The Editor,
It’s amazing an issue like the Vancouver Airport Fuel Delivery Project proposed by the Vancouver Airport Fuel Facilities Corporation (VAFFC), that attracted so much attention last year, has faded into the background after receiving approval from the BC Environmental Assessment Office (BCEAO).
The approval gives the go ahead for VAFFC to begin work on this project. If it goes ahead we will see barges and large ocean going tankers loaded with jet fuel moving up the Fraser River to unload their toxic cargo into giant storage tanks next to the Riverport Entertainment complex.
The “Reasons for the Minister’s Decision” document from last December is accessible to everyone at the BCEAO website.
Section 2.3 of the document states: “The Project will contribute more than $500,000 annually in property taxes, a portion of which will go toward supporting fire protection services.”
As the storage tanks would be located in Richmond, this must be an estimate of property taxes that Richmond would receive.
It’s my understanding the City of Richmond had no input into the contents of the document. So, where did the numbers come from?
What’s interesting is the implication in the document that property taxes can be earmarked for specific purposes by some taxpayers. The wording certainly leaves one with the impression that cost for fire protection services for this project will rest with the City of Richmond.
The same section also states: “The Canada Shipping Act requires that VAFFC deploy equipment and resources to contain and control a spill within one hour of its discovery, and commence spill response within six hours. VAFFC’s spill response measures will facilitate a response in less than six hours.”
Does this seem reasonable in a fast moving Fraser River? I can’t help but wonder if the entire downstream estuary from the marine terminal to Steveston and the Salish Sea would be contaminated within that first hour of a spill let alone in six hours. Depending on the tide, a spill could also contaminate areas upstream to Surrey.
City staff sent a comprehensive letter to the BCEAO 10 months ago reiterating opposition to all aspects of the project and offering input into BCEAO’s draft report. The subsequent silence suggests the letter and its contents were ignored and the city has caved and rolled over.
Given that municipal elections are only a few months away, we should quiz all candidates as to their stand on this project and what they propose to do if elected.
Hopefully, some of them will have more interesting things to say than simply writing more letters.
Frank Suto
Richmond
