Author Archives: Drew Yewchuk

About Drew Yewchuk

B.A. (UAlberta) J.D. (UCalgary) LLM (U.B.C.) Drew was a full-time staff lawyer with the University of Calgary's Public Interest Law Clinic from 2018-2022. He is now an PhD student at the Peter A. Allard School of Law. His research focuses on administrative secrecy, access to information law, species at risk, resource law, and environmental liabilities.

The AER Announces Some Details of the Mandatory Closure Spend Targets

By: Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: The AER Announces Some Details of the Mandatory Closure Spend Targets 

Legislation Commented On: AER Bulletin 2021-22 ‘Invitation for Feedback on Proposed New Licensee Life-Cycle Management Directive’; AER Bulletin 2021-23 ‘Mandatory Closure Spend Targets’

This is another post on the changes the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) is making to the Liability Management Framework for conventional oil and gas assets. The earlier post I co-authored with Shaun Fluker on the problems with the liability management framework and the changes being made to it (and specifically the changes to the Eligibility Requirements for Acquiring and Holding Energy Licences and Approvals) is here. The AER is now seeking comments on Draft Directive XXX: Licensee Life-Cycle Management (the Draft Directive) until July 25, 2021. The Draft Directive will replace the current Directive 006 once finalized. This post discusses the Draft Directive and the details of the inventory reduction program first announced a year ago. Continue reading →

The Canada Energy Regulator Protects Trans Mountain from Canadians

By: Christine Laing & Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: The Canada Energy Regulator Protects Trans Mountain from Canadians

Decision Commented On: Decision on Trans Mountain’s Request for Confidential Treatment dated 29 April 2021

The Canada Energy Regulator (CER or Commission) has the statutory duty to assess financial resources plans filed by operating pipeline companies each year and determine whether those resources remain sufficient to cover the company’s expected liabilities if a pipeline spills. The written review process is open to the public through postings on the CER’s website. Trans Mountain requested an exception to the typical public filing process, asking the CER to keep their insurers confidential going forward. On April 29, 2021, the CER granted the request by making an order under section 60 of the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, SC 2019, c 28, s 10 (CER Act) to keep the identity of Trans Mountain’s insurers confidential. The decision pertains to the insurance in place to cover liability for the operating Trans Mountain pipeline, not liability associated with its decommissioning or liability associated with the construction or operation of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project. Continue reading →

Responding to Concerns that Alberta Does Not Collect Enough Security for Environmental Remediation the AER Chooses to Collect Less Security

By: Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: Responding to Concerns that Alberta Does Not Collect Enough Security for Environmental Remediation the AER Chooses to Collect Less Security

Document Commented On: Mine Financial Security Program Standard, dated May 6, 2021

On May 6, 2021, the Alberta Government announced they would review and modify the Mine Financial Security Program (MFSP). The MFSP is Alberta’s system for ensuring (purportedly at least) that companies pay for the reclamation of their mines, both oilsands and coal. At first glance, a review and modification sounds like a good idea, since the MFSP has been criticized as severely deficient since at least 2015 when an Auditor General report identified numerous significant problems concluding that in the event that “a mine operator cannot fulfill its reclamation obligations… the province may have to pay a potentially substantial cost for this work to be completed” (at 2). Since then, the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) has improved its administration of the program, but Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP), the primary department responsible for the policy and design of the MFSP, has not addressed the overall structure of the program (see the Auditor General’s 2019 report). Under the MFSP, the province held $1.57 billion in security against estimated reclamation liabilities of $20.8 billion in December 2014 and $1.46 billion in security against $28.35 billion in estimated reclamation liabilities in June 2018. So reform is long overdue, especially if Alberta is considering approving new coal mines. Continue reading →

Reporting Obligations Under the Species at Risk Act: A Review of the Westslope Cutthroat Trout Recovery Strategy Implementation Progress Report

By: Dana Poscente and Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: Reporting Obligations Under the Species at Risk Act: A Review of the Westslope Cutthroat Trout Recovery Strategy Implementation Progress Report

Matter Commented On: Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Report on the Progress of Recovery Strategy Implementation for the Westslope Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) Alberta Population (also known as the Saskatchewan-Nelson River Populations) in Canada for the Period 2014 to 2019 (Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Report Series) (Ottawa: Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 2021)

This post discusses the recent “Report on the Progress of Recovery Strategy Implementation for the Westslope Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) Alberta Population” (WSCT Implementation Report), assesses whether the WSCT Implementation Report meets the criteria set out in the Species at Risk Act, SC 2002 c 29 (SARA), and describes the overall problems with implementation reports under SARA.

The Westslope Cutthroat Trout is a freshwater fish native to western North America, recognizable for the orange-red slashes under its lower jaw. Throughout much of its range, this species is the only native true trout, and as such it plays an important role in its ecosystems and is viewed as an indicator species of general ecosystem health (SARA Registry, “Species Details”). The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) assessed the Alberta population of Westslope Cutthroat Trout as threatened in both 2006 and 2016. The reason for this designation was that the population had been reduced by almost 80 percent through over-exploitation, habitat degradation, and hybridization and competition with introduced, non-native trout. As well, the range of the Westslope Cutthroat Trout is currently less than 20 percent of its observed historical range, and the existing range is severely fragmented (WSCT Implementation Report at 3, citing the 2016 COSEWIC Assessment).

Continue reading →

Coal Law and Policy Part Five: What is the Role of the Federal Government in Relation to Alberta Coal Mines?

By: Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: Coal Law and Policy Part Five: What is the Role of the Federal Government in Relation to Alberta Coal Mines?

Legislation Commented On: Impact Assessment Act, SC 2019, c 28, s 1; Species at Risk Act, SC 2002, c 29; Coal Mining Effluent Regulations (forthcoming)

This is another installment in the continuing ABlawg series on the law and policy framework for coal projects in Alberta. This installment focuses on three statutes or regulations by which the federal government exercises authority over possible coal mining in Alberta’s eastern slopes: the Impact Assessment Act, the Species at Risk Act, and the forthcoming Coal Mining Effluent Regulations (a regulation under the Fisheries Act).

It should be noted these three enactments are not exhaustive of federal powers that apply to coal mining. The federal government may be involved in other ways, including through the general protection for fish habitat under the Fisheries Act, limitation of greenhouse gas emissions from industrial projects, constitutional obligations to Indigenous peoples, or water allocation disputes between provinces.

Continue reading →