Crisis and Opportunity: Understanding Bill C-39’s Proposed Changes to Federal Approvals for Interprovincial Pipelines and Transmission Lines (Part 5)

Wednesday, October 28, 2026

Introduction

On September 21, 2026, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act.¹ Bill C-39 proposes changes to several federal laws to shorten approval timelines, coordinate regulatory processes and help major projects move forward more quickly. As Canada has explained in its public materials and statements, the reason for the introduction of this bill and the changes that it proposes to make is the ongoing trade dispute with the United States.²

Over this series, themed “Crisis and Opportunity”, OKT will explain what Indigenous Governments need to know about Bill C-39. Our overarching message is simple: while Bill C-39 raises serious initial concerns, it provides only the blueprint for what is still to come. Much will be shaped by how Canada implements the bill and the additional changes contemplated in the Cabinet Directive on Getting Projects Built in Canada (the “Cabinet Directive”), which accompanied Bill C-39. As a result, there is an opportunity for Indigenous Governments to shape the new regulatory processes and clearly establish their expectations for how major projects should be developed within their territories.

Use the hyperlinks below to read more of this series. They will be updated as more posts are published.

1. A Time of Crisis and Opportunity: An Introduction to C-39 and the Cabinet Directive
2. A Time of Crisis and Opportunity: Understanding Amendments to the Impact Assessment Act
3. Crisis and Opportunity: How Indigenous Governments Can Position Themselves for Canada’s Major Projects Push
4. Crisis and Opportunity: Understanding Bill C-39’s Proposed Changes to the Building Canada Act
5. Crisis and Opportunity: Understanding Bill C-39’s Proposed Changes to Federal Approvals for Interprovincial Pipelines and Transmission Lines

Bill C-39 proposes various changes to the Canadian Energy Regulator Act (CERA) apparently aimed at streamlining the regulatory approval process for pipelines and transmission lines and generally creating what the Government of Canada considers to be a more ‘project-friendly’ regulatory state. As with several other regulatory schemes amended by Bill C-39, the bill would require the decision-maker, here, the Commission, to consider “the technical, economic and practical feasibility of the conditions” before imposing those conditions on a project.³ The likely impact of considering those feasibility considerations before imposing conditions is that conditions which are necessary to protect Aboriginal and Treaty rights do not get imposed because they are too expensive. This would be a significant change from past practice.

Bill C-39’s proposed changes to CERA will build on recent changes to the Physical Activities Regulations to exempt interprovincial pipelines and transmission lines from federal environmental impact assessments.⁴

Bill C-39 also allows for and encourages more coordination with other federal authorities to complete CER review processes, Indigenous consultation, and other relevant authorizations.⁵

The shorter timelines and decreased opportunities to contribute to the regulatory process will mean that Indigenous governments will want to prepare for consultations early and proactively, rather than waiting for Crown governments to invite them to consult. We encourage Indigenous governments to consider what proposed projects will mean for their rights before the assessment begins.

Faster Pipeline Approvals, Fewer Checkpoints

Bill C-39 proposes to amend sections 182 to 186 of CERA to create different approval processes for interprovincial pipelines depending on the length of the new right of way. In all cases, the amendments would impose strict timelines for the relevant decisions. Although the applicable timelines begin to run once the Commission considers a proponent’s application to be complete, parallel changes by CER to the Commission’s procedures suggest that the Commission intends to limit public involvement in the completion assessment and otherwise expedite that initial determination.⁶

Maximum of 365 Days for Pipeline Approval: If the pipeline requires 300 km or more of new right of way, the Commission has no more than 180 days once the proponent has submitted a complete application, down from 450 days in the current CERA, to recommend to the Minister whether to certify the pipeline “is and will be required by the present and future public convenience and necessity.”⁷

Once the Commission issues its recommendation, the Governor in Council must within 60 days order the Commission either to issue an approval certificate or dismiss the application.⁸

If Cabinet then orders the Commission to issue a certificate, the Commission then has a further 125 days to issue that certificate setting any applicable conditions that will be imposed on the project.⁹ The public has opportunities to make submissions both during the initial certification stage and the subsequent condition stage.¹⁰

Delegating Approvals for Smaller Pipelines: If a pipeline requires less than 300 km of new right of way, under Bill C-39 the Commission has no more than 300 days following the proponent’s submission of a complete application to decide whether to certify the pipeline.¹¹ Importantly, Bill C-39 would delegate decision-making authority on these shorter pipeline projects to the Commission rather than the current practice of requiring the Commission to recommend a decision to Cabinet.¹² As with the current pipeline approval process, the Commission is required to receive public comment during this decision-making process.¹³

These diverging approval processes leave the Commission with 60% less time for its initial assessment of longer projects compared with projects involving less new right of way. This difference appears intended to allow Cabinet input for longer projects while keeping total approval time under 365 days, but it is not clear whether and how the Commission can properly assess major new pipelines or complete necessary consultations in this narrow window.

Broadened Exemption Powers: Bill C-39 amends the CERA provision allowing the Commission to exempt applications from the relevant approval processes. While under the current Act the Commission can only exempt a pipeline if it has a total length of no more than 40 km, the proposed changes would allow exemptions for any pipeline that requires no more than 40 km of new right of way.¹⁴ This means that a new, 1,000 km pipeline crossing multiple provincial boundaries and treaty territories could be exempt from the normal regulatory process if it is built on an existing right of way, for example, as a replacement for an existing pipeline or a twinned pipeline with one which is already built.

More significantly, Bill C-39 also allows the Commission to exempt pipelines that require more than 40 km of new right of way, “if the Commission determines that the order is in the public interest, after consideration of their size, complexity and potential impacts, including on the rights of Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.”¹⁵ This significant discretion to potentially exempt large pipelines from the existing regulatory approval process gives the CER a nearly blank cheque to exclude new pipelines from standard regulatory scrutiny. Even if the CER uses this new power responsibly, the potential for future abuse and further degradation of regulatory protections is extreme.

Consolidating Certification and Detailed Route Assessment: Bill C-39 also amends the process by which the Commission would approve the detailed pipeline route. Under the current legislation, proponents must receive two approvals before construction can begin: the initial certification, then approval of a detailed route.¹⁶

The government’s proposed amendments would allow the proponent to submit its detailed plan during the initial certification decision, potentially combining the consideration of the detailed plan with the overall decision on whether the pipeline should receive a certificate in the first place.¹⁷

Equivalent Changes to Powerline Approvals

Bill C-39 also proposes to amend the approval process for interprovincial transmission lines.

Similar to the amended pipeline process, the proposed approval process will depend on the distance of the new right of way.

If the powerline requires less than 300 km of new right of way, the Commission has a maximum of 300 days to issue a decision on whether to certify the line once the proponent has issued a complete application.¹⁸ This process maps onto the current process under section 262 of CERA.

If the powerline requires 300 km or more of new right of way, the Commission has a maximum of 145 days once the proponent has submitted a complete application to issue a recommendation to the Minister on whether the pipeline “is and will be required by the present and future public convenience and necessity.”¹⁹ Once the Commission issues its recommendation, the Governor in Council must within 60 days order the Commission either to issue an approval certificate or dismiss the application.²⁰

If the Governor in Council orders the Commission to issue a certificate, the Commission then has a further 125 days to issue that certificate setting any applicable conditions that will be imposed on the project.

What This Means for Your Indigenous Government

• Federal processes for pipeline and transmission line approvals would get shorter under Bill C-39, leaving Indigenous governments with less time and fewer opportunities to make their voices heard.
• Although Canada must still fulfill its constitutional obligations under section 35, Indigenous governments must closely monitor the regulatory process and be ready to submit their Indigenous-led assessments and other evidence quickly to ensure proper consideration.
• It is not clear how participant funding models will adapt to these changing timelines. If Indigenous governments must prepare much of their evidence before the hearing process starts, how will Canada ensure Indigenous governments have sufficient resources to meaningfully participate in the regulatory process?