If approved, the 1,200-kilometre Mackenzie Valley pipeline would run from Inuvik, N.W.T., to northern Alberta, where it would connect with southern markets. (CBC)

The lead proponent of the Mackenzie Gas Project says it should not have to provide an update on the economic feasibility of the proposed Mackenzie Valley natural gas pipeline in the Northwest Territories.

Imperial Oil, which heads the consortium of companies behind the pipeline proposal, responded on Wednesday to a request from Alternatives North to release updated data on the natural gas market and the economic feasibility of the pipeline.

The Yellowknife-based social justice group asked the National Energy Board last week to make the proponents provide that information so that everyone can decide whether the project makes sense.

"We don't believe that Alternatives North has provided any valid reason for the NEB to require us to file an updated market demand report," Imperial spokesman Pius Rolheiser told CBC News.

The Mackenzie Gas Project's gas price forecasts are confidential, Rolheiser said.

Not worried about competition

In requesting the new information, Alternatives North said the pipeline consortium has been using data from 2007, and the natural gas market has changed significantly since then.

Rolheiser said Imperial Oil and the other proponents are not worried about those changes, such as competition from shale gas discoveries and a similar pipeline proposal in Alaska.

Even with that competition in place, there will still be room in the market for the Mackenzie Valley pipeline, should it be approved, Rolheiser said.

He added that it should not be up to the National Energy Board, the federal energy regulator, to decide whether the project makes economic sense.

"The whole notion of economic feasibility, in our understanding, that's a decision that the proponents will ultimately have to make," he said.

"It's a business decision. I mean, is this a project that we believe can be economically viable?"

Narrow view: Alternatives North

But Alternatives North spokesman Kevin O'Reilly said Imperial Oil is taking a narrow interpretation of the National Energy Board's mandate in reviewing the pipeline proposal.

"They certainly stand to make some money from this project, but the public is also at risk from this project in terms of the environmental and socio-economic effects," he said.

"We know that the proponents are also attempting to get subsidies from the federal government, so that's why there's a need for an independent regulator to look at all of these factors."

O'Reilly said the pipeline proponents still need to provide up-to-date information about their proposal, and the National Energy Board has to consider the markets in deciding whether to approve the project.

According to the National Energy Board's regulations, the board may regard economic feasibility and the markets before making a decision about a project.

Alternatives North has until Feb. 19 to file its own response to the National Energy Board and Imperial Oil.