By: Drew Yewchuk
PDF Version: The December 2021 Mine Financial Security Program Standard
Regulatory Document Commented On: The December 23, 2021 Mine Financial Security Program Standard
In a post back in May 2021, I mentioned a quietly made change to Alberta’s Mine Financial Security Program (MFSP), which sets out the security requirements for coal and oil sands mines in Alberta: Continue reading
By: Drew Yewchuk
PDF Version: Bill 77, Unpaid Municipal Taxes, and the Connection to the Inactive and Orphan Wells Problem
Bill Commented On: Alberta’s Bill 77: Municipal Government (Restoring Tax Accountability) Amendment Act, 2021, 2nd Session, 30th Legislature
Alberta’s Bill 77: Municipal Government (Restoring Tax Accountability) Amendment Act, 2021 (2nd Session, 30th Legislature) is moving towards becoming law. This post describes what Bill 77 would do, explains the connection between oil and gas companies’ unpaid municipal taxes and Alberta’s orphan well problem, and describes some reasons why Bill 77 will be ineffective. Continue reading
By: Drew Yewchuk
PDF Version: The 2020/2021 Year in Access to Justice on ABlawg
Event Commented On: Access to Justice Week 2021
The Canadian Bar Association’s annual Access to Justice Week in Alberta ran from October 25-31, 2021. This post is the annual look back at the past year of access to justice posts on ABlawg. The blog focuses on important cases that changed the law rather than programs that provided access to justice for underserved communities – the access to justice blog covers several of those initiatives, and some other changes not covered on ABlawg. Continue reading
By: Drew Yewchuk
PDF Version: Another Year Gone Under the Mine Financial Security Program
Legislation Commented On: Annual Mine Financial Security Program Submissions, 2021 Submissions for 2020 Reporting Year
In a post back in May 2021, I complained about a change to Alberta’s Mine Financial Security Program (MFSP). This is a follow-up post in response to the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) posting the annual submissions under the program on September 30, 2021. Note that each annual submission is for the September of the previous year, so the 2021 report is relevant to the situation in September 2020.
The MFSP is Alberta’s system for ensuring that companies pay for the reclamation and remediation of their mines, both oilsands and coal (but not conventional oil and gas, which is handled by a different liability management system that also does not work properly). In short, the MFSP allows companies to use an asset safety factor against their estimated future environmental liabilities, such that if a mine’s resource assets are worth more than three times the total anticipated reclamation costs (3:1), nothing beyond an initial (and wholly inadequate) ‘base deposit’ is required, provided also that the planned reclamation is conducted as scheduled, and the mine has more than 15 years of reserves remaining. Companies may also choose to skip those calculations and pay full security based on an estimate of the total cost of clean-up. Continue reading
By: Drew Yewchuk
PDF Version: Procedural Fairness When Challenging Timeline Extensions for Freedom of Information Requests
Decision Commented On: Blades v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2021 ABQB 725 (CanLII)
The recent decision in Blades v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2021 ABQB 725 (CanLII) (Blades) relates to two issues ABlawg has previously covered. First, the challenges of getting government records in a timely manner using the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP). Prior posts on FOIP have discussed the challenges with the information request process, and the challenges presented by the review process at the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. Second, the Alberta government’s decision to revoke the 1976 Coal Development Policy for Alberta. See the list of coal-related ABlawg posts listed at the top of this post. Looking past those specifics, Blades is a judicial review decision about an administrative body’s obligation of procedural fairness and the right to be heard by the administrative decision-maker. Continue reading
