33 records – page 1 of 2.

Decision 71-03

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2238
Applicant
Petrogas Processing Ltd.
Application Number
5383
Title
Decision on application by Petrogas Processing Ltd., 1971 (gas processing Crossfield field Petrogas Processing Ltd.)
Date
1971
Title
Decision on application by Petrogas Processing Ltd., 1971 (gas processing Crossfield field Petrogas Processing Ltd.)
Date
1971
Applicant
Petrogas Processing Ltd.
Application Number
5383
Hearing Panel
Govier GW
Manyluk AF
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Gas processing
Descriptors
Crossfield field
Gas processing plant
Sulphur recovery
Air pollution
Emission
OPERATING
Pollution control
Sulphur dioxide
Notes
ERCB decision on application to amend board approval 843 and provincial boar of health interim air pollution approval No. 1092-P-265 relating to sulphur recovery at the Petrogas Crossfield gas plant; granted by approval No. No. 1477
Interveners
Department of Health
Approval
Approved
Less detail

Decision 78-08

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2112
Applicant
Amoco Canada Petroleum Company Limited
Application Number
780023
Title
Decision on inquiry into uncontrolled flow from the well Amoco Pacific Brazr 7-10-48-12 W5M in the Lodgepole Drayton Valley area, 1978
Date
1978
Title
Decision on inquiry into uncontrolled flow from the well Amoco Pacific Brazr 7-10-48-12 W5M in the Lodgepole Drayton Valley area, 1978
Date
1978
Applicant
Amoco Canada Petroleum Company Limited
Application Number
780023
Hearing Panel
DeSorcy GJ
Bohme VE
Kupchanko EE
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Inquiry - Blowout
Descriptors
Blowout (well)
Blowout control
Drayton Valley area
Lodgepole blowout
Sour gas
Well killing
Air pollution
Case history
Inquiry
Emergency procedure
Emission
Environmental impact
Health
Hydrogen sulphide
NTS 83G
Procedure
Safety
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S8.137
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S8.142
Notes
Decision 78-8 on proceeding No. 780023 to investigate an uncontrolled flow of sour gas from a well in LSD 7-10-48-12 W5M during a period from 1977-12-06 to 1978-01-02; Board inquiry 1978-02-22/23
Interveners
Alberta Disaster Services
Pacific Petroleum Ltd.
S&T Drilling (Northern) Ltd.
Less detail

Decision 82-12

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2066
Applicant
ESSO Resources Canada Limited
Application Number
810520
Title
Decision on application by Esso Resources Canada Limited, 1982 (Quirk Creek gas processing plant)
Date
1982
Title
Decision on application by Esso Resources Canada Limited, 1982 (Quirk Creek gas processing plant)
Date
1982
Applicant
ESSO Resources Canada Limited
Application Number
810520
Hearing Panel
Millard V
Strom NA
Evans RG
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Gas processing
Descriptors
Gas processing plant
Moose field
Quirk Creek plant
Sour gas
Whiskey field
Air pollution
Air quality
Emergency procedure
Emission
Environmental impact
ID-80-02
IL-71-29
IL-80-24
Expansion
Hydrogen sulphide
Injection
Monitoring
NTS 82J
Pollution control
Procedure
Sulphur dioxide
Sulphur recovery
Underground
Waste disposal
Water pollution
Legal References
Energy Resources Conservation Act S2
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S4
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S26
Notes
Decision 82-12 on application No. 810520 to utilize spare plant capacity to process sour gas reserves from Moose and Whiskey fields at the Quirk Creek gas plant located in the south half of section 4-21-4 W5M; Board hearing 1981-11-04/05/06/23/24/25/26 and 1981-12-14/15/16/17/18 and 1982-01-05/06; see also related Decision D82-3 on Jumping Pound gas plant and ERCB report 82-E for Decisions on related pipeline applications by Shell and Decision D83-8 for local interveners cost awards; see also related report 82-D
Interveners
Shell Canada Resources Limited
Hanen, Z.
Rumsey Ranches
Russell, A.
Canadian Wildlife Federation
Wolf, R.E.
Less detail

Decision 82-D

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2313
Applicant
Energy Resources Conservation Board
Application Number
810520
810092
Title
Sour gas processing in Alberta : a review of evidence presented at recent ERCB hearings respecting the impacts and surveillance of sour gas plants
Date
1982
Title
Sour gas processing in Alberta : a review of evidence presented at recent ERCB hearings respecting the impacts and surveillance of sour gas plants
Date
1982
Applicant
Energy Resources Conservation Board
Application Number
810520
810092
Category
Gas processing
Descriptors
Air pollution
Emission
Environmental impact
Gas processing
Nitrogen oxide
Soil pollution
Sour gas
Sulphur
Sulphur dioxide
Sulphur dioxide removal
Sulphur recovery
Water pollution
Acidification
Airborne waste
Alberta
Deposition
Exhaust gas
Health
Hydrogen sulphide
Injection
Livestock
Monitoring
Selenium
Trace element
Underground
Waste disposal
Notes
ERCB report 82-D arising from hearing to consider application for sour gas processing at Jumping Pound and Quirk Creek gas plants and pipeline to connect Moose and Whiskey sour gas reserves to Quirk Creek plant. for Decisions on these applications see ERCB Decisions 82-3, 82-12 and report 82-E
Less detail

Decision 83-04

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision1201
Applicant
Citadel Resources Ltd.
Scion Petroleum Engineering Limited
Application Number
820763
Title
Examiners report on application by Citadel Resources Ltd., 1983 (sour gas processing plant Sundre area)
Date
1983
Title
Examiners report on application by Citadel Resources Ltd., 1983 (sour gas processing plant Sundre area)
Date
1983
Applicant
Citadel Resources Ltd.
Scion Petroleum Engineering Limited
Application Number
820763
Hearing Panel
Homeniuk TF
Mazurek LA
Nichol JR
Hearing Type
Examiners
Category
Gas processing
Descriptors
Gas processing plant
Sour gas
Sundre area
Air pollution
Air quality
Design criteria
Emergency procedure
Emission
Health
Locating
Monitoring
Noise (sound)
NTS 82O
Plant location
Safety
Sulphur dioxide
Truck
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S26
Notes
Examiners report E83-4 on application No. 820763 by Scion Petroleum & Gildex Ltd. on behalf of Citadel for approval to construct a sour gas processing plant in LSD 13-20-33-5 W5M; Examiners hearing 1982-10-27 adjourned to 1982-11-25
Interveners
Residents in the County of Mountainview
Alberda, R.
Less detail

Decision 84-09

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision1698
Applicant
Amoco Canada Petroleum Company Limited
Application Number
830007
Title
Decision report 84-09: Lodgepole blowout report (phase 1)
Date
1984
Title
Decision report 84-09: Lodgepole blowout report (phase 1)
Date
1984
Applicant
Amoco Canada Petroleum Company Limited
Application Number
830007
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Inquiry - Blowout
Descriptors
Blowout (well)
Blowout control
Brazeau River field
Lodgepole blowout
Sour gas
Well killing
Air pollution
Emission
Environmental impact
Health
Hydrogen sulphide
NTS 83G
Procedure
Recommendation
Sulphur dioxide
Notes
Decision D84-9 on proceeding No. 830007 (phase 1) on blowout of the well, Amoco Dome Brazeau River 13-12-48-12; 1 volume (main report, summary& recommendations, addendum; pamphlet-causes, effects, actions filed with 1984 Decisions); see Decision report D84-5 for phase 2 report
Interveners
Nabors Drilling Limited
Doyle TL
Berg E
Brown B
Randall W
Rode G
Alberta Government Departments
Alberta Agriculture
Christian RG
Beck BE
Klavano GG
Lillie LE
Walkey D
Alberta Forest Service Division of Energy and Natural Resources
Benson JE
Jaap EG
McFadyen AB
Fish and Wildlife Division of Energy and Natural Resources
Thompson G
Hunt CA
Smith K
Wig D
Occupational Health and Safety Division of Workers' Health, Safety and Compensation
Johnston BJ
Arnold I
MacPherson J
Ung E
Weiss A
Alberta Disaster Services
Egener IDM
Tyler E
Bennett B
Langman SR
Social Services and Community Health
Provincial Board of Health
Durkin SM
Bharnbhani Y
O'Laney JM
Orford RR
Rogers RE
Waters JR
Love EJ
Alberta Environment
Kupchanko EE
Briggs RN
Kostler JF
Sakiyama S
Schulz AR
Edmonton Area Respiratory Patient
May C
McPherson C
Semaka MG
Clanachan AS
Brown NE
Sarns C
Campbell W
Town of Drayton Valley
Mayhew R
Dykes I
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Drayton Valley Detachment
Bannerman L
County of Parkland No. 31
Steele R
Canadian Institute of Public Health Inspectors - Alberta Branch
Greenwood R
Hodge T
Alberta West Central Health Unit
Bayliss NJ
Public Advisory Committee to the Environment Council of Alberta
Kostuch MS
Behie SW
Guy PR
Johnson RL
Health Unit Association of Alberta
Shell Canada Resources Ltd.
Canterra Energy Ltd.
Canadian Petroleum Association
Independent Petroleum Association of Canada
Canadian Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors
Environmental Law Centre
City of Edmonton
Edmonton Board of Health
Pembina Area Sour Gas Exposures Committee
Macintosh R
Baker D
Baker O
Grinde M
Strach C
Whitelock C
Elton W
Lodgepole Area Panel
Belair D
Nail L
Wentland T
Violet Grove Area Panel
C. Andersen
Bolianatz J
McGhee D
Buck Creek Area Panel
Rosell C
Rosell WD
Sackela R
Wasser A
Cynthia Area Panel
Beck R
Nichols D
Penner J
Easyford Area Panel
Huska D
Huska J
Kynoch B
Macintosh L
Vowk D
Drayton Valley Panel
Benger J
Gottschalk E
Guze O
Rowles J
Stewart J
Health Panel
Horstman L
Josephson KE
Cowdery R
Struzik E
Members of the Public
Luethi H
Henkle Mrs.
McConnen S
Beckett L
Gramlich D
Rosell W
Smeland L
Cavanagh C
Shirvell W
Welsh Mr.
Bosrnan A
Barnett Mr.
Hall E
Mallett L
Sams C
Less detail

Decision 84-B

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision1695
Applicant
East Claresholm Clean Air Association
Title
Public meeting to consider concerns regarding an uncontrolled flow of sour gas and the operation of a sour gas plant in the Claresholm area
Date
1984
Title
Public meeting to consider concerns regarding an uncontrolled flow of sour gas and the operation of a sour gas plant in the Claresholm area
Date
1984
Applicant
East Claresholm Clean Air Association
Hearing Panel
Bellows LA
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Inquiry
Descriptors
Air pollution
Blowout (well)
Blowout control
Claresholm area
Gas processing plant
Sour gas
Air quality
Blowout preventer
Emergency procedure
Environmental impact
Evacuation
Gas well
Health
Hydrogen sulphide
Livestock
Monitoring
NTS 82H
NTS 82I
Planning
Safety
Soil analysis
Notes
Report on a public meeting regarding the sour gas well blowout (Drummond et al Claresholm 6-30-12-25 W4M) and ongoing concerns over the operation of the Claresholm sour gas processing plant located in the SW quarter of section 30-12-25 W4M; public meeting 1984-11-08
Less detail

Decision 87-09

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision208
Applicant
Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.
Application Number
861041
Title
Decision on application by Norcen Energy Resources Ltd., 1987 (approval of a gas processing plant in the Campbell-Namao field)
Date
1987
Title
Decision on application by Norcen Energy Resources Ltd., 1987 (approval of a gas processing plant in the Campbell-Namao field)
Date
1987
Applicant
Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.
Application Number
861041
Hearing Panel
Goodman CJ
Mink FJ
Bruni MJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Gas processing
Descriptors
Campbell Namao field
Gas processing plant
Sour gas
Air pollution
Air quality
Citizen participation
Emission
Environmental impact
Health
Locating
Negotiation
Noise (sound)
NTS 73H
Safety
Soil analysis
Sulphur dioxide
Sulphur recovery
Water quality
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S26
Notes
Decision D87-9 on application No. 861041 to construct a gas processing plant in LSD 1-55-25 W4M to process non-associate and solution gas from wells in several fields in the general area; Board hearing 1987-03-17/18/19
Interveners
Rose Ridge Citizens Committee
Blach, W.
Bocock, J.
Pasay, I.
Silito, S.
Sinkovics, A.
Zuidema, P.
Councillor in the Municipal District of Sturgeon #90
MLA for Consistuency of Westlock-Sturgeon
Location
##-01-055-25W4
Less detail

Decision 88-05

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision168
Applicant
AEC Pipelines
Application Number
871983
Title
Decision on application by AEC pipelines, 1988 (pump station and related facilities in the la Corey area)
Date
1988
Title
Decision on application by AEC pipelines, 1988 (pump station and related facilities in the la Corey area)
Date
1988
Applicant
AEC Pipelines
Application Number
871983
Hearing Panel
Mink FJ
Dilay JD
Sharp KG
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Pipelines
Descriptors
La Corey area
Pipeline pump
Pump station
Storage facility
TANK
Air pollution
Emission
Environmental impact
Land value
Noise (sound)
NTS 73L
Pollution
Truck
Legal References
Pipeline Act Part 4
Notes
Decision D88-5 (and interim Decision) on application No. 871983 to construct a pump station and related facilities along its Cold Lake to Edmonton pipeline system in LSD 14-30-63-5 W4M (Lacorey terminal); amendment dated 1988-07-26; Board hearing 1988-04-13/14
Interveners
Dyck, J.
Szymanski, F.
Szymanski, M.
Sabatier, G.
Spanier, W.
Spanier, G.
Location
14-30-063-05W4
Less detail

Decision 88-22

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision146
Applicant
Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.
Application Number
861041
Title
Decision on application by Norcen Energy Resources Ltd., 1988 (approval of a gas processing facility in the Campbell-Namao field)
Date
1988
Title
Decision on application by Norcen Energy Resources Ltd., 1988 (approval of a gas processing facility in the Campbell-Namao field)
Date
1988
Applicant
Norcen Energy Resources Ltd.
Application Number
861041
Hearing Panel
Mink FJ
Bruni MJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Gas processing
Descriptors
Campbell Namao field
Gas processing plant
Sour gas
Air pollution
Air quality
Citizen participation
Emission
Environmental impact
Health
Locating
Negotiation
Noise (sound)
NTS 73H
Safety
Soil analysis
Sulphur dioxide
Sulphur recovery
Water quality
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S26
Notes
Decision D88-22 on application No. 861041 to construct a gas processing plant in LSD 1-55-25 W4M to process non-associate and solution gas from well in several fields in the general area; pre-hearing meeting held 1988-09-08.
Interveners
A Group of Area Residents
Blach, W.
Bocok, J.
Mackay, G.
Sinkovics, A.
Councillor in the Municipal District of Sturgeon # 90
MLA for Constitutuency of Westlock- Sturgeon
Location
##-01-055-25W4
Less detail

Decision 90-B

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision99
Applicant
Energy Resources Conservation Board
Concord Scientific Corporation
Title
Field measurement program (Gascon2) (Gascon)
Date
1990
Title
Field measurement program (Gascon2) (Gascon)
Date
1990
Applicant
Energy Resources Conservation Board
Concord Scientific Corporation
Category
Environment/Pollution
Descriptors
Air pollution
Airborne waste
Atmospheric diffusion
Blowout (well)
Emission
Gas leak
Hazard
Hydrogen sulphide
Meteorological data
Pipeline accident
Plume
Risk
Sour gas
Sulphur dioxide
Comparison
Evaluation
Mathematical model
Model
Monitoring
Sample analysis
Notes
Preliminary draft released 1990-04-06, final report released 1990-10 10 volume plus background release public document non-circulating no photocopies
Less detail

Decision 97-08

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2854
Applicant
Cardinal River Coals Ltd.
TransAlta Utilities Corporation
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Application Number
960313
960314
960677
Title
Decision 97-08: Cardinal River Coals Ltd. and TransAlta Utilities Corporation : Appplication for EUB-CEAA Joint Review Panel - Cheviot Coal Project, Mountain Park Area, Alberta : Report
Date
1997
Title
Decision 97-08: Cardinal River Coals Ltd. and TransAlta Utilities Corporation : Appplication for EUB-CEAA Joint Review Panel - Cheviot Coal Project, Mountain Park Area, Alberta : Report
Date
1997
Applicant
Cardinal River Coals Ltd.
TransAlta Utilities Corporation
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Application Number
960313
960314
960677
Hearing Type
Joint
Utilities
Category
Coal
Descriptors
Coal project
Cheviot coal project
Air pollution
Air quality
Biological effect
Coal development policy for Alberta (1976)
Coal mine
Coal preparation plant
Environmental impact
Mountain Park area
NTS 83C
Open pit mining
Physiological effect
Socio-economic effect
Soil pollution
Transmission line
Water pollution
Water quality
Wildlife
Legal References
Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act S47
Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act S51
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act S37
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act S40
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act S41
Coal Conservation Act S10
Coal Conservation Act S23
Energy Resources Conservation Act S29
EUB Rules of Practice
Fisheries Act S35
Hydro and Electric Energy Act S12
Hydro and Electric Energy Act S14
Hydro and Electric Energy Act S17
Notes
EUB Decision D97-08 (report of the EUB-CEAA Joint Review Panel) on applications no. 960313, 960314, and 960677 by Cardinal River Coals and TransAlta Utilities Corporation for a proposed coal mine and coal processing plant (Cheviot Coal Project) and associated transmission line and substation (all in township 45-46, range 22-24, W5M); Joint Review Panel public hearing 1997-01-13 through 1997-02-20 and re-opened on 1997-04-01 for one day
Interveners
King MA
Inland Cement
Weldwood Canada
Hinton and District Chamber of Commerce
Alberta Chamber of Commerce
United Mine Workers of America Local 1656
Town of Hinton
Van Binsbergen D
Breitkreuz C
Alexis First Nation
Cadomin Environmental Protection Association
Alpine Club of Canada
Alberta Native Plant Council
Mountain Park Environmental Protection and Heritage Association
Alberta Wilderness Association
Jasper Environmental Society
Pembina Institute for Responsible Development
Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
Gadd B
Alberta Fish and Game Association
Trout Unlimited
Rocky Mountain Ecosystem Coalition
Western Canada Wilderness Committee
Smallboy Camp
Dave family
Clark JD
Higgins B
Approval
Approved
Conditions
Section 35-45-24 W5M and SW quarter of Section 36-45-24 W5M (upper Prospect Creek) are excluded from application no. 960313
Cardinal Rivers Coals (CRC) shall monitor aquatic ecology of Lac Des Roche
CRC shall justify the need for each end lake pit and rock drain
CRC shall carry out long term monitoring of groundwater and surface water quality
CRC shall maintain 1000 m buffer between mine disturbance and the Cardinal Divide Natural Area wherever practical
CRC shall monitor impacts on wildlife populations
CRC shall establish permissable noise levels
CRC shall establish community liaison groups, in particular with the Mountain Park Association, stewards of the Cardinal Divide Natural Area, the Alexis First Nation, and the Smallboy Camp
Less detail

Decision 98-01

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2893
Applicant
CE Alberta BioClean Ltd.
Application Number
960864
Title
Decision 98-10: CE Alberta BioClean Ltd.: Application for an industrial development permit for a new MTBE / ETBE plant, Fort Saskatchewan area
Date
1998
Title
Decision 98-10: CE Alberta BioClean Ltd.: Application for an industrial development permit for a new MTBE / ETBE plant, Fort Saskatchewan area
Date
1998
Applicant
CE Alberta BioClean Ltd.
Application Number
960864
Hearing Panel
Mink FJ
McManus BT
Schnitzler WJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Industrial development permit
Descriptors
Air pollution
Butane
Chemical plant
Carbon dioxide
Emergency procedure
Energy conservation - industrial
Environmental impact
Ethanol
Ether
Fort Saskatchewan area
Gas flaring
Gasoline
Grain crop
Hydrogen
Industrial development permit
Locating
Methanol
Petrochemistry
Petroleum product
Demand (economics)
Natural gas - fuel
Noise (sound)
NTS 83H
Safety
Socio-economic effect
Supply (economics)
Legal References
Agricultural and Recreational Land Ownership Act
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S42
Notes
EUB decision D98-01 on application no. 960864 for an industrial development permit respecting a new methyl tertiary butyl ether (MBTE) / ethyl teriary butyl ether (ETBE) facility in Strathcona County at Section 18, Twp 55 Rg 21 W4M. The IDP application requested permit to use field butanes and hydrogen as feedstock to convert barley in the production of ethanol, methonol, ethers MTBE/ETBE, and agricultural livestock feed by-product Distillers Dried Grain with Soluables (DDGS); and permit to use natural gas as a fuel
Board hearing 1997-09-04/05
Interveners
Trans Mountain Pipe Line Company Ltd.
Alberta Barley Commission
City of Fort Saskatchewan
Strathcona County
Alberta Envirofuels Inc.
Dzurny AM
Demeule NE
Schotte E
Finch A
Chartrand M
Anez VM
Approval
Approved
Approved with conditions
Conditions
That satisfactory corporate and financial arrangements are in place to develop the project in advance of the start of construction
That a satisfactory emergycy response plan has been developed and implemented before the start up of the project
Location
##-18-055-21W4
Less detail

Decision 98-03

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2909
Applicant
Shell Chemicals Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1008234
Title
Decision 98-03 : Shell Chemicals Canada Ltd.: Application for an industrial development permit for a new ethylene glycols plant, Fort Saskatchewan area
Date
1998
Title
Decision 98-03 : Shell Chemicals Canada Ltd.: Application for an industrial development permit for a new ethylene glycols plant, Fort Saskatchewan area
Date
1998
Applicant
Shell Chemicals Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1008234
Hearing Panel
Mink FJ
Miller GJ
Bruni MJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Industrial development permit
Descriptors
Ethylene glycol
Air pollution
Chemical plant
Emergency procedure
Energy conservation - industrial
Environmental impact
Ethylene - raw material
Fort Saskatchewan area
Industrial development permit
Land use
Natural gas - raw material
Petroleum product
Regional planning
Safety
Socio-economic effect
NTS 83H
Notes
EUB decision D98-03 on application no. 1008234 for an industrial development permit respecting a new ethylene glycols facility in Strathcona County at Section 32, Twp 55 Rg 21 W4M and the south half of Section 5 Twp 56 Rg 21 W4M. The IDP application requested authorization to use ethylene feedstock and natural gas as fuel in the production of monoethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, and triethylene glycol
Interveners
Strathcona County
City of Fort Saskatchewan
Dzurny AM
Demeule NE
Schotte E
Samoil K
Anez VM
Approval
Approved
Location
##-32-055-21W4
##-05-056-21W4
Less detail

Decision 98-07

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2915
Applicant
Union Carbide Canada Inc.
Application Number
970188
Title
Decision 98-07 : Union Carbide Canada Inc.: Application for a proposed new polyethylene plant, Prentiss area
Date
1998
Title
Decision 98-07 : Union Carbide Canada Inc.: Application for a proposed new polyethylene plant, Prentiss area
Date
1998
Applicant
Union Carbide Canada Inc.
Application Number
970188
Hearing Panel
Mink FJ
Boon JA
Rahnama F
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Industrial development permit
Descriptors
Air pollution
Chemical plant
Environmental impact
Ethylene
Ethylene - raw material
Industrial development permit
Land reclamation
Land use
Natural gas - fuel
NTS 83A
Railroad
Reclamation
Regional planning
Safety
Soil conservation
Notes
EUB decision D98-07 on application no. 970188 for an industrial development permit respecting a new polyethylene plant to be located at its existing Prentiss site in the west half of Section 30, Township 39, Range 25, W4M. The applicant applied to use a maximum of 740 kilotonnes per year of ethylene as feedstock and 83.85 million cubic metres per year of natural gas as fuel in the production of a maximum of 771 kt/yr of polyethylene. The plant would have a rail loading facility associated with it; Board Hearing 1997-11-03/04/25
Interveners
Canadian National Railway
Sharp M
Chessor D
Pocock B
Friesen G
Gordon M
Hainsworth J
Anez VM
Approval
Approved
Location
##-30-039-25W4
Less detail

Decision 98-11

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2946
Applicant
Caprice Holdings Inc.
Application Number
970378
Title
Decision 98-11 : Caprice Holdings Inc.: Application to construct and operate an oilfield waste management facility, Brazeau/Elk River area
Date
1998
Title
Decision 98-11 : Caprice Holdings Inc.: Application to construct and operate an oilfield waste management facility, Brazeau/Elk River area
Date
1998
Applicant
Caprice Holdings Inc.
Application Number
970378
Hearing Panel
Dilay JD
Mink FJ
Shirley EA
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Waste management
Descriptors
Air pollution
Brazeau River area
Citizen participation
Elk River area
Environmental impact assessment
Environmental impact
Flare
Guide 58
Groundwater
Hydrogeology
Locating
Organic compound
Regulation
Waste disposal
Waste treatment
NTS 83B
Legal References
Energy Resources Conservation Act S29
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S26
Notes
EUB Decision D98-14 on application no. 970378 by Caprice Holdings to construct and operate an oilfield waste management facility at Lsd 11, Section 3, Township 47, Range 11 W5M to process solids, produced water, and oily waste. Issues considered included the need for the facility, the location and impact, adequacy of public consultation, and issues surrounding the Board application process such as completeness and accuracy, need for an EIA, initiation of facility construction proir to approval, and the role of interveners.
Interveners
Byram Industrial Services Ltd.
Kalita P
Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development
Approval
Approved
Approved with conditions
Conditions
Groundwater monitoring and submission of a re-evaluation of the geology and hydrogeology of the site prior to operation
Solids storage pit: to contain solids defined in Guide 58 only, and to be cleaned and inspected annually
Surface runoff containment: management system is appropriate
Location
11-03-047-11W5
Less detail

Decision 2000-59

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision3281
Applicant
Cardinal River Coals Ltd.
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Application Number
960313
960314
Title
Decision on application by Cardinal River Coals Ltd., Cheviot Coal Project, 2000 (report of the EUB-CEAA Joint Review Panel - Cheviot Coal Project, Mountain Park Area, Alberta) (EUB Applications No. 960313 and 960314)
Date
2000
Title
Decision on application by Cardinal River Coals Ltd., Cheviot Coal Project, 2000 (report of the EUB-CEAA Joint Review Panel - Cheviot Coal Project, Mountain Park Area, Alberta) (EUB Applications No. 960313 and 960314)
Date
2000
Applicant
Cardinal River Coals Ltd.
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Application Number
960313
960314
Hearing Panel
Bietz BF
Miller GJ
Beck T
Hearing Type
Joint
Utilities
Category
Coal
Descriptors
Air pollution
Air quality
Biological effect
Cheviot Coal Project
Coal development policy for Alberta (1976)
Coal mining
Coal preparation plant
Ecological research
Environmental impact
Evaluation
Indians of North America
Mountain Park Area
NTS 83C
Open pit mining
Physiological effect
Road construction
Socio-economic effect
Soil pollution
Transmission line
Water pollution
Water quality
Wildlife
Legal References
Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act S47
Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act S51
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act S37
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act S40
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act S41
Coal Conservation Act S10
Coal Conservation Act S23
Energy Resources Conservation Act S29
EUB Rules of Practice
Fisheries Act S35
Hydro and Electric Energy Act S12
Hydro and Electric Energy Act S14
Hydro and Electric Energy Act S17
Notes
Conclusions made in this report are supplemental to those made in the Panels' 1997 report, Decision 97-8 (Appendix 1) and include any new information obtained since the release of that report.
Interveners
Hinton and District Chamber of Commerce
Gouthro B
Dery M
Carramusa R
Mork C
United Mine Workers of America, Local 1656 (UMWA)
Campbell R
Town of Hinton
Risvold R
Alberta Environment (AENV)
Alberta Health and Wellness
Macdonald W
Cox D
Smith K
Stenhouse G
Sterling G
Notan L
MacKenzie A
Cadomin Environmental Protection Association (CEPA)
Way C
Government of Canada
Linsey G
Tupper R
LeFebvre JG
LaPalme L
Fairbairn M
Fenton W
Gregoire P
Holroyd G
Hooper R
Weaver J
Bradford W
Cardiff S
Johnson D
Dobson B
Purves H
Hodgins D
Kirkland D
Weldwood of Canada Ltd. (Weldwood)
Udell R
Stauffer R
Lougheed H
Alberta Wilderness Association, Jasper Environmental Society,
Pembina Institute for Responsible Development, Canadian
Parks and Wilderness Society, and Ben Gadd (AWA Coalition)
Pachal D
Gunsch S
Gadd B
Seaton J
Notnes R
Kittredge P
Howery D
Stellmach H
Mountain Park Environmental Protection and
Heritage Association
Godby EA
Bracko M
Alpine Club of Canada/Alberta Native Plant Council (ACC/ANPC)
Dinwoodie A
Strang I
Breitkreuz C
Griffiths G
Mountain Cree Camp
Mountain Cree Camp Syllabics Institute
Nadeau M
Parry B
Fedirchuk G
Nielson R
Budinski J
Trout Unlimited Canada (TUC)
Brewin K
Alberta Fish and Game Association (AFGA)
Alexis First Nation (AFN)
Chief Francis Alexis
Potts P
Canadian Nature Federation (CNF)
Environmental Resource Centre
Clark J. D
Mitchell J
O’Chiese J
Western Canada Wilderness Committee (WCWC)
Phillips L
Jones G
Treaty 8 First Nations of Alberta (Treaty 8 FN)
Rath J
Handel J
Panel Consultants:
Ross W
Peterson E
Stephenson HG
Panel Secretariat:
Kennedy WY
MacLachlan LJ
Henderson DIR
Seguin N
Creasey R
Powell R
Thompson JP
Roberts L
Stoddart A
Brown C
Morris D
Nixon V
Approval
Approved
Conditions
In addition to the original conditions, CRC shall: monitor selenium levels in the water of new end-pit lakes and assess adverse effects; schedule its rail and road construction after consulting with regional forestry and petroleum companies; conduct surveys for rare plant species on mine property; control mining impact on grizzly bears; protect historic archaeological sites; develop alternative to Mountain Park off-highway staging site; maintain regional environmental management initiatives.
Less detail

Decision 2001-111

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision3490
Applicant
Epcor Generation Inc.
Epcor Power Development Corpoaration
Application Number
2001173
Title
Decision 2001-111: EPCOR Generation Inc. and EPCOR Power Development Corporation expansion of Genesee power plant
Date
2001
Title
Decision 2001-111: EPCOR Generation Inc. and EPCOR Power Development Corporation expansion of Genesee power plant
Date
2001
Applicant
Epcor Generation Inc.
Epcor Power Development Corpoaration
Application Number
2001173
Hearing Panel
McCrank MN
Lock RG
Miller GJ
Hearing Type
Board
Utilities
Category
Electric power
Descriptors
Electric power generation
Genesee Power Plant
Coal - fuel
Thermal Power Plant
Leduc area
NTS 83G
Decision D2001-33
Decision D2001-101
Environmental impact
Safety
Air pollution
Fisheries
Water pollution
Wildlife
Noise (sound)
Health
Human factor
Socio-economic effect
Cooling system
Legal References
Hydro and Electric Energy Act S9
Hydro and Electric Energy Act S2
Energy Resources Conservation Act S2
Notes
EUB Decision 2001-111 on application no. 2001173 by EPCOR Generation Inc. and EPCOR Power Development Corporation to construct a 490-megawatt expansion to its existing coal-fired Genesee power plant at Rge 25-50-3 W5M
Interveners
Alberta Environment
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
Capital Health Authority
Clean Energy Coalition
Department of Fisheries and Oceans
ENMAX Energy Corporation
ENMAX Power Corporation
Enron Canada Corporation
Environment Canada
ESBI Alberta Ltd.
Fording Coal Limited
Hebner Group
Kruger Group (for the local area residents of Genesee)
Mewassin Community Action Group
Paul First Nation
TransAlta Utilities Corporation
TransCanada Energy Limited
Anderson AM
Bernette Ho L
Bird T
Bjorge R
Blackall P
Bodnarek R
Bradford J
Buchwald V
Bull A
Buss K
Cheng L
Chesterman D
Cook S
Cusano LA
Dobko R
Donahue W
Fairbairn M
Forster C
Forster L
Gagner E
Gaspe D
Good Striker D
Griffiths M
Hannaford DJ
Hebner B
Hebner D
Hemstock RN
Hnytka F
Huber HR
Kellerhals M
Kruger D
Lakeman B
Lawrence L
Lawrence S
Legge A
Lloyd D
MacDonald B
Mackenzie A
Mak A
Marr-Laing T
McDonald K
Paul D
Phillips L
Rain O
Rain P
Rain R
Ross G
Sawatsky N
Secord RC
Shores W
Stepaniuk DW
Stubbings
Tyrell H
Valupadas P
Vincent M
Wallace RB
Yanor-McRae R
Approval
Approved
Conditions
The Board expects that EPCOR will adhere to all commitments it made during the consultation process, in the application, and at the hearing on such matters as mitigation, monitoring, and bilateral agreements.
Location
##-25-050-03W5
Less detail

Decision 2002-55

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision3511
Applicant
Canadian Crude Separators Inc.
Application Number
2000343
1242258
1096927
1096321
Title
Decision 2002-55: Canadian Crude Separators Inc. applications to construct and operate an oilfield waste management facility, drill a disposal well, construct and operate a pipeline, and operate a disposal scheme Edson field
Date
2002
Title
Decision 2002-55: Canadian Crude Separators Inc. applications to construct and operate an oilfield waste management facility, drill a disposal well, construct and operate a pipeline, and operate a disposal scheme Edson field
Date
2002
Applicant
Canadian Crude Separators Inc.
Application Number
2000343
1242258
1096927
1096321
Hearing Panel
Bietz BF
Nichol JR
Railton JB
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Waste management
Descriptors
Air pollution
Citizen participation
Edson field
Environmental impact assessment
Flare
Guide 51
Guide 55
Guide 58
Injection well
Leduc Fm
Locating
NTS 83F
Pipeline construction
Pipeline route
Waste disposal
Waste treatment
Notes
CCS INc. applied to the Board to construct an oilfield waste management facility at LSD 7-18-53-18W5M; to drill a well at LSD 12-16-53-19W5M; to construct and operate 7.8 km of pipeline and to inject class 1b fluids into the Leduc Fm.
Interveners
West Edson Landlords Coalition
Armstrong J
Bugg H
Bugg J
Chapman N
Crawford C
Crawford D
Knutson E
Makowecki F
Secord RC
Thebeau B
Thebeau D
Thompson C
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
EUB hereby approves the applications subject to the applicant's strict adherence to the commitments and conditions summarized in the Appendix. Application No. 1096321 is approved subject to the drilling and evaluation of the proposed well and to adherence with the wellbore integrity requirements of Guide 51 : Injection and Disposal Wells.
Location
07-18-053-18W5
12-16-053-19W5
Less detail

Decision 2006-85

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4166
Applicant
Shell Canada Limited
Application Number
1398448
Title
Decision 2006-085: Decision on an application by Shell Canada Limited to expand the Scotford upgrader, Strathcona County, Fort Saskatchewan
Date
2006
Title
Decision 2006-085: Decision on an application by Shell Canada Limited to expand the Scotford upgrader, Strathcona County, Fort Saskatchewan
Date
2006
Applicant
Shell Canada Limited
Application Number
1398448
Hearing Panel
Lock RG
Remmer WG
Warren WA
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Industrial development permit
Descriptors
Air pollution
Airborne waste
Emergency procedure
Emergency response plan
Fort Saskatchewan area
ID 2001-03
Monitoring
Noise (sound)
NTS 83H
Pollution control
Sulphur recovery
Legal References
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act S49
Interveners
Industrial Heartland Residents (IHR)
Chichak D
Chichak M
Radke J
Radke K
Radke R
Northwest Upgrading Inc.
Synenco Energy Inc.
Brown A
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 COMMITMENTS BY SHELL CANADA LIMITED 1 The following commitments were made by Shell during the hearing: 1.1 Sulphur Recovery 1.2 Emergency Response Planning 1.3 Noise 1.4 Construction Traffic 1.5 Voluntary Land Purchase Program 2 The following commitments are taken from Hearing Exhibit 12, submission 45697, Shell, June 16, 2006: 2.1 Stack Top Temperature 2.2 Flaring 2.3 Leak Detection and Repair Program 2.4 Cooling Tower Emissions 2.5 Equipment Exhaust Stack Emissions 2.6 Ultra Low NOx Burners 2.7 Air Monitoring APPENDIX 3 APPROVAL CONDITIONS This section is provided for the convenience of readers. In the event of any difference between the conditions in this section and those in the main body of the decision, the wording in the main body of the decision shall prevail. 1) Shell will coordinate another track clearing exercise within six months of the approval date and will report on the performance of the exercise to the EUB and other stakeholders. 2) Shell will comply with the minimum calendar quarter-year sulphur recovery guidelines set out in ID 2001-03, Table 1, on the basis of the calendar quarter-year average sulphur content of the combined acid gas feed to the sulphur recovery processes installed at its Scotford complex inclusive of the sulphur content of acid gas that is flared.
Less detail

33 records – page 1 of 2.