44 records – page 1 of 3.

Decision 2000-04

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision3203
Applicant
Anderson Resources Limited
Application Number
1042760
1048692
Title
Examiner report on application by Anderson Resources Ltd. applications for a well licence ARL Gordondale 14-30-79-10, Gordondale area
Date
2000
Title
Examiner report on application by Anderson Resources Ltd. applications for a well licence ARL Gordondale 14-30-79-10, Gordondale area
Date
2000
Applicant
Anderson Resources Limited
Application Number
1042760
1048692
Hearing Panel
Langlo CA
Willard RJ
Abel TG
Hearing Type
Examiners
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Emergency response plan
Exploratory well
Wabamun Fm
Kiskatinaw Fm
Gordondale field
NTS 83M
Well licence
Legal References
Energy Resources Conservation Act S29
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Notes
Examiner report E2000-04 on application no. 1042760 for a licence to drill a level-2 noncritical sour gas well from surface location Lsd 31 Sec 79 Twp 10 W6M to produce gas from the Wabamun and Kiskatinaw formaitons, resulting in well licence no. 0224954 and objected to under ERCA S29; in response Anderson proposed alternate surface location at Lsd 5 Sec 30 Twp 79 Rge 10 W6M as application no. 1048692
Interveners
Lee W
Approval
Approved
Location
05-30-079-10W6
Less detail

Decision 2001-98

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision3486
Applicant
Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1247815
Title
Decision 2001-98: Burlington Resources Canada Energy Ltd. production operations emergency response plan Gregg Lake, Hinton area
Date
2001
Title
Decision 2001-98: Burlington Resources Canada Energy Ltd. production operations emergency response plan Gregg Lake, Hinton area
Date
2001
Applicant
Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1247815
Hearing Panel
Berndtsson NG
McGee TM
Willard RJ
Hearing Type
Board
Descriptors
Emergency Response Plan
Gas pipeline
Gas processing
Hinton area
Horizontal drilling
NTS 83F
Pipeline construction
Sour gas
Interveners
Ramsey L
Tymstra C
Approval
Approved
Less detail

Decision 2004-90

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision3893
Applicant
EOG Resources Canada Inc.
Application Number
1327299
Title
Decision 2004-090 EOG Resources Canada Inc. application for a licence for a natural gas well Jumping Pound West
Date
2004
Title
Decision 2004-090 EOG Resources Canada Inc. application for a licence for a natural gas well Jumping Pound West
Date
2004
Applicant
EOG Resources Canada Inc.
Application Number
1327299
Hearing Panel
Nichol JR
McGee TM
Waisman DD
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Air quality
Emergency Response Plan
Emission
Gas well
Health
Hydrogen sulphide
Jumping Pound west field
Natural gas
NTS 82O
Property
Public consultation
Safety
Site survey
Sour gas
Value
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.20
Interveners
O'Nions D
Deer D
Deere K
Cook P
M.D. of Rockyview
West T
Pedenko V
Kovats J
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
Should EOG drill this well in the winter months, EOG must have a contractor on standby to plough the roads, if necessary, to ensure that the roads are passable in the event that an evacuation is necessary while conducting operations in the sour zone.
EOG must supply copies of the updated ERP to any resident within the EPZ who requests it.
EOG is directed to ensure that its test of communications and response protocols conforms to a tabletop exercise, including communications, as described in Appendix 3 of Guide 71.
Location
07-02-024-05W5
10-35-023-05W5
Less detail

Decision 2005-35

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision3951
Applicant
Talisman Energy Inc.
Application Number
1356869
Title
Decision 2005-35: Talisman Energy Inc. application for a well licence Turner Valley
Date
2005
Title
Decision 2005-35: Talisman Energy Inc. application for a well licence Turner Valley
Date
2005
Applicant
Talisman Energy Inc.
Application Number
1356869
Hearing Panel
Nichol JR
McGee TM
Remmer WG
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Emergency Response Plan
Hydrogen sulphide
NTS 82J
Turner Valley field
Well licence
Legal References
EUB Rules of Practice S20
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Interveners
Schmaus H Schmaus T
Approval
Withdrawn
Location
02-17-019-02W5
Less detail

Decision 2005-58

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4004
Applicant
Intrepid Energy Corporation
Application Number
1366746
Title
Decision 2005-058: Intrepid Energy Corporation application for a well licence, Sturgeon Lake South Field
Date
2005
Title
Decision 2005-058: Intrepid Energy Corporation application for a well licence, Sturgeon Lake South Field
Date
2005
Applicant
Intrepid Energy Corporation
Application Number
1366746
Hearing Panel
Nichol JR
Boyler DK
Willard RJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Directional well
Emergency Response Plan
Hydrogen sulphide
Leduc Fm
NTS 83K
NTS 83N
Sturgeon Lake south field
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Interveners
Sturgeon Lake Cabin Owners Group
Bustin K
Rigler K
Lessoway R
Marcie G
Boutilier P
Municipal District of Greenview No.19
Tymchyshyn
Approval
Approved
Less detail

Decision 2005-60

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4006
Applicant
Compton Petroleum Corporation
Application Number
1276857
1276858
1276859
1276860
1307759
1307760
Title
Decision 2005-060: Comptom Petroleum applications for licences to drill six critical sour natural gas wells, reduced emergency planning zone, special well spacing, and production facilities Okotoks Field (Southeast Calgary Area)
Date
2005
Title
Decision 2005-060: Comptom Petroleum applications for licences to drill six critical sour natural gas wells, reduced emergency planning zone, special well spacing, and production facilities Okotoks Field (Southeast Calgary Area)
Date
2005
Applicant
Compton Petroleum Corporation
Application Number
1276857
1276858
1276859
1276860
1307759
1307760
Hearing Panel
Berg AJ
Miller GJ
Nichol JR
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Battery
Decision D2000 20
Drilling spacing unit
Emergency Response Plan
Facility licence
Gas producing
Guide 56
Guide 71
Horizontal drilling
Horizontal well
Hydrogen sulphide
Natural gas
NTS 82J
Okotoks field
Public interest
Sour gas
Target area
Well licence
Well spacing
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S79
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S7.001
Interveners
Munro S
Newton J
Baiton N
Burditt G
Burns West Corporation
Burns J
Calgary Health Region
Lambert T
Stefani D
Carma Developers
Clark RFE
City of Calgary
Cochrane P
Morris W Chief
Reinfliesch H
Coalition of Concerned Communities
Erin Woods Community Association
Peace I
Evans B
Evans J
Franklin S
Friends of Medicare
Chase H
Front Line Residents Group
Gecko Management Consultants
Hemstock J
McManus R
RWDI West Inc.
Dowsett I
Springer A
Cheung A
Christensen M
Pearson J
Pincott B
Oloman N
Municipal District of Rocky View
West T (Chief)
Ollerenshaw Ranch
Brown G
Taylor P
Pearson R
Pearosn S
Queenan M
A.G. Soutzo
Thimm H
White Family
White F
White G
White P
Hindson H
Duncan C
Picard D
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS APPENDIX 3 SUMMARY OF DIRECTIONS APPENDIX 4 COMMITMENTS
Location
10-13-022-29W4
04-13-022-29W4
06-24-022-29W4
04-18-022-28W4
12-19-022-28W4
Less detail

Decision 2005-66

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4017
Applicant
Anadarko Canada Corporation
Application Number
1351758 Application number
1386951 Proceeding number
Title
Decision 2005-066: Anadarko Canada Corporation - Section 40 review of well licence 0308210 Knopcik Field
Date
2005
Title
Decision 2005-066: Anadarko Canada Corporation - Section 40 review of well licence 0308210 Knopcik Field
Date
2005
Applicant
Anadarko Canada Corporation
Application Number
1351758 Application number
1386951 Proceeding number
Hearing Panel
McGee TM
Remmer WG
Willard RJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Emergency Response Plan
Knopcik field
NTS 83M
Well licence
Legal References
Energy Resources Conservation Act S40
Interveners
Rothe S
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS COMMITMENTS BY ANADARKO
Location
07-05-073-10W6
Less detail

Decision 2005-71

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4021
Applicant
Shell Canada Limited
Application Number
1369362
1358995
Title
Decision 2005-071: Shell Canada Limited - Applications for well, facility and pipeline licences Waterton Field
Date
2005
Title
Decision 2005-071: Shell Canada Limited - Applications for well, facility and pipeline licences Waterton Field
Date
2005
Applicant
Shell Canada Limited
Application Number
1369362
1358995
Hearing Panel
Nichol JR
McGee TM
Sharp KG
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Well licence
Pipelines
Descriptors
Emergency Response Plan
Facility licence
Gas pipeline
NTS 83O
Pipeline licence
Waterton field
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S7.001
Pipeline Act Part 4
Notes
Objections withdrawn
Hearing cancelled
Interveners
Sheppard D
Sheppard J
Barbero K
Barbero S
Approval
Approved
Location
##-05-020-06W2
02-30-006-02W5
Less detail

Decision 2005-79

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4024
Applicant
BA Energy Inc.
Application Number
1347899
Title
Decision 2005-079: BA Energy Inc.:Application to construct and operate an upgrader - Strathcona, Fort Saskatchewan
Date
2005
Title
Decision 2005-079: BA Energy Inc.:Application to construct and operate an upgrader - Strathcona, Fort Saskatchewan
Date
2005
Applicant
BA Energy Inc.
Application Number
1347899
Hearing Panel
Berg AJ
Houlihan RN
Miller GJ
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Oil sands
Descriptors
Construction permit
Decision D2004-110
Emergency Response Plan
Environmental impact
Fort Saskatchewan field
Human factor
NTS 83H
Operating
Sulphur recovery
Oil sands oil recovery
Upgrading
Legal References
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act
Interveners
Northeast Strathcona County Residents
Astotin Creek Residents' Coalition
Government of Alberta
Shell Canada
Inter-Pipeline Fund
Strathcona County Taxpayers Association
Northwest Upgrading
Murray J
Veltman H
Veltman I
Radke J
Radke K
Bartlett T
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
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. The following conditions are from Section 7 of the decision report. 1) BA Energy’s application for the use of lime addition technology as the sole means of sulphur recovery for the first phase of the Heartland upgrader is denied. 2) Primary sulphur recovery for the first phase of the Heartland upgrader will be based on Claus sulphur recovery technology, as described by BA Energy in Application No. 1347899. 3) Sulphur recovery for the Heartland upgrader will comply with the sulphur recovery requirements outlined in EUB Interim Directive (ID) 2001-3: Sulphur Recovery Guidelines for the Province of Alberta and any subsequent revisions. 4) Installation of lime addition sulphur technology as a demonstration project for the first phase of the Heartland upgrader is approved. 5) Three months prior to testing of lime addition technology, BA Energy must submit to the Board and to AENV, for their approval, any information that the Board requires and any information that AENV requires. The information that the Board requires must include, as a minimum, an operating plan that details how BA Energy will test its lime addition technology, how it will continue to meet its air emissions limits during the testing period, and how it intends to report its operating results, its air emission performance, and any other operating criteria as requested by AENV or the Board. 6) If BA Energy chooses to install lime addition technology for the first phase of its Heartland upgrader project and it can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Board and AENV its claims as outlined in Application No. 1347899, then the Board, on application by BA Energy, would be prepared to reconsider its decision on sulphur recovery for additional phases of development.
Location
##-10-056-21W4
Less detail

Decision 2005-85

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4029
Applicant
Petrofund Corp.
Application Number
1365474 formerly application no.1346789
Title
Petrofund Corp. application for a well licence Armisie Field (West Edmonton Area)
Date
2005
Title
Petrofund Corp. application for a well licence Armisie Field (West Edmonton Area)
Date
2005
Applicant
Petrofund Corp.
Application Number
1365474 formerly application no.1346789
Hearing Panel
McGee TM
Sharp KG
Boyler DK
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Armisie field
Blairmore Fm
Emergency Response Plan
Gas producing
Hydrogen sulphide
NTS 83H
Sour gas
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Interveners
West Edmonton Landowners Group
Gotaas B
Gotaas D
Sulyma R
City of Edmonton
Ainslie P
Black B
River Heights Group
Hazlett A
Singh SP
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS AND CONDITIONS COMMITMENTS BY PETROFUND CONDITIONS
Location
07-04-052-25W4
09-33-051-25W4
Less detail

Decision 2005-104

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4054
Applicant
Talisman Energy Inc.
Application Number
1367267
Title
Decision2005-104: Talisman Energy Inc. application for a well licence Sinclair Field
Date
2005
Title
Decision2005-104: Talisman Energy Inc. application for a well licence Sinclair Field
Date
2005
Applicant
Talisman Energy Inc.
Application Number
1367267
Hearing Panel
McGee TM
Waisman DD
Remmer WG
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Emergency Response Plan
Halfway Fm
Hydrogen sulphide
Natural gas
NTS 83M
Sinclair field
Sour gas
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Interveners
Syme M
Syme D
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS The Board notes throughout the decision report that Talisman Energy Inc. has undertaken to conduct certain activities in connection with its operations that are not strictly required by the EUB’s regulations or guidelines. These undertakings are described as commitments and are summarized below. It is the Board’s view that when a company makes commitments of this nature, it has satisfied itself that these activities will benefit both the project and the public, and the Board takes these commitments into account when arriving at its decision. The Board expects the applicant, having made the commitments, to fully carry out the undertaking or advise the EUB if, for whatever reasons, it cannot fulfill a commitment. The EUB would then assess whether the circumstances regarding the failed commitment warrant a review of the original approval. The Board also notes that the affected parties have the right to request a review of the original approval if commitments made by the applicant remain unfulfilled. COMMITMENTS BY TALISMAN ENERGY INC.
Talisman commits to hold a face-to-face meeting with the Symes to conduct a detailed review of its emergency response plans if the Symes so request.
Talisman commits to investigate the use of an incinerator to test the viability of the 14-13 well and commits to use the best means possible to meet the Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives (AAAQO).
Talisman commits to no continuous flaring at the 14-13 well site.
Talisman commits to minimize flaring and/or incineration as much as possible and not to commence any flaring and/or incineration operations at the 14-13 well site if the prevailing winds are blowing toward the Symes’ residence.
Talisman commits to offer to relocate the Syme family to a hotel prior to any flaring and/or incineration operations at the 14-13 well site.
Talisman commits to offer to test the Symes’ water well for both quality and quantity of water before and after drilling the 14-13 well.
Talisman commits to consult with the 14-13 landowner and to offer to install a chain link fence around the proposed 14-13 well site if the 14-13 landowner so agrees.
Talisman commits to install a muffler system onto the rig to reduce the noise of the rig motors during drilling operations at the 14-13 well site.
Talisman commits to install conveyer matting on the rig catwalk to reduce the noise during tripping operations at the 14-13 well site.
Talisman commits to minimize nighttime tripping operations at the 14-13 well as much as possible.
Talisman commits to limit regular or scheduled traffic from accessing the 14-13 well site between 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. as much as possible during drilling operations.
Talisman commits not to conduct cement pumping operations at the 14-13 well site between midnight and 6:00 a.m.
Location
14-13-072-11W6
10-13-072-11W6
Less detail

Decision 2006-39|2006-39 Errata

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4139
Applicant
Prospex Resources Ltd.
Application Number
1379164
Title
Decision 2006-039 Prospex Resources Ltd: Application for a well licence Garrington Field (and Eratta released May 10, 2006)
Date
2006
Title
Decision 2006-039 Prospex Resources Ltd: Application for a well licence Garrington Field (and Eratta released May 10, 2006)
Date
2006
Applicant
Prospex Resources Ltd.
Application Number
1379164
Hearing Panel
McGee TM
Willard RJ
Waisman DD
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Decision D2005-060
DIR 056
DIR 060
DIR 071
Emergency response plan
Environmental impact assessment
ID 2001-05
Gas flaring
Garrington Field
Mannville Fm
Site survey
Sour gas
Swan Hills Fm
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations
Notes
Eratta released May 10, 2006
Interveners
Rossall J
Clissold R
Connors P
Bissett D
Brown R
Dabbs F
Papanikolaou N
Burkinshaw P
Burkinshaw L
Cressman J
Robidoux R
Freeman J
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
The Board approves the well licence at the revised surface location noted on the survey plan filed with the Board on February 16, 2006 APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS COMMITMENTS BY PROSPEX
Location
12-04-036-04W5
06-04-036-04W5
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

Decision 2006-87

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4174
Applicant
Dominion Exploration Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1423057
1423066
1423070
1423083
1423087
1423097
1423109
1423124
Title
Decision 2006-087: Dominion Exploration Canada Ltd. applications for well licences Pembina Field
Date
2006
Title
Decision 2006-087: Dominion Exploration Canada Ltd. applications for well licences Pembina Field
Date
2006
Applicant
Dominion Exploration Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1423057
1423066
1423070
1423083
1423087
1423097
1423109
1423124
Hearing Panel
Nichol JR
Rahnama F
Langlo CA
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Emergency response plan
DIR 060
DIR 071
Pembina Field
NTS 83G
Well licence
Intervener status
Legal References
Energy Resources Conservation Act S26
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.02
Interveners
Bolianatz D
Boxing Alberta
McKay K
McKay J
Coetzee K
Obst J
Obst I
Claypool L
Claypool W
Whitelock C
Whitelock A
MacIntosh R
MacIntosh A
Bannard GL
Baker J
Baker D
Overli K
Lovdokken J
Pembina Agricultural Protection Association
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS. CONDITIONS 1) Dominion will confirm the resident, landowner, and transient information and any other area of the ERP that maybe subject to change and submit a revised copy of the ERP to the EUB Public Safety Group prior to the drilling of each new well. 2) The well licences and ERP will be granted for a term of two years. APPENDIX 3 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS COMMITMENTS BY DOMINION 1) Dominion commits to install a temporary air monitor in the vicinity of the Obst, Coetzee, and McKay properties at the commencement of sour drilling operations. 2) Dominion commits to have a rover posted during any period when the ERP is active at the junction of Highway 753 and Range Road 103 to ensure prompt notification and, if necessary evacuation of the Obsts, Mr. Coetzee, and the McKays. 3) Dominion commits to coordinate rig moves and other service and support traffic under its control so that they do not coincide with school bus operating hours. 4) Dominion commits to provide all members of the Coetzee family with cell phones during sour drilling and completion operations. 5) Dominion commits to conduct an ERP simulation exercise prior to conducting sour drilling and completion operations and to invite all parties who objected to these well applications to attend the exercise. 6) Dominion commits to revise the roles and responsibilities described in its ERP for the local authorities and regional health authorities to more accurately reflect the integrated command structure that would likely take place in the event of an emergency.
Location
15-11-047-10W5
10-15-047-10W5
06-32-047-10W5
09-14-047-10W5
07-14-047-10W5
14-14-047-10W5
16-14-047-10W5
10-28-047-10W5
06-28-047-10W5
16-28-047-10W5
Less detail

Decision 2006-110

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4184
Applicant
Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1448800
1460293
1460301
Title
Decision 2006-110 : Burlington Resources Canada Ltd. applications for three well licences, Pembina field
Date
2006
Title
Decision 2006-110 : Burlington Resources Canada Ltd. applications for three well licences, Pembina field
Date
2006
Applicant
Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1448800
1460293
1460301
Hearing Panel
Langlo CA
Rahnama F
Berndtsson NG
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Decision D2006-087
Directive 071
Emergency response plan
EUB
Nisku Fm
NTS 83G
Sour gas
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Interveners
Olynyk B
Olynyk D
Bishop D
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS AND CONDITIONS The Board notes that during its public consultation program and at the hearing, Burlington committed to undertake certain activities in connection with its operations that are not strictly required by the EUB’s regulations or guidelines. These undertakings are described as commitments and are summarized below. It is the Board’s view that when a company makes commitments of this nature, it has satisfied itself that these activities will benefit both the project and the public, and the Board takes these commitments into account when arriving at its decision. The Board expects the applicant, having made the commitments, to fully carry out the undertaking or advise the EUB if, for whatever reasons, it cannot fulfill a commitment. The EUB would then assess whether the circumstances regarding the failed commitment warrant a review of the original approval. The Board also notes that the affected parties also have the right to request a review of the original approval if commitments made by the applicant remain unfulfilled. The Board recognizes the Olynyks’ request to make these approvals conditional on the commitments that were made during the course of the hearing and upon Burlington providing reasonable relocation compensation for the period of their relocation. Conditions generally are requirements in addition to or otherwise expanding upon existing regulations and guidelines. The Board would like to state that matters related to compensation are outside the jurisdiction of the EUB. As such, the Board is satisfied that there is no need to condition these approvals. COMMITMENTS BY BURLINGTON
Provide at least 72 hours’ notification to the Olynyks between the end of the sour drilling operations and the commencement of completion operations.
Test the Olynyks’ water well before and after drilling operations.
Ensure that the Olynyks are incorporated into the producing operator’s ERP.
Notify the Olynyks of any workover operations.
Ensure that the Olynyks are notified of any H2S concentration changes.
Fulfill commitments made in letters dated June 4, 2006, June 10, 2006, and August 4, 2006, which were all submitted as part of Burlington’s submission.
Location
06-06-049-08W5
Less detail

Decision 2006-125

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4196
Applicant
Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1456689
1459652
1459666
Title
Decision 2006-125 : Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.: Applications for three well licences, Pembina Field
Date
2006
Title
Decision 2006-125 : Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.: Applications for three well licences, Pembina Field
Date
2006
Applicant
Burlington Resources Canada Ltd.
Application Number
1456689
1459652
1459666
Hearing Panel
Nichol JR
Langlo CA
Boyler DK
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Decision D2006-087
Directive 071
Emergency response plan
EUB
Nisku Fm
NTS 83G
Sour gas
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Interveners
Olynyk B
Olynyk D
Colins P
Johnson G
Johnson C
Cartwright L
Cartwright S
Kitching A
The Pembina Agricultural Protection Association (PAPA)
Donison B
McLean S
Guze D
Guze S
Titanich O
Titanich B
MacKenzie J
MacKenzie L
MacKenzie K
Bannard GL
Sondersen L
Approval
Approved
Withdrawn
Location
13-34-048-09W5
07-03-049-09W5
03-08-049-08W5
03-17-049-08W5
12-04-049-08W5
Less detail

Decision 2007-111|2007-111 Errata

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4264
Applicant
Duvernay Oil Corp.
Application Number
1500699
1551285
1529482
Title
Decision 2007-111: Duvernay Oil Corp. applications for well, battery, and pipeline licences Edson field (and errata)
Date
2007
Title
Decision 2007-111: Duvernay Oil Corp. applications for well, battery, and pipeline licences Edson field (and errata)
Date
2007
Applicant
Duvernay Oil Corp.
Application Number
1500699
1551285
1529482
Hearing Panel
Berg AJ
Langlo CA
Evans RG
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Pipelines
Descriptors
Emergency procedure
Emergency response plan
Gas flaring
Combustion
Safety
Compliance
Edson field
NTS 83F
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S7.001
Pipeline Act Part 4
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Notes
Errata date January 15, 2008 regarding errors in decision 2007-111 document
Interveners
Bugg H
Bugg J
Bullock C
Holroyd D
Holroyd M
Smith K
Makowecki F
Thompson C
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS APPENDIX 3 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS Drilling, completion, and well testing ERP's
Location
08-13-054-19W5
06-34-053-19W5
04-11-053-18W5
02-13-054-19W5
Less detail

Decision 2008-18

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4278
Applicant
Highpine Oil & Gas Limited
Application Number
1480869
1486164
Title
Decision 2008-018: Highpine Oil & Gas Limited applications for well licences Pembina field
Date
2008
Title
Decision 2008-018: Highpine Oil & Gas Limited applications for well licences Pembina field
Date
2008
Applicant
Highpine Oil & Gas Limited
Application Number
1480869
1486164
Hearing Panel
Sharp KG
Boyler DK
Gilmour JG
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Hydrogen sulphide
Safety
Hazard
Risk
Emergency response plan
Noise reduction
Environmental impact
Sour gas
Pembina field
NTS 83G
Well licence
Nisku FM
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Energy Resources Conservation Act S3
Administrative Procedures and Jurisdiction Act
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S12.150
EUB Rules of Practice
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Personal Information Protection Act
Interveners
Rocky Rapids Concerned Citizens
Kessler D.
Mulroy D.
Sullivan D.
Coombs N.
CoombsJ.
Mueller M.
MacKenzie K.
Dupperon L.
Kelly S.
Domke B.
McGinn L.
Ochsner M.
Schmidt D.
Dodd C.
Du S.
McCutcheon D.
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS The Board notes throughout the decision report that Highpine has undertaken to conduct certain activities in connection with its operations that are not strictly required by the EUB’s regulations or guidelines. These undertakings are described as commitments and are summarized below. It is the Board’s view that when a company makes commitments of this nature, it has satisfied itself that these activities will benefit both the project and the public, and the Board takes these commitments into account when arriving at its decision. The Board expects the applicant, having made the commitments, to fully carry out the undertaking or advise the EUB if, for whatever reasons, it cannot fulfill a commitment. The EUB would then assess whether the circumstances regarding the failed commitment warrant a review of the original approval. The Board also notes that the affected parties have the right to request a review of the original approval if commitments made by the applicant remain unfulfilled. COMMITMENTS BY HIGHPINE
Highpine will not flare more than eight hours in total for each well.
Highpine will maintain roads in the EPZs to ensure that they remain passable during critical sour operations.
Highpine will suspend operations if any roads inside the EPZs are unable to be made passable.
Highpine will lead one full-scale emergency response exercise every year.
Highpine will update its ERPs, including updating all resident information, and submit those updates to the EUB for review.
Highpine will ignite an uncontrolled release within 15 minutes of sour gas reaching surface.
Location
16-14-050-07W5
14-18-050-06W5
16-13-050-07W5
11-14-050-08W5
00-00-048-08W5
00-00-049-09W5
13-02-050-06W5
Less detail

Decision 2008-24

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4280
Applicant
Petro-Canada Oil Sands Inc.
Application Number
1490956
Title
Decision 2008-024: Petro-Canada Oil Sands Inc. application to construct and operate the Sturgeon upgrader Sturgeon County
Date
2008
Title
Decision 2008-024: Petro-Canada Oil Sands Inc. application to construct and operate the Sturgeon upgrader Sturgeon County
Date
2008
Applicant
Petro-Canada Oil Sands Inc.
Application Number
1490956
Hearing Panel
Dilay JD
Miller GJ
McManus BT
Hearing Type
Prehearing
Category
Oil sands
Descriptors
Environmental impact
Groundwater
Surface water
Air quality
Soil
Vegetation
Wildlife
Noise reduction
Health
Safety
Emergency response plan
Economic analysis
Socio-economic effect
Sturgeon County
Upgrading
Oil sands
Legal References
Oil Sands Conservation Act S11
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act
Water Act S36
Water Act S37
Water Act S49
Water Act S50
Interveners
Alexander First Nations Industrial Relations Corporation (AFN IRC)
Northeast Sturgeon County Industrial Landowners (NESCIL) and the Citizens for Responsible Development (CFRD)
Shaw S
Shaw K
Statoil Hydro Canada
Norh West Upgrading
Suncor Energy Inc.
S.V. Farms, S.V. Half Diamond Ranch, 267554 Alberta Ltd., and the J.Smulski Estate
Hoehn R
Total E&P Canada Ltd.
Wright A
Approval
No approval required
Location
00-19-056-21W4
00-02-056-21W4
00-03-056-21W4
00-10-056-21W4
00-11-056-21W4
00-12-056-21W4
00-13-056-21W4
00-14-056-21W4
00-15-056-21W4
00-22-056-21W4
00-23-056-21W4
00-24-056-21W4
00-25-056-21W4
00-26-056-21W4
00-27-056-21W4
Less detail

Decision 2008-30

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4286
Applicant
Highpine Energy Ltd.
Application Number
1520743
1521616
Title
Decision 2008-030: Highpine Energy Ltd. and Highpine Oil & Gas Limited applications for two well licences Tomahawk field (and Errata)
Date
2008
Title
Decision 2008-030: Highpine Energy Ltd. and Highpine Oil & Gas Limited applications for two well licences Tomahawk field (and Errata)
Date
2008
Applicant
Highpine Energy Ltd.
Application Number
1520743
1521616
Hearing Panel
Miller GJ
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Safety
Health
Emergency response plan
Environmental impact
Land value
Risk
Tomahawk field
NTS 83G
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
ERCB Rules of Practice S21
Notes
includes Errata dated May 6, 2008
Interveners
area landowners
Approval
Withdrawn
Location
08-25-051-06W5
04-30-051-05W5
03-18-051-06W5
Less detail

44 records – page 1 of 3.