British Columbia has formally rejected the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal, saying the project has not been able to address environmental concerns.

In its final written submission to the review panel, British Columbian officials say the $6-billion project as proposed by Calgary-based Enbridge should not go ahead.

"British Columbia thoroughly reviewed all of the evidence and submissions made to the panel and asked substantive questions about the project including its route, spill response capacity and financial structure to handle any incidents," Environment Minister Terry Lake said in a news release issued by the provincial government Friday morning.

"Our questions were not satisfactorily answered during these hearings."

Lake said Northern Gateway has not presented adequate evidence to explain how they would respond to a major spill, and for that reason the B.C. government can’t issue a certificate for the pipeline to go ahead.

The Northern Gateway would transport diluted bitumen from the Alberta oilsands via two pipelines to a tanker port on the north coast of B.C. The 1,177-kilometre stretch of pipes could move 525,000 barrels of oil each day.

B.C. has established a list of demands that must be met in order for it to consider the construction and operation of heavy-oil pipelines within the province:

• Successful completion of the environmental review process. In the case of Northern Gateway, that would mean a recommendation by the National Energy Board Joint Review Panel that the project proceed;

• World-leading marine oil spill response, prevention and recovery systems for B.C.'s coastline and ocean to manage and mitigate the risks and costs of heavy-oil pipelines and shipments;

• World-leading practices for land oil spill prevention, response and recovery systems to manage and mitigate the risks and costs of heavy-oil pipelines;

• Legal requirements regarding Aboriginal and treaty rights are addressed, and First Nations are provided with the opportunities, information and resources necessary to participate in and benefit from a heavy-oil project; and

• British Columbia receives a fair share of the fiscal and economic benefits of a proposed heavy-oil project that reflect the level, degree and nature of the risk borne by the province, the environment and taxpayers.

Government officials say its position on Northern Gateway isn’t a rejection of all proposed heavy-oil projects.

B.C. has asked for an hour to present its final oral arguments to the review panel when hearings recommence in Terrace on June 17.

A final report is due to the federal government at the end of the year. Federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said a full review of the evaluations will take place after it’s published.

Oliver said any resource development would not proceed “unless it is safe for Canadians and the environment,” but reiterated that diversifying export markets for energy remains a critical priority.

“Resource industries make up 13 percent of the British Columbia economy. They support thousands of jobs and generate billions in royalties and tax revenue to fund hospitals, schools and other critical services across our country,” he said in a statement.

“We look forward to continued engagement with all provinces on market diversification for oil and gas.”

Enbridge spokesperson John Carruthers told CTV News the company shares the federal government’s goals of diversifying the oil and gas industry – and doing it safely.

“So it’s just a matter of time working with them to better define that,” he said. “The project is not dead.”

But environmental groups, long critical of the pipeline, are taking B.C.’s rejection as a sign that it’s just a matter of time before the final nail is struck into the project’s coffin.

The Sierra Club of Canada released a statement saying the rejection is one they’ve been anxiously awaiting.

"Days like this give meaning to 50 years of environmental activism," said the organizations’ executive director John Bennett. "Words cannot express how much I admire the activists and First Nations who made this decision possible."

Gillian McEachern of Environmental Defence went one step further, telling CTV’s Power Play the decision signaled widespread opposition nationally.

“This project won’t go ahead,” McEachern said. “It would be rather problematic to ram a pipeline through a province that doesn’t want it.”

McEachern said the pipeline rejection is a sign people are interested in greener energy sources, and hope to shift away from traditional energy sources, like oil.

“The oil industry isn’t just going to get an easy ride in its plan to recklessly expand the tar sands over the decade,” she said. “Gateway isn’t happening in its own bubble. This is in the context of a broad movement of people who are really concerned about these projects.”