Certain elements of Dr. Gerald Graham's Enbridge Northern Gateway project tanker spill risk analysis have made it into the Final Argument phase of the Joint Review Panel's work. On Page 5 of his submission to the Panel M. P. Nathan Cullen writes:
"Beyond the track record and reputation of Enbridge, we also have to assess whether the project itself is one that is responsible and sustainable. We have heard, for example, that the calculation of spills during marine transportation have been developed and presented in a clearly deceptive manner. World-renowned marine oil spill response specialist Dr. Gerald Graham, for example, wrote to and appeared before the panel in August 2012 and January 2013 to detail how, over the expected 50-year lifespan of the project, the likelihood of one or more major tanker spills (31,500 barrels or more) increases to between 8.7% and 14.1%.
But even this calculation contrasts starkly with the definition of a large spill as defined by the International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation (ITOPF), which applies to any spill greater than 5,131 barrels. History is replete with examples of oil spills of 5,000 barrels or even less which wrought enormous environmental and economic damage. Thus, if we applied the ITOPF's internationally recognized definition of a large spill in Dr. Graham's calculations, the likelihood of a major tanker spill would certainly rise well above 14.1% over 50 years as well."
Mr. Cullen plans to provide his oral Final Argument in person in Terrace on June 17, 2013.