14 records – page 1 of 1.

Decision 2012-01

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4475
Applicant
MEG Energy Corporation
Application Number
1571384
Title
Decision 2012-001: MEG Energy Corp. application for an amendment to the Christina Lake regional project Athabasca oil sands
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-001: MEG Energy Corp. application for an amendment to the Christina Lake regional project Athabasca oil sands
Date
2012
Applicant
MEG Energy Corporation
Application Number
1571384
Hearing Panel
McManus B
Watson TL
Engen TC
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Oil sands
Descriptors
Athabasca oil sands
NTS 83M
Abandonment
Degradation
Steam assisted gravity drainage
Thermal recovery
Oil sands project
DIR 020
Legal References
Oil Sands Conservation Act S13
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act S53
2012 ABERCB 001
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Chipewyan Prairie Dene First Nation (CPDFN), Conklin Metis Local #193 (CML), Whitefish Lake First Nation #128 (WLFN), and Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) objected to the application.
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
Condition One: Prior to the commencement of steaming operations in an area, MEG Energy Corp. (MEG) shall repair or abandon all wells that could be impacted by thermal operations in a manner that is compatible with the thermal operations. MEG must contact the ERCB to obtain approval for the manner in which to repair or abandon wells not considered to be compatible with the thermal operations.
Condition Two: MEG shall provide a maximum operating pressure (MOP) and caprock integrity study (MOP study), for ERCB review and approval, prior to the commencement of steaming operations in the Phase 3A and 3B areas, respectively.
Location
13-32-076-04W4
09-06-077-04W4
07-07-077-04W4
03-01-077-05W4
01-01-077-05W4
06-05-077-04W4
Less detail

Decision 2012-02

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4477
Applicant
Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL)
Application Number
1662418
Title
Decision 2012-002 : Canadian Natural Resources Limited application for class II disposal Athabasca oil sands area
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-002 : Canadian Natural Resources Limited application for class II disposal Athabasca oil sands area
Date
2012
Applicant
Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL)
Application Number
1662418
Hearing Panel
Watson TL
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Athabasca Oil Sands
Grosmont FM
Disposal well
Waste disposal
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S39
ERCB Rules of Practice S21
2012 ABERCB 002
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Approval
Withdrawn
Location
10-01-082-17W4
Less detail

Decision 2012-03

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4476
Applicant
Glencoe Resources Limited
Application Number
1695898
Title
Decision 2012-003 : Glencoe Resources Ltd. application for well licence Chigwell field
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-003 : Glencoe Resources Ltd. application for well licence Chigwell field
Date
2012
Applicant
Glencoe Resources Limited
Application Number
1695898
Hearing Panel
Eynon G
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Chigwell field
Horizontal well
Ponoka area
Oil producing
Viking FM
Well licence
Legal References
ERCB Rules of Practice S21
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
2012 ABERCB 003
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Approval
Withdrawn
Location
xx-04-035-26W4
Less detail

Decision 2012-04

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4478
Applicant
Petrobank Energy and Resources Limited
Application Number
1600065
Title
Decision 2012-004 : Petrobank Energy and Resources Ltd. application for the May River phase 1 project Athabasca oil sands area
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-004 : Petrobank Energy and Resources Ltd. application for the May River phase 1 project Athabasca oil sands area
Date
2012
Applicant
Petrobank Energy and Resources Limited
Application Number
1600065
Hearing Panel
Watson TL
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Oil sands
Descriptors
Athabasca Oil Sands
May River area
Legal References
Oil Sands Conservation Act S10
ERCB Rules of Practice S21
2012 ABERCB 004
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Conklin Metis Local #193, Chipewyan Prairie Dene First Nation and Devon Canada Corp., filed objections to the application.
Approval
Withdrawn
Less detail

Decision 2012-05

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4480
Applicant
Kallisto Energy Corporation
Application Number
1697898
Title
Decision 2012-005 : Kallisto Energy Corp. application for a well licence Crossfield East Field
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-005 : Kallisto Energy Corp. application for a well licence Crossfield East Field
Date
2012
Applicant
Kallisto Energy Corporation
Application Number
1697898
Hearing Panel
McManus RC
Eynon G
Warren WA
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Communication (well)
Emergency response plan
Emergency procedure
Airdrie area
Basal Quartz FM
Hydrogen sulphide
Well licence
Position (location)
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
2012 ABERCB 005
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Interveners
CrossAlta Gas Storate & Service
BP Canada Energy
BPCanada Energy Company
GransCanaada Pipelines Limited
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
CONDITIONS
The licensee must obtain and immediately submit stabilized initial pressure data to the ERCB and CrossAlta.
The licensee must not use fracture stimulation on the well that exceeds 40 tonnes unless consent has been given by the Board.
The licensee must obtain and submit stabilized pre- and post-frac pressure data to the ERCB and CrossAlta.
Location
11-26-027-01W5
Less detail

Decision 2012-06

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4479
Applicant
Sinopec Daylight Energy Limited
Application Number
1623169
Title
Decision 2012-006 : Sinopec Daylight Energy Ltd. application for a well licence Pembina Field
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-006 : Sinopec Daylight Energy Ltd. application for a well licence Pembina Field
Date
2012
Applicant
Sinopec Daylight Energy Limited
Application Number
1623169
Hearing Panel
McManus B
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Directional well
Emergency response plan
Emergency procedure
Drayton Valley area
Nisku FM
Pembina field
Hydrogen sulphide
Well licence
Position (location)
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
ERCB Rules of Practice S21
2012 ABERCB 006
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Approval
Withdrawn
Location
16-05-050-06W5
Less detail

Decision 2012-07

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4481
Applicant
Koch Oil Sands Operating ULC
Application Number
1617225
Title
Decision 2012-007 : Koch Oil Sands Operating ULC application for a bitumen recovery scheme Cold Lake Oil Sands area
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-007 : Koch Oil Sands Operating ULC application for a bitumen recovery scheme Cold Lake Oil Sands area
Date
2012
Applicant
Koch Oil Sands Operating ULC
Application Number
1617225
Hearing Panel
Eynon G
McManus RC
Engen TC
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Enhanced recovery
Gas processing
Descriptors
Dispute resolution
Noise (sound)
Water quality
Surface water
Groundwater
In situ
Bitumen
Oil recovery
Steam assisted gravity drainage
Cold Lake area
Oil sands oil recovery
NTS 73L
DIR 054
DIR 055
DIR 056
DIR 078
Legal References
2012 ABERCB 006
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
The Operator’s scheme as described in a)Application No. 1617225, is approved, subject to the Oil Sands Conservation Regulation and the terms and conditions herein contained. 2)Clause 1 does not preclude alterations in design and equipment, provided that the ERCB is satisfied that the alterations are compatible with the outline of the scheme, are made for the better operation of the scheme, and do not result in unacceptable adverse impacts. 3)The recovery process approved for the project is Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) utilizing only steam as the injection fluid unless otherwise stipulated by the ERCB. 4)Unless otherwise stipulated by the ERCB, the production of bitumen from the project area shall not exceed 1600 cubic metres per day (m3/d) on an annual average basis. 5)The Operator shall conduct all operations to the satisfaction of the ERCB and in a manner that under normal operating conditions will permit a) the recovery of the practical maximum amount of crude bitumen within the project area outlined in Figure 1. b) the conservation of the practical maximum volume of produced gas at the well pads and central facilities, c) the minimization of flaring during non-routine operations such as start-up, shutdown, emergencies, infrequent upsets, and maintenance depressuring, and d) the practical maximum reuse of produced water, with the minimum recycle rate being 90 per cent on an annual basis, unless otherwise stipulated by the ERCB. 6)Prior to drilling SAGD wells in an area, all ERCB regulated wells that could be impacted by thermal operations must be repaired or abandoned in a manner that is compatible with the thermal operations. The Operator must contact the ERCB for discussion of and obtaining approval for the manner in which to repair or abandon wells not considered to be compatible with the thermal operations. 7)Unless otherwise stipulated by the ERCB, the Operator shall: provide the ERCB with gamma ray, spontaneous potential, resistivity, neutron, and density log measurements from total depth to surface casing for all vertical wells, and b) take full diameter cores of the entire bitumen-bearing interval of the Lower Grand Rapids Formation from not less than four evenly-spaced vertical wells per section, and take full-diameter cores of bitumen-bearing intervals of other zones in the Mannville Group, if any, from at least one well per section. 8)Unless otherwise permitted by the ERCB, steam injection operations, having commenced at a well pad, shall continue until the well pad has produced a minimum of 50 per cent of the in-place volume of crude bitumen assigned to that well pad by the ERCB. 9)Where the Operator proposes to cease SAGD operations at a well pad that has produced less than 50 per cent of the in-place volume of crude bitumen and the ERCB’s consent therefore is sought, the Operator shall advise the ERCB as to the following: a)the reason for proposing to cease SAGD operations, b)details of individual well workovers and recompletions attempted, c)detailed economics of continuing operations, d)the effect of ceasing SAGD operations on the bitumen recovery ultimately achievable from that part of the reservoir associated with the pad and immediately offsetting pads, and e)future plans for the well pad with reference to possible follow-up recovery techniques that could be applied and other zones that could be exploited. 10)The Operator shall ensure that sulphur recovery will be operational at the facilities before total sulphur emissions from flaring and combustion of gas containing hydrogen sulphide (H2S) reach one tonne/day on a calendar quarter-year average basis, unless otherwise stipulated by the ERCB. The calendar quarter-year sulphur recovery shall not be less than set out in Table 1 of ERCB Interim Directive (ID) 2001-03: Sulphur Recovery Guidelines for the Province of Alberta on the basis of the calendar quarter-year daily average sulphur content of produced gas streams flared and used as fuel at each central processing facility. 11)(1) The Operator shall notify the ERCB of any proposed material alteration or modification of the scheme or to any equipment proposed for use therein prior to effecting the alteration or modification. (2) Where, in the opinion of the ERCB, any alteration or modification to the scheme or to any equipment proposed for use therein: a) is not of a minor nature, b) is not consistent with the scheme approved herein, or c) may not result in an improved or more efficient scheme or operation, the alteration or modification shall not be proceeded with or effected without the further authorization of the ERCB. The Operator must provide evidence that this material alteration or modification to the scheme or to any equipment will result in a benefit to the scheme or operation and be in the public interest. 12)Any plans for operations or development outside the approved development area shall be applied for to the ERCB for review. Such applications must: a) describe the facility and infrastructure locations and the operation of the surface facilities. Justify any changes from those described in the original application and associated amendments. Evaluate the potential environmental impacts in the context of these changes and contrast with impacts predicted in the original application, b) verify predictions and evaluate the performance of the environmental mitigation strategies proposed by the Operator in the original application and associated amendments. Discuss how the approach to various mitigation strategies might be altered based on the findings of the evaluation and incorporated into future operations, c) provide a summary of the information submitted for the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (EPEA), as well as any other environmental information related to the scheme and its amendment that may be required by an agency other than the ERCB, d) provide geological and reservoir data that demonstrate that the reservoir in the proposed development area has been fully evaluated, including evaluation wells and seismic interpretation to fully understand where well pads and wells will be located. Submit updated bitumen, gas, and water mapping, reservoir properties, and reserves estimates for the existing development area, the proposed additional area, and the overall development area, e) describe the Operator’s participation in regional environmental initiatives. Discuss recommendations that have been generated from these regional initiatives and how these recommendations have been incorporated into the project, f) provide a detailed description of the proposed amendment, including subsurface drainage pad design, such as the number of horizontal wells per drainage pad, the lateral spacing between horizontal wells, the length and trajectory of each horizontal well, the horizontal well elevations, and the subsurface drainage area corresponding to each horizontal well. Provide cross section profiles for each horizontal well to demonstrate that the location and design have been optimized to conserve bitumen, g) provide a detailed discussion of the scheme performance to date, with specific emphasis on key factors affecting the success of the scheme, and how this experience has been incorporated into the operation of the existing scheme and the design and operation of the scheme within the proposed additional area, including but not limited to i) the impact of top gas, ii) the impact of top water, iii) the impact of bottom water, iv) the effectiveness of the cap rocks, and v) the state of the steam chamber. h) provide a discussion on modeling results, including the input data, modeling runs carried out, and the latest model predictions of bitumen recovery and pad production profiles based on history matching the field performance data. This information shall include i) a description of the model used, ii) the input data files for the model cases run, iii) for each case run, cross sections perpendicular to the horizontal portion of the wellbore showing the changing fluid saturations and temperature with time to illustrate the growth of the steam chamber to abandonment, iv) a discussion of the history match and parameters adjusted to achieve the match obtained, and v) a discussion of the prediction cases run, plots of the results for key performance predictions (e.g., rates, steam oil ratio), and how the results were used in operation of the existing scheme, in the design and operation of the proposed new area, and in the scheduling of future development of the scheme. 13)Notwithstanding any date by which any work, act, matter, or thing is by this approval required to be done, performed, or completed, the ERCB, if it considers it proper to do so, may by stipulation alter the dates specified. 14)The ERCB may, a)upon its own motion, or b)upon the application of an interested person, rescind or amend this approval at any time.
Location
11-12-060-03W4
12-12-060-03W4
13-12-060-03W4
14-12-060-03W4
Less detail

Decision 2012-08

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4482
Title
Decision 2012-008 : Penn West Santiago Ltd. appeal of notice of low risk noncompliance and high risk enforcement action
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-008 : Penn West Santiago Ltd. appeal of notice of low risk noncompliance and high risk enforcement action
Date
2012
Legal References
2012 ABERCB 008
Notes
Not published
Less detail

Decision 2012-08

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4485
Applicant
Shell Canada Limited
Application Number
1689376
Title
Decision 2012-008 : Shell Canada Limited application for the Quest carbon capture and storage project Radway Field
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-008 : Shell Canada Limited application for the Quest carbon capture and storage project Radway Field
Date
2012
Applicant
Shell Canada Limited
Application Number
1689376
Hearing Panel
Eynon G
McManus RC
Willard RJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Storage facility
Pipelines
Descriptors
Shell Scotford upgrader
Carbon dioxide
Injection well
Radway field
Carbon dioxide injection
Alberta Environment
Carbon sequestration
Safety
Emergency procedure
Emergency response plan
Environment protection
Socio-economic effect
Public interest
Monitoring
Measuring
Pipeline transportation
Sequestration
Legal References
Pipeline Act Part 4
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S39
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S13
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Interveners
Clifton C
Clifton B
Ouelette T
Cheng Y
Douziech L
Vaudan R
Vaudan J
Secord R
Kovac M
Kovac A
Stanley D
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
TheBoard requires that Shell do the following: 1. Use a MBHIP of 30 MPa for the BCS in the 8-19 injection well. [210] 2. Before construction of the pipeline, submit additional detailed information on the technicaoperational, cost, and public safety considerations of adding mercaptans to the CO stream[241] 3. Submit a complete pre-baseline MMV plan by October 15, 2012. [332] 4. Submit an annual report of operational performance, MMV results, associated analyses that describe how the operational performance of the scheme conforms with the modelling and predictions, and discussion of the need for MMV changes. [333] 5. Submit MMV plan updates as required by the ERCB; as a minimum, Shell must submit updates at critical milestones such as commencement of injection, closure, and post-closure [334] 6. Evaluate the need for adding another deep monitoring well completed in the Winnipegosis formation at either the 15-16 or 15-29 location, and provide its analysis by October 15, 2012. [339] 7. In its annual reporting, evaluate the need for additional deep monitoring wells adjacent to the four legacy wells in the AOI. [340] 8. Conduct hydraulic isolation logging after two years of injection. Any further hydraulic isolation logging over the life of the well will be determined by the ERCB through the annualreporting process. [342] 9. Immediately report any anomalies that indicate fracturing out-of-zone. [343] 10. Complete and submit the final refults of its geomechanical testing of the MCS. [345] 11. Immediately report evidence of loss of containment. [346] 12. Submit a more comprehensive project model using site-specific parameters to re-evaluate the issue of deformations caused by pressure changes, if monitoring shows loss of containment or unexpected surface heave. [346] 13. Address the potential need for micro-seismic arrays at other injection well pads by October 15, 2012. [347] 14. Address the need to rerun CO2 plume and pressure front models in the annual reporting process after the additional injection wells are drilled. {350] 15. Conduct additional fall-off tests with pressure transient analyses after two years of injection, in al injection wells, for comparison with the baseline pressure analysis of the 8-19 well. [351] 16. Submit the preliminary InSAR results showing the distribution of likely natural targets in its October 15, 2012, report. If the ERCB deems corner reflectors necessary, Shell must install the corner reflectors near each injection site at least 15 months before injection. [353] 17. Two years before commencing injection, provide a preliminary report on the InSAR baseline data that addresses the suitability of the data for the pressure front and geomechanical modelling and analysis recommended it its MMV plan. {354] 18. Provide a report to the ERCB six months after injection begins for early indication of the efficacy of the InSAR program. [354] 19. Allow additional water well owners to participate in the landowner water well portion of its MMV program at any time. Shell is required to include such wells in the MMV plan and associated reports. [357] 20. Clarify the process by which Shell determined the statistical significance of the number of domestic wter wells for monitoring within the 3.2 km radius of the proposed injector well locations. This information mush be included in the October 15, 2012, report to the ERCB. [358] 21. In its October 15, 2012, pre-baseline reporting of the MMB plan, address a phased assessment of natural variability of the geochemistry of the water in the domectic water wells included in its baseline study, including the need for more frequent sampling during both the baseline data collection and early operational monitoring periods. [360] 22. Address the potential need for installing additional monitoring wells in the Winnipegosis and BCS toward the periphery of the pressure build-up zone in the BCS later in the project life. This information must be included in each annual report and presentations. [361] 23. Complete its tracer feasibility study, and submit the results of the study one year before injection. If a tracer is deemed not technically feasible, then Shell mush provide a discussion of the baseline data and the methods by which anthropogenic CO2 will be distinguished from naturally occurring CO2. Shell is also required to conduct and analyse measurements of biogenic flux of CO2 in different soil types throughout the AIO, and to report on the results before injection. [363]
Location
12-32-055-21W4
Less detail

Decision 2012-09

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4487
Applicant
Enbridge Pipelines (Woodland) Incorporated
Application Number
1688169
1688170
Title
Decision 2012-009 : Enbridge Pipelines (Woodland Inc. applications for pipeline and pump station licences Fort McMurray area to Sherwood Park area
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-009 : Enbridge Pipelines (Woodland Inc. applications for pipeline and pump station licences Fort McMurray area to Sherwood Park area
Date
2012
Applicant
Enbridge Pipelines (Woodland) Incorporated
Application Number
1688169
1688170
Hearing Panel
Engen TC
McManus BT
McManus RC
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Pipelines
Descriptors
Bitumen
Pipeline
Pipeline licence
Pipeline construction
Pump station
NTS 84D
Route selection
Legal References
Pipeline Act Part 4
Energy Resources Conservation Act S26
2012 ABERCB 009
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Interveners
Svitich M
TransCanada Pipelines Limited
Approval
Approved
Conditions
APPENDIX 3 SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS AND COMMITMENTS The Board notes that Enbridge Pipelines (Woodland) Inc. (Enbridge Woodland) has made certain undertakings, promises, and commitments (collectively referred to as commitments) to parties involving activities or operations that are not strictly required under ERCB requirements. These commitments are separate arrangements between the parties and do not constitute conditions to the ERCB’s approval of the applications. COMMITMENTS BY ENBRIDGE PIPELINES (WOODLAND) INC. The following commitment is a statement given by Enbridge Woodland and recorded on the hearing record. Enbridge Woodland will work cooperatively and in good faith with TransCanada with regard to matters relating to the proposed routing for the proposed Woodland extension. Enbridge Woodland will also work cooperatively and in good faith with TransCanada with regard to an alternative route for the proposed Woodland extension in the western portion of the TransCanada Heartland property.
Location
07-08-084-06W6
Less detail

Decision 2012-10

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4486
Applicant
North West Upgrading Incorporated
Application Number
1734600
1734598
Title
Decision 2012-010 : North West Upgrading Inc. applications for two pipeline licences Redwater field
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-010 : North West Upgrading Inc. applications for two pipeline licences Redwater field
Date
2012
Applicant
North West Upgrading Incorporated
Application Number
1734600
1734598
Hearing Panel
Eynon G
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Pipelines
Descriptors
Pipeline
Pipeline licence
Bitumen
Redwater field
Dispute resolution
NTS 83H
Bruderheim area
Hydrogen sulphide
Legal References
Pipeline Act Part 4
2012 ABERCB 010
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Approval
Approved
Location
10-11-056-21W4
Less detail

Decision 2012-11

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4488
Applicant
Osum Oil Sands Corporation
Application Number
1636580
Title
Decision 2012-011 : Osum Oil Sands Corp. application for a commercial crude bitumen recovery scheme approval Cold Lake Oil Sands area
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-011 : Osum Oil Sands Corp. application for a commercial crude bitumen recovery scheme approval Cold Lake Oil Sands area
Date
2012
Applicant
Osum Oil Sands Corporation
Application Number
1636580
Hearing Panel
Watson TL
McManus BT
Bolton AH
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Enhanced recovery
Gas processing
Descriptors
In situ
Bitumen
Oil recovery
Steam assisted gravity drainage
Cold Lake area
Oil sands oil recovery
NTS 73L
Legal References
Oil Sands Conservation Act S10
Energy Resources Conservation Act S26
2012 ABERCB 011
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Interveners
Cold Lake First Nations (CLFN)
Hennessy S
North Bay Holdings Ltd.
Martin B
Hayward M
Approval
Approved
Location
xx-00-065-01W4
Less detail

Decision 2012-12

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4489
Applicant
Terra Energy Corporation
Application Number
1698084
1698094
Title
Decision 2012-012 : Terra Energy Corp. applications for an oil effluent pipeline Grande Prairie
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-012 : Terra Energy Corp. applications for an oil effluent pipeline Grande Prairie
Date
2012
Applicant
Terra Energy Corporation
Application Number
1698084
1698094
Hearing Panel
Watson TL
Engen TC
Dilay JD
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Enhanced recovery
Gas processing
Descriptors
Grande Cache area
NTS 83M
Effluent
Oil pipeline
Hydrogen sulphide
Health
Safety
Land use
Emergency response plan
Legal References
Pipeline Act Part 4
2012 ABERCB 012
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Interveners
East Route Interveners (ERI)
West Route Interveners (WRI)
Approval
Approved
Location
11-12-071-07W6
Less detail

Decision 2012-13

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4490
Applicant
Enbridge Pipelines (Athabasca) Incorporated
Application Number
1724271
1723966
Title
Decision 2012-013 : Enbridge Pipelines (Athabasca) Inc. applications for a pipeline and pipeline installation licences Kirby Lake Terminal to Battle River Terminal
Date
2012
Title
Decision 2012-013 : Enbridge Pipelines (Athabasca) Inc. applications for a pipeline and pipeline installation licences Kirby Lake Terminal to Battle River Terminal
Date
2012
Applicant
Enbridge Pipelines (Athabasca) Incorporated
Application Number
1724271
1723966
Hearing Panel
McManus BT
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Pipelines
Descriptors
Pipeline
Pipeline licence
Crude oil
Dispute resolution
NTS 83M
Pump station
Legal References
Pipeline Act Part 4
2012 ABERCB 013
Notes
Change to legal citation effective January 2011
Approval
Approved
Location
11-05-074-05W4
12-23-060-04W4
Less detail

14 records – page 1 of 1.