OTTAWA — There can be economic benefits from oil spills, Kinder Morgan says in its $5.4-billion proposal to the federal government to triple the capacity of its pipeline from Alberta to Burnaby.

The company submission says its risk assessment and 60-year history operating the existing pipeline show “the probability of a large pipeline spill is low.”

But the 15,000-page submission, required by federal regulations, analyzes numerous moderate and catastrophic spill scenarios along the pipeline route in both provinces. It looks at the socio-economic, environmental and even psychological impact of major spills in areas such as the Fraser River near the Port Mann Bridge.

“Pipeline spills can have both positive and negative effects on local and regional economies, both in the short- and long-term,” the company states in its submission to the National Energy Board, the federal government’s Calgary-based regulatory agency. “Spill response and cleanup creates business and employment opportunities for affected communities, regions, and cleanup service providers.”

The New Democratic Party MP who represents Burnaby, including the Westridge Marine Terminal where large tankers will arrive to carry diluted bitumen overseas, accused the company of insensitivity.

“We know Kinder Morgan is using every trick in the book to push this pipeline through our community, but this takes the cake — proposing that a spill would actually be good for the local economy,” said Kennedy Stewart, MP for Burnaby-Douglas riding. “This assertion shows the utter disregard this company has for British Columbians.”

The company said it was just fulfilling its regulatory requirements.

“No spill is acceptable to us,” Michael Davies of Kinder Morgan Canada said by email. “While we are required by the National Energy Board to explore both the positive and negative socio-economic effects of a spill, it in no way means we accept the inevitability of a spill, nor justify one.”

The overall economic effect of a spill depends on several factors, according to the Kinder Morgan submission.

“The net overall effect depends on the size and extent of a spill, the associated demand for cleanup services and personnel, the capacity of local and regional businesses to meet this demand, the willingness of local businesses and residents to pursue response opportunities, the extent of business and livelihoods adversely affected (directly or indirectly) by the spill, and the duration and extent of spill response and cleanup activities.

“Evidence from past incidents shows that economic activities would be affected if a large spill were to directly affect a (high consequence area) such as a community or water body. The magnitude of effects resulting from a small spill on land would be smaller.”

Kinder Morgan’s proposed twinning of the existing pipeline will increase its capacity from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels of oil a day, increasing the number of tankers arriving at Westridge from five to 34 a month.

One of the scenarios Kinder Morgan was required the analyze was a full-bore summertime pipeline rupture into the Fraser River adjacent near the Port Mann Bridge.

That scenario would coat the surface of the river with oil from the Port Mann Bridge to past the George Massey Tunnel, the submission said. “From there to the mouth of the river, the probability of oil on the surface is between 60 and 80 per cent. There is about a 40 per cent probability of oil on the surface of the water entering the side channels and marshes near Ladner and Port Guichon.

“Oil that reaches the mouth of the river is discharged into the Strait of Georgia with considerable momentum, so it is likely to disperse to the north or south in the strait and does not have a high probability of directly affecting the Sturgeon or Roberts Banks. It is more likely that this oil will affect shorelines on the opposite side of the strait.”

The submission says the ecological impact depends on the timing and intensity of the spill, with the impact on mammals like muskrat, beaver, otter and mink “potentially high.”

While cleaning up the riverbank would be fairly straightforward, clean up of the main channel of the river and the marsh areas near Port Guichon would require much more work.

The next step in the process is a May 12 deadline for interveners to file requests for the company to provide additional information.

poneil@postmedia.comTwitter.com/poneilinottawag