Critics say the federal government doesn't have a clear chain of command or enough resources available to clean up an oil spill if it leaked from an offshore well in foreign waters into Canadian waters.

The gap is especially problematic, says Yukon Liberal MP Larry Bagnell, his party's critic on Arctic issues and Northern development, because although oil drilling is not currently happening in the Canadian Arctic, Cairn Energy, a Scottish company, is drilling exploratory wells off the coast of Greenland, 300 kilometres from Canada. It says it has a one in 10 chance of striking oil or gas. Shell Oil hopes to start drilling next year in the Beaufort Sea between Alaska and the Yukon. BP has an exploratory licence in the Canadian Beaufort but has not applied for permission to drill.

"The clear and present danger to Canada is actually right now Greenland and the U.S.A., before Canadian drilling," Mr. Bagnell told the Commons natural resources committee May 13.

Mr. Bagnell said he's frustrated he hasn't been able to get a straight answer out of the government as to who would be responsible for cleanup if a well blowout in foreign waters was to spill oil into Canada.

On June 15, Mr. Bagnell stood up during Question Period and asked: "If there is a spill from a blown out well or a foreign tanker in waters off our coast, what plan does the government have to deal with it? What will happen to our Arctic coast? Will it simply leave it in the hands of the foreign private sector so our pristine Arctic beaches are polluted with globs of oil like in the Gulf of Mexico?"

Natural Resources Minister Christian Paradis (Mégantic-L'Érable, Que.) responded: "We are taking all necessary steps to ensure that the protection of the environment is ensured. I urge the member to take all the necessary steps to respect the will of his constituents and vote against the gun registry."

It wasn't the substantial, direct answer Mr. Bagnell said he was looking for. He said he's asked the government the same question eight or nine times in Question Period with similar results. Often, Mr. Paradis responds. He is responsible for the National Energy Board, a regulatory body that would be the key federal agency to respond to a spill from a drilling rig in its Canadian Arctic jurisdiction.

Mr. Bagnell said it should be Fisheries and Oceans Minister Gail Shea (Egmont, P.E.I.), whose department is in charge of the Canadian Coast Guard, the agency that would take the lead for a ship-based spill in Canadian Arctic waters.

If the politicians are confused about who is responsible, so too are the bureaucrats.

While Canada, the United States and Greenland share the common practice that the polluter pays and is responsible to clean up its own spill, if the monitoring government determines the polluter isn't doing it properly, it can step in.

The National Energy Board is not responsible for cleaning up spills from outside its jurisdiction, board spokesperson Sarah Kiley told The Hill Times. She suggested that Environment Canada or the Canadian Coast Guard might take the lead.

Not Environment Canada, said Wade Romanko, the department's environmental emergencies manager for the Prairie and Northern region.

"The Canadian lead agency, or government agency, would be the Canadian Coast Guard, once any pollution transbounds international boundary waters; the Canadian Coast Guard is the lead," he said.

The Canadian Coast Guard has drafted a joint Canada-U.S.-North spill agreement with the U.S. Coast Guard to address spills in the border waters of the Beaufort Sea, he said. The two coast guards got together in March to hash out who would do what, through a table-top spill scenario. Through these types of exercises, the agencies regularly discuss roles and responsibilities.

"The Canadian Coast Guard has a national plan that they would implement in the...response to a spill in international waters and Environment Canada is part of that contingency plan," he said. Environment Canada is there not as a response organization but to give expert advice on issues such as cleanup technologies, and spill modelling.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans communications adviser Marian Kwok said she couldn't confirm if the Canadian Coast Guard would take the lead in cleaning up a spill originating from a foreign well or rig that has drifted into Canadian waters. She said she believes the Coast Guard is only responsible for cleaning up spills from ships, not rigs or wells. This information could not be confirmed before The Hill Times' deadline last week.

"If there is confusion inside government around jurisdiction, then it's clear we're not prepared to address an emergency," said Craig Stewart, Arctic program director for the conservation group World Wildlife Fund Canada.

It's worrisome because, while no company is currently drilling in Canada's North and won't be until at least 2014, exploratory drilling is happening currently off Greenland and may soon happen off Alaska. If a spill occurs at either operation, it could reach Canadian waters, said Mr. Stewart.

Shell Oil was ready to start exploratory drilling at sites in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas near Canadian waters this summer. After the environmental disaster of the BP blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, the United States government announced a one-year ban on offshore drilling in Alaska that shelved that plan.

"[W]e are hopeful the Department of Interior permits Shell to drill in 2011," wrote company spokesperson Kelly op de Weegh in an email to The Hill Times last week.

If drilling goes ahead as planned, said Mr. Stewart, "Shell has prepared oil spill trajectory plans that clearly demonstrate that, should oil be spilled, it would flow into the waters of the Canadian Beaufort."

Yet he said, "[L]ocal communities lack adequate training and equipment, including boats, to effectively respond to an oil spill."

Unlike in the Gulf, there is no large commercial fishing industry in the Beaufort Sea, he said. That means there is no ready access to the thousands of boats and harbours from which to launch them that would be needed to help in the cleanup effort of a large BP-like spill.

Likewise, he pointed to a lack of boom to corral the oil and keep it from spreading in ice-free waters.

A BP Canada executive told the Commons Natural Resources Committee in May that the company had installed more than 1.5 million feet (457 kilometres) of boom to protect the Gulf coast from the BP spill. René Grenier, deputy commissioner of the Canadian Coast Guard told the committee his organization had a total of about 91 kilometres of both offshore and coastal boom, of which three kilometres had been lent to the United States to help with the BP spill.

"Our coast is 10 times the length of the U.S. coast. Why do we have so little boom capacity?" questioned NDP natural resources and energy critic Nathan Cullen (Skeena-Bulkley Valley, B.C.).

"[W]e identify risks, and we have national, regional, and area plans, and those outline the need for response in the country," Mr. Grenier responded.

To be prepared to respond to ship-sourced spills, the Coast Guard has 19 equipment depots spread across the Arctic, including containment and recovery gear such as booms and skimmers, as well as 80 trained responders. Fleet vessels and personnel could also be called to help. If it needed more, the Coast Guard could mobilize equipment from across Canada, Mr. Grenier later told the Senate Natural Resources Committee.

But it's important to remember, said Mr. Romanko, that the polluting private company is the lead responder. Drilling wouldn't be approved unless the regulatory authority was satisfied the company had the resources to respond to a spill. Already, Imperial Oil and Exxon Mobil Corp. are talking to federal departments about cleanup and countermeasures in planning to drill after 2014.

Between 150 and 200 kilometres west of the Greenland coast, in the Davis Strait, Scottish company Cairn Energy has already started drilling two exploratory wells in shallow water, about 300 kilometres from Canada. Critics have pointed out that the company is relatively small and draws most of its offshore drilling experience from Asia and other areas without the same harsh ice-prone conditions.

"Our drilling operations team has got immense harsh environment an Arctic experience to handle this campaign," said company spokesperson David Nisbet last week.

The company is drilling now, in the summer, while it is not restricted by ice cover, he said. Among the 14 support vessels floating near the drilling rig are ones specifically focused on iceberg management, he said. If a blowout was to occur, he said, the company has another rig close by that it could use to immediately start drilling a relief well.

The governments of Canada and Greenland have agreed that officials from the Canadian National Energy Board can join inspectors from the offshore oil and gas regulator in Greenland, the Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum, on some of their regular inspections of the Cairn rigs.

Environment Minister Jim Prentice (Calgary Centre-North, Alta.) met with his counterparts from Greenland last month and "got the assurance...that they will ensure the protection of the environment and the health and safety of the workers on the rigs," wrote his spokesperson, Frédéric Baril in an email to The Hill Times.

But if a spill occurred, despite the numerous safety precautions, "of course there is a small likelihood it could move to Canada," said BMP director Jorn Skov Nielsen.

If that happened, Cairn would still be the first responder, said Mr. Nisbet. "We are responsible for the spill. Full stop," he said. "But that doesn't mean to say that you don't have other agency support to ensure that everything is done properly to stop whatever may be happening."

In order to get a licence to drill, companies must provide 60 billion Danish kroner (U.S. $10-billion) in financial guarantees that could be drawn upon in the event of spill cleanup, said the BMP head. If a company couldn't or wouldn't respond adequately, Greenland public authorities could swoop in, and, if needed, lean on the Danish navy (Greenland is a self-governing Danish territory) for help. The company would still get the bill.

In cleaning up oil on Canadian waters, "We would cooperate very, very closely with Canadian authorities," he said. "But, of course, it's a Canadian jurisdiction so they would have the final say on that."

Canada and Denmark have agreements and plans to respond to cross-border spills, similar to the Canada-U.S.-North agreement and one for the Canadian-American Atlantic coast, said Mr. Romanko.

If that's the case, it's not being communicated well to people like Mr. Stewart and Mr. Bagnell.

"Judging from the answers we got in the House, we're not very prepared at all," said Mr. Bagnell.

kshane@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times