Author Archives: Drew Yewchuk

About Drew Yewchuk

B.A. (University of Alberta) J.D. (University of Calgary). Drew was formerly a staff lawyer with the University of Calgary's Public Interest Law Clinic from 2018-2022 and is now an LLM student at the Peter A. Allard School of Law.

The Alberta Energy Regulator Enforces New Licensee Capability Assessment and Restricts License Eligibility of AlphaBow

By: Drew Yewchuk

AER Administrative Sanction Commented On: 202207-13, AlphaBow Energy Ltd.

PDF Version: The Alberta Energy Regulator Enforces New Licensee Capability Assessment and Restricts License Eligibility of AlphaBow

The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) issued an administrative sanction to AlphaBow Energy Ltd. on July 28, 2022. Two aspects of the sanction make this an interesting case rather than a routine enforcement action: first, the history of AlphaBow, and second, that the administrative sanction is the AER implementing their new approach to liability management, so the terms and the ultimate outcome of this administrative sanction are a decent indication of things to come. Continue reading →

Alberta’s Orphan and Unreclaimed Oil and Gas Assets in July 2022

By: Drew Yewchuk

Annual Report Commented On: Orphan Well Association Annual Report 2021/2022; AER Bulletin 2022-23 Mandatory Closure Spend Target Set for 2023

PDF Version: Alberta’s Orphan and Unreclaimed Oil and Gas Assets in July 2022

The Orphan Well Association (OWA) released their annual report for 2021/2022 this month, and the AER posted Bulletin 2022-23 updating the mandatory closure spend targets. This post discusses these two documents and describes the current state of Alberta’s orphan and inactive oil and gas assets. For greater background on the OWA and the history of the problem, see here. Continue reading →

An Example of How Government Delays Access to Information Requests: Pretending to not Understand Them

By: Drew Yewchuk

Decision Commented On: Re Health, 2022 CanLII 51351 (AB OIPC) (Order F2022-25)

PDF Version: An Example of How Government Delays Access to Information Requests: Pretending to not Understand Them

Re Health, Order F2022-25 is a decision from an adjudicator at the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) ordering Alberta Health to respond to an access request that Alberta Health had wrongly refused to process. The conduct of Alberta Health described in the decision is a good illustration of the strategies used by public bodies in Alberta to defeat access requests under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP) Continue reading →

Procedural Fairness When Challenging Timeline Extensions for Freedom of Information Requests

By: Drew Yewchuk

Decision Commented On: Re Energy, Order F2022-20, 2022 CanLII 29391 (AB OIPC)

PDF Version: Procedural Fairness When Challenging Timeline Extensions For Freedom of Information Requests

Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) Order F2022-20 shows how easy it is for public bodies to drag the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP) process out to prevent timely transparency, even where there is little or no plausible justification for the public body to withhold records.

F2022-20 relates to the same FOIP request as Blades v Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2021 ABQB 725 (CanLII) (Blades), a decision I wrote about here. The request in question is an attempt to get government records explaining the Alberta government’s decision to revoke the 1976 Coal Development Policy for Alberta. Continue reading →

Abandonment and Reclamation Obligations, Builders Liens, and Municipal Taxes in Oil and Gas Bankruptcy Proceedings

By: Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: Abandonment and Reclamation Obligations, Builders Liens, and Municipal Taxes in Oil and Gas Bankruptcy Proceedings

Cases Commented On: Manitok Energy Inc (Re), 2022 ABCA 117 (CanLII)

Re Manitok Energy Inc, 2022 ABCA 117 (CanLII) (Manitok) was released March 30, 2022. It relates to the bankruptcy of an Alberta oil and gas corporation and interprets the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Orphan Well Association v Grant Thornton Ltd, 2019 SCC 5 (CanLII) (often referred to as Redwater, after the bankrupt company involved). The specific question before the Court of Appeal in Manitok was:

Whether end of life obligations associated with the abandonment and reclamation of unsold oil and gas properties must be satisfied by the Receiver from Manitok’s estate in preference to satisfying what may otherwise be first-ranking builders’ lien claims based on services provided by the lien claimants before the receivership date. (Manitok at para 1) Continue reading →