the decision. She said she is concerned the Line 9 hearings continue a trend that may ultimately lead to public apathy, she explained.

“What is the public interest? Whose interest really is the public interest – is it Enbridge’s interest and economic interest or is it really the everyday, hardworking southern Ontario citizens’ interest,” she said. “… How many times through this hearing and other energy project hearings has the public come forward and said this is not in our interest, these are our concerns and yet the projects are always approved?”

Goodman accurately predicted last fall in an interview with the Post that NEB would approve Enbridge’s project, but said her heart still fell when she read the decision. She noted Burlington’s feedback was noticeably missing from the NEB’s report.

“One thing that struck me was that my testimony related to the survey conducted in Burlington and Burlington residents’ impression of consultations was not included and neither were their concerns in terms of the capacity and the transportation of bitumen,” said Goodman, who was one of approximately 60 intervenors who took part in the NEB hearing last fall on Enbridge’s Line 9B proposal. “In fact, my testimony was only cited with respect to concerns of a leak or spill, so that was little bit upsetting. I guess I didn’t feel the report had the rigour I would have expected.”

Enbridge is touting the National Energy Board’s decision, saying it is good business for the country and will keep Canadians employed.

“The benefits of the reversal of Line 9B are clear,” said Al Monaco, president and chief executive officer of Enbridge Inc., in a news release.

“For Quebec, bringing a new, reliable supply of competitively priced crude oil to respond to the needs of Quebec-based refineries will protect more than 4,000 jobs, sustain a vibrant petrochemical industry and strengthen the economy. For our customers, Line 9B reversal is an important component of our broader market access initiatives to open up and expand connections to key refining markets. Core to our strategy is to reduce our industry's environmental footprint, which is why our first choice is always to use existing infrastructure.”

Over at city hall, Mayor Rick Goldring said the city’s concerns with the project seem to have been heard by the NEB based on the 30 conditions. He added city staff is reviewing the 141-page document released yesterday and will be speaking with other municipalities about the decision.

“The city is pleased that the board has imposed the 30 conditions on Enbridge, and many of those conditions are actually what the City of Burlington has requested with regard to the integrity of the pipeline, focusing on emergency response and continuation of consultation,” he said.

Gareth Williams, a member of the Burlington Sustainable Development Committee, said after reviewing the document in detail, the conditions do not go far enough in terms of the city’s specific concerns around the likelihood of a release and the financial accountability in the event of a spill or leak.

He added he’s only satisfied with the commitment to the response plan.

“There’s a dissent among the board (NEB) on Enbridge’s ability to financially be accountable and that’s a major concern going forward,” Williams said.

“In terms of the likelihood of release, I think there’s a lot of unanswered questions on that one. There’s a lot of things the board has said, ‘Well, we’re going to go back and ask them to develop a plan on crack management, we’re going to go back and ask them to look more closely at the manually-operated valves, for example, but we’re not saying now that we’re going to ask them to replace them.’ It seems there is a lot of things that are being pushed down the road that I think should have been answered through the hearing process.”

BurlingtonGreen questioned the public consultation going forward.

“We believe that the conditions of the NEB decision require Enbridge to create plans to mitigate risk, however we have concerns that the public will not have a chance to review these plans,” said Michelle Bennett, program co-ordinator with BurlingtonGreen, which will be releasing a full response on its website later today.

“…What is not being made clear at this point is when they will continue to engage the public, local government, first responders. Those questions remain outstanding. Also, the position of shutoff valves across watercourses at this time remains unspecific.”