26 records – page 1 of 2.

Decision 76-12

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2152
Applicant
Alberta Gas Trunk Line Company Limited
Application Number
9162
9219
Title
Decision on application by Alberta Gas Trunk Line Company Limited, 1976 (Edson and Foothills extensions)
Date
1976
Title
Decision on application by Alberta Gas Trunk Line Company Limited, 1976 (Edson and Foothills extensions)
Date
1976
Applicant
Alberta Gas Trunk Line Company Limited
Application Number
9162
9219
Hearing Panel
Millard V
DeSorcy GJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Pipelines
Descriptors
Edson area
Gas pipeline
Pipeline construction permit
NTS 83F
NTS 83K
NTS 83M
NTS 83N
Pipeline crossing
River
Water pollution
Notes
Decision 76-12 on application No. 9162 (Edson extension) and No. 9219 (Foothills extension) to construct pipelines for the transmission of natural gas; Board hearing 1976-06-17/18/21; see also final Decision 77-07
Less detail

Decision 78-02

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2118
Applicant
BP Exploration Canada Limited
Application Number
770629
Title
Decision on application by BP Exploration Canada Limited, 1978 (licence to drill a well in the Chestermere Lake area)
Date
1978
Title
Decision on application by BP Exploration Canada Limited, 1978 (licence to drill a well in the Chestermere Lake area)
Date
1978
Applicant
BP Exploration Canada Limited
Application Number
770629
Hearing Panel
Millard V
DeSorcy GJ
Manyluk AF
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Chestermere Lake area
Well licence
Blowout preventer
Casing (well)
Contamination
Elkton Fm
Emergency procedure
Environmental impact
Geologic interpretation
Land value
Locating
NTS 82P
Oil producing
Residential building
Safety
Water pollution
Notes
Decision 78-2 on application No. 770629 for a licence to drill a well in LSD 6-15-24-28 W4M to evaluate and obtain production from the Elkton FM; Board hearing 1977-10-06; adjourned to 1977-11-09
Interveners
The Summer Village of Chestermere Leake
Comport Industries Ltd.
Argyle Management Ltd.
Scott, J.
Scott, C.
Anderson, G.
Location
06-15-024-28W4
Less detail

Decision 81-06

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2002
Applicant
Calgary Power Ltd.
Application Number
800276
Title
Decision on application by Calgary Power Ltd., 1981 (alternative cooling studies - Wabamun power plant)
Date
1981
Title
Decision on application by Calgary Power Ltd., 1981 (alternative cooling studies - Wabamun power plant)
Date
1981
Applicant
Calgary Power Ltd.
Application Number
800276
Hearing Panel
Millard V
Goodman CJ
Kupchanko EE
Hearing Type
Board
Utilities
Category
Electric power
Descriptors
Cooling system
Cooling tower
Electric power project
Eutrophication
Lake Wabamun
Pollution control
Wabamun power plant
Waste heat
Water pollution
Weed control
Comparison
Environmental impact
NTS 83G
Plant nutrition
Waste water
Notes
Decision on application pursuant to stipulation under approval No. HE 7606 for submission of documents relating to thermal discharge into Lake Wabamun (TP.53, R.4 W5M); Board hearing 1980-09-30 & 1981-01-13/14/15/16
Interveners
Summer Villages of Point Alison and Kapasiwin and Village Residents
Village of Wabumun
Lake Wabumun Preservation Association
Gorham, P.R.
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 82-32

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision1120
Applicant
Voyager Petroleums Limited
Application Number
820693
Title
Examiners report on application by Voyager Petroleums Limited, 1982 (gas processing plant Killam north field)
Date
1982
Title
Examiners report on application by Voyager Petroleums Limited, 1982 (gas processing plant Killam north field)
Date
1982
Applicant
Voyager Petroleums Limited
Application Number
820693
Hearing Panel
Edgecombe RW
Pearson DG
Remmer WG
Hearing Type
Examiners
Category
Gas processing
Descriptors
Gas processing plant
Killam north field
Sour gas
Contamination
Emergency procedure
Environmental impact
Flare
Gathering line
Groundwater
Iron sponge process
NTS 73D
Pipeline corrosion
Safety
Waste disposal
Water pollution
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S26
Notes
ERCB Examiners report E82-32 on application No. 820693 to construct & operate a gas sweetening facility at Voyager's compressor station located in the SW quarter of section 5-45-12 W4M.
Interveners
Wylie, D.
Bricker, L.
Bricker, Mrs.
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 84-A

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision1850
Applicant
Energy Resources Conservation Board
Title
Report on some trace element studies in the Twin Butte area
Date
1984

Decision 85-16

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision1678
Applicant
Luchyk (William)
Application Number
850170
Title
Decision on application by Luchyk (William), 1985 (review of Husky Oil Operations Ltd. remedial cementing program)
Date
1985
Title
Decision on application by Luchyk (William), 1985 (review of Husky Oil Operations Ltd. remedial cementing program)
Date
1985
Applicant
Luchyk (William)
Application Number
850170
Hearing Panel
Bellows LA
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Abandonment
Descriptors
Cementing
Groundwater
Water pollution
Water quality
Well workover
Wildmere field
Monitoring
NTS 73E
Legal References
Energy Resources Conservation Act S42
Notes
Decision D85-16 on application No. 850170 for review of approved Husky oil remedial cementing program for well "Husky et al Wildmere 5C-18-4" S7-4 (W4M) as part of well abandonment program.
Interveners
Husky Oil Operations Ltd.
Less detail

Decision 89-08

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision124
Applicant
Strathfield Oil and Gas Ltd.
Application Number
890574
890576
890577
890578
890579
890795
890796
890797
890798
890799
890800
890801
890802
890803
Title
Decision 89-08 : Strathfield Oil and Gas Ltd.: Application for well licences, Provost field
Date
1989
Title
Decision 89-08 : Strathfield Oil and Gas Ltd.: Application for well licences, Provost field
Date
1989
Applicant
Strathfield Oil and Gas Ltd.
Application Number
890574
890576
890577
890578
890579
890795
890796
890797
890798
890799
890800
890801
890802
890803
Hearing Panel
Strom NA
Morin EJ
Langlo CA
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Provost field
Well licence
Agricultural land
Air quality
Aquifer
Battery
Communication
Community relations
Cretaceous
Development well
Dina member
Drilling fluid
Drilling waste disposal
Emission
Energy development
Environmental impact
Groundwater
Hydrogen sulphide
Land use
Mannville Gp
NTS 73D
Oil well
Reservoir boundary
Spill
Sulphur dioxide
Water pollution
Water quality
Well spacing
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Notes
ERCB decision D89-8 on applications no. 890574, 890576-890579, 890795-890803 for licences to drill wells all in Tp.37, R.4, W4; Board hearing 1989-06-27/28
Interveners
Hanson, R.
Less detail

Decision 90-08

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision85
Applicant
Shell Canada Limited
Husky Oil Operations Ltd.
Application Number
890971
890969
891504
891505
891506
891478
891479
891480
891481
891482
891568
891569
891570
891571
900404
891483
891290
900236
891047
891757
891805
891804
891803
891703
891802
Title
Decision 90-08 : Shell Canada Limited and Husky Oil Operations Ltd.: Application for Caroline Beaverhill Lake gas development
Date
1990
Title
Decision 90-08 : Shell Canada Limited and Husky Oil Operations Ltd.: Application for Caroline Beaverhill Lake gas development
Date
1990
Applicant
Shell Canada Limited
Husky Oil Operations Ltd.
Application Number
890971
890969
891504
891505
891506
891478
891479
891480
891481
891482
891568
891569
891570
891571
900404
891483
891290
900236
891047
891757
891805
891804
891803
891703
891802
Hearing Panel
DeSorcy GJ
Mink FJ
Bietz BF
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Gas processing
Descriptors
Caroline field
Caroline gas project
Energy development
Gas pipeline
Gas processing plant
Pipeline construction permit
Product pipeline
Sour gas
Sulphur recovery plant
Bearberry field
Benefit cost analysis
Carbon dioxide
Capitalized cost
Claus process
Conservation
Economic analysis
Emergency procedure
Emission
Environmental impact
ID-81-03
ID-88-01
Feasibility
Forecasting
Groundwater
Nitrogen oxide
Noise (sound)
NTS 82O
NTS 83B
Operating cost
Petroleum conservation
Public interest
Reliability
Safety
Socio-economic effect
Soil conservation
Soil pollution
Sulphur dioxide
Sulphur recovery
Water disposal
Water pollution
Water quality
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S4
Notes
Decision D90-8 on proceeding No. 890971 and on applications by Shell, Husky and associated parties for production, processing and transportation facilities for sour gas reserves in the Caroline Beaverhill Lake area (all in TP.31-36, R.3-10 W5M); Board hearing commenced 1990-04-17 and continued to 1990-05-10 with final argument 1990-05-28/29
Interveners
Federated Pipe Lines Ltd.
Amoco Canada Petroleum Company Ltd.
Altana Exploration Company
ATCOR Ltd.
Canadian Hunter Exploration Ltd.
Gulf Canada Resources Limited
Mobil Oil Canada
NOVA Corporation of Alberta
Numac Oil & Gas Ltd.
Union Pacific Resources Inc.
CN Rail
CP Rail
Alberta Fish and Game Association
Pollution Sub-Committee of the Public Advisory Committees - Environment Council of Alberta
Bauman, J.
Bauman, L.
Brown, R.
McCormick, H.
Brunner, J.
Brunner, L.
Heggie, R.
Burnstick Lake Cottage Owners' Association
Caroline Advisory Board
Caroline & District Chamber of Commerce
Concerned Residents Action Group
County of Mountain View No. 17
Diamond J. Industries Ltd.
Harris, D.
Harris, M.
Hermann, J.
Jans, E.
Jans, B.
Kostuch , M.
Rocky Veterinary Clinic Ltd.
Macklin, J.
Macklin, B.
Mountain View Land Holders Group
Olds& District Chamber of Commerce
Preservation of Agriculture and Living Space Society
Rocky Mountain House & District Chamber of Commerce
Roth, L.
Roth, S.
Saunders, D.
447 Area Residents
Sundre & District Chamber of Commerce
Town of Innisfail
Town of Sundre
Town of Rocky Mountain House
Village of Caroline
Wolf, R.E.
Less detail

Decision 97-03

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2856
Applicant
CanNat Resources Inc.
Application Number
970189
Title
Examiner report on application by CanNat Resources Inc., 1997 (application for two well licences Joarcam Area)
Date
1997
Title
Examiner report on application by CanNat Resources Inc., 1997 (application for two well licences Joarcam Area)
Date
1997
Applicant
CanNat Resources Inc.
Application Number
970189
Hearing Panel
Bruni MJ
Skappak DL
Hill CD
Hearing Type
Examiners
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Drainage
Environmental impact
Groundwater
Joarcam field
Noise (sound)
NTS 83H
Odor
Surface water
Water disposal
Water pollution
Water quality
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S11
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Notes
EUB Examiners Report E97-03 on application no. 970189 by CanNat Resources for licences to drill two wells from a single surface location at Lsd 2 Sec 26 Twp 50 Rge 22 W4M to obtain production from the Viking Fm.
Interveners
Olsen Barry and Carol
Read DL
Approval
Approved
Location
02-26-050-22W4
Less detail

Decision 97-04

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2857
Applicant
Renaissance Energy Ltd.
Application Number
960977
1004244
Title
Examiner report on application by Renaissance Energy Ltd., 1997 (applications for a well licence and a pipeline permit Provost field)
Date
1997
Title
Examiner report on application by Renaissance Energy Ltd., 1997 (applications for a well licence and a pipeline permit Provost field)
Date
1997
Applicant
Renaissance Energy Ltd.
Application Number
960977
1004244
Hearing Panel
Dilay GW
Marsh RA
Elle R
Hearing Type
Examiners
Category
Pipelines
Well licence
Descriptors
Environmental impact
IL-96-09
IL-96-12
Gas pipeline
Gas producing
Lloydminster Fm
Locating
NTS 73D
Pipeline construction permit
Provost field
Route selection
Soil pollution
Water pollution
Water quality
Well licence
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Pipeline Act Part 4
Notes
EUB Examiners report E 97-4 on application no. 960977 for a licence to drill a well in Lsd 16 Sec 10 Twp 36 Rge 3 W4M to obtain sweet natural gas production from the Lloydminster Formation and on application no. 1004244 to construct approximately 1.1 km of 114.3 mm outside diameter pipeline to transport sweet natural gas from the proposed well to an existing pipeline located in Lsd 4 Sec 14 Twp 36 Rge 3 W4M;
Examiners hearing scheduled for 1997-02-19 postponed and convened 1997-03-05 in Provost Alberta
Interveners
Mouly B
Location
16-10-036-03W4
04-14-036-03W4
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 98-08

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision2928
Applicant
Cabre Exploration Ltd
Application Number
970459
1010982
Title
Decision 98-08 : Cabre Exploration Ltd,: Application for well licences and reduced oil well spacing, Provost Field
Date
1998
Title
Decision 98-08 : Cabre Exploration Ltd,: Application for well licences and reduced oil well spacing, Provost Field
Date
1998
Applicant
Cabre Exploration Ltd
Application Number
970459
1010982
Hearing Panel
Belanger C
Schnitzler WJ
Asgar-Deen ML
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Spacing
Descriptors
Environmental impact
Groundwater
NTS 73D
Oil producing
Public consultation
Water pollution
Well licence
Well spacing
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Act S71
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S4.030
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S5.190
Notes
EUB Decision on application no 970459 and no. 1010982 for licences to drill five wells (all in Twp 38 Rge 3 W4M) and to establish one legal subdivision drilling spacing units;
Board hearing 1997-12-09/11
Interveners
L.H. Ranching Limited
Hanson R
Hanson T
Eastview Farms Limited
Nelson P.
Dzurko D
Alberta Surface Rights Federation
Approval
Approved
Less detail

Decision 2000-49 ADDENDUM

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision3297
Applicant
Avalanche Energy Ltd.
Application Number
1040201
1041048
1041629
1042292
Title
Decision 2000-49 addendum: Avalanche Energy Limited review of applications for a holding, reduced spacing, and well licences, Keoma/Entice area
Date
2000
Title
Decision 2000-49 addendum: Avalanche Energy Limited review of applications for a holding, reduced spacing, and well licences, Keoma/Entice area
Date
2000
Applicant
Avalanche Energy Ltd.
Application Number
1040201
1041048
1041629
1042292
Hearing Panel
McGee TM
Miller GJ
Remmer WG
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Belly River Gp
Drilling spacing unit
Edmonton Gp
NTS 82P
Paskapoo Fm
Water pollution
Water quality
Well licence
Legal References
Energy Resources Conservation Act S29
Notes
EUB Decision D2000-49 addendum on application by Avalanche to obtain approval for a holding and reduced well spacing, seeking to drill to a density of two wells per pool section for the production of sweet natural gas from the Edmonton and Belly River Groups; also applied to drill three sweet natural gas wells in the Keoma/Entice area. Addendum deals with claim by the Delainey and the Stewart/Petersen families that their water wells were biofouled by Avalanche's activities. The Board concluded that there was no apparent link between the water well problems and drilling and production operations.
Interveners
Stewart G
Peterson T
Delainey D
Delainey K
Approval
Denied
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 2006-52

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4151
Applicant
Compton Petroleum Corporation
Application Number
1423649
Title
Decision 2006-052 : Decision on requests for consideration of standing respecting a well licence application by Compton Petroleum Corporation : Eastern slopes area
Date
2006
Title
Decision 2006-052 : Decision on requests for consideration of standing respecting a well licence application by Compton Petroleum Corporation : Eastern slopes area
Date
2006
Applicant
Compton Petroleum Corporation
Application Number
1423649
Hearing Panel
McGee TM
Dilay JD
Nichol JR
Hearing Type
Board
No Hearing
Category
Well licence
Descriptors
Air quality
Eastern Slopes area
Environmental impact assessment
Groundwater
IL 93-09
Water pollution
Well licence
Intervener status
Legal References
Energy Resources Conservation Act
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations
Interveners
Livingston Landowners Group
Olthafer L
Municipal District of Pincher Creek
Smith T
Gold T
Gold I
Halibert K
Kathol N
Pekisko Group
Cross J
Blades M
Alberta Wilderness Association
Douglas N
South Porcupine Hills Stewardship Association
Newton B
Approval
Denied
Location
15-28-009-01W5
Less detail

Decision 2006-102

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4182
Applicant
EnCana Corporation
Application Number
1393397
Title
Decision 2006-102: EnCana Corporation applications for licences for 15 wells, a pipeline, and a compressor addition, Wimborne and Twining Fields
Date
2006
Title
Decision 2006-102: EnCana Corporation applications for licences for 15 wells, a pipeline, and a compressor addition, Wimborne and Twining Fields
Date
2006
Applicant
EnCana Corporation
Application Number
1393397
Hearing Panel
McCrank MN
Dilay JD
Miller GJ
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Well licence
Pipelines
Descriptors
Battle Fm
Bearpaw Fm
Compressor station
Directive 027
Dispute resolution
Drilling (Well)
Gas processing plant
Groundwater
Horseshoe Canyon Fm
NTS 83P
Paskapoo Fm
Pipeline
Pipeline construction
Scollard Fm
Twining Field
Well licence
Water pollution
Whitemud Fm
Wimborne Field
Legal References
Pipeline Act Part 4
Interveners
Hoppins K
Doering G
Niemi K
Howard L
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 1 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS AND CONDITIONS COMMITMENTS BY ENCANA
Test all water wells within 400 m, 11 additional wells located between 400 m and 880 m, some springs in the area, and all high-yield water wells present within 1000 m of an EnCana well. CONDITIONS
Measure the pressure between the tubing and casing annulus above the zones being fractured, note and explain any increased pressures, and report the findings to the EUB within five days of the fracturing operation.
Install a groundwater monitoring well in the deepest aquifer immediately above the Battle Formation within 50 m of the EnCana well that has the shallowest surface casing depth. The water quality is to be determined prior to fracturing operations, and the water level is to be monitored continuously, commencing immediately prior to and continuing during and after fracturing operations, until the level has stabilized. The water quality testing is to be conducted in accordance with Alberta Environment’s Standard for Baseline Water-Well Testing for Coalbed Methane/Natural Gas in Coal Operations, April 2006. The results of this monitoring are to be reported to the Board and interveners within 30 days. Thereafter, monitoring will be done on a yearly basis and reported by December 1 of each year. This condition will be reviewed after the findings of the Shallow Fracturing Technical Committee are released or a period of five years.
Ensure the noise level at EnCana’s facility remains within 25 dBA as measured at the Bauer residence under summertime conditions, as outlined in Table 3 of the Faszer Farquarson report, and within the EUB’s PSLs at all other times. Alternatively, EnCana could comply by demonstrating that the facility, when operating under the above conditions, is not audible above the ambient sound level, or Mr. D. Bauer could agree that the noise from the facility is acceptable under conditions that the resident believes represents a worst-case scenario.
Less detail

Decision 2008-02

https://had.aer.ca/link/decision4265
Applicant
Artemis Exploration Inc.
Application Number
1478721
1494900
1494911
Title
Decision 2008-002: Artemis Exploration Inc. application for well, pipeline and facility licences Furness field
Date
2008
Title
Decision 2008-002: Artemis Exploration Inc. application for well, pipeline and facility licences Furness field
Date
2008
Applicant
Artemis Exploration Inc.
Application Number
1478721
1494900
1494911
Hearing Panel
Dilay JD
McGee TM
Warren WA
Hearing Type
Board
Category
Pipelines
Descriptors
Position (location)
Gas flaring
Safety
Water pollution
Public consultation
Furness field
NTS 83H
Legal References
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations S2.020
Pipeline Act Part 4
Interveners
Welgan H
Approval
Approved with conditions
Conditions
APPENDIX 2 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS The Board notes throughout the decision report that Artemis has undertaken to conduct certain activities in connection with its operations that are not strictly required by EUB 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. COMMITMENTS BY ARTEMIS
Artemis commits to using an incinerator during well testing if in-line testing is not feasible.
Artemis commits to surveying the actual kelly bushing elevation following rig-up. The data will be used to recalculate the depths on the geological prognosis for the drilling of the 15-10 well.
Artemis commits to having a well site geologist present on site and increasing the geological sampling interval from every 5 m to every 2 m from -560 m subsea (SS) to total depth.
Artemis commits to using a gas detector on site.
Artemis commits to checking geolograph and pipe tallies before the drilling depth reaches -560 mSS, and if significant discrepancies are apparent, Artemis will trip out the drill string and retally back into the hole.
Artemis commits to control drilling practices below -560 m SS, with reduced penetration rates from -560 m SS to total depth, to allow enhanced sampling intervals, improved gas detection accuracy, and an accurate determination of when the shale separating the bottom of the Lower Mannville sandstone channel from the Ellerslie G (if present) has been entered.
Location
15-10-048-23W4
07-10-048-23W4
Less detail

26 records – page 1 of 2.