University of Calgary Faculty of Law ABLawg.ca logo over mountains

Category: Environmental Page 2 of 58

Major Projects and the Building Canada Act: New list of PONIs or PHONIs?

 By: David V. Wright

Matter Commented On: Building Canada Act, SC 2025, c 2, s 4

PDF Version: Major Projects and the Building Canada Act: New list of PONIs or PHONIs?

This week, Prime Minister Carney announced a second tranche of major projects for fast-tracking consideration under the new Building Canada Act, SC 2025, c 2, s 4 (BCA). This short post provides an update on the context and then presents a draft glossary that tries to make sense of the unusual terminology and various types of projects and concepts falling within the increasingly broad mandate of the new Major Projects Office (MPO).

Mine 14: It’s Worse Than We Thought

By: Nigel Bankes

Matter Commented On: Responsive Records to Access to Information Requests re Mine 14 Decision-Making

PDF Version: Mine 14: It’s Worse Than We Thought

An earlier ABlawg post described the manner in which Rob Morgan, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) unlawfully intervened in the Mine 14 adjudicative process then under the conduct of AER Hearing Commissioners. At the time we suggested that the CEO’s decision might have been the result of political pressure brought to bear on Mr. Morgan. The access to information requests discussed in this post strengthen that supposition and also provide evidence of improper communication between Mr. Morgan (and others at the AER) with Vitor Marciano the Chief of Staff of Brian Jean, Minister of Energy and Minerals.

A Review of Closure Nomination for Inactive Oil and Gas Sites and AER Updates to Directive 088 

By: Drew Yewchuk & Shaun Fluker 

Regulatory Bulletin Commented On: Alberta Energy Regulator, Bulletin 2025-32, Invitation for Feedback on Proposed Revisions to Closure Nomination Requirements in Directive 088 

PDF Version: A Review of Closure Nomination for Inactive Oil and Gas Sites and AER Updates to Directive 088 

The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) is taking comments on some proposed changes to the process for nominating oil and gas sites (facilities and wells) for closure work. The comment period is open until November 12, 2025. The AER’s closure nomination system has been in place since April 2023, and one of us commented on its commencement in Updates to the Oil and Gas Liability Management Framework: The New Closure Nomination and The Renamed Closure Quotas. The proposed changes adjust the timelines for the closure nomination. In particular, they shorten the timeline for nominated sites that had already been decommissioned to complete a phase 1 environmental site assessment from three years to one year, and they extend all closure nomination timelines to the end of the quarter-year. This post reviews the public information on the closure nomination process so far, discusses the AER’s proposed changes, and assesses the effectiveness of the closure nomination process so far.  

Taking Stock of the Grassy Mountain Project and Other Coal Matters: Update 4, October 2025

By: Nigel Bankes & Drew Yewchuk

Cases and Decisions Commented On: Northback Holdings Corporation v. Alberta Energy and Joint Review Panel For the Grassy Mountain Coal Project acting in its capacity as the Alberta Energy Regulator, 2025 CanLII 99179 (SCC) and Northback Holdings Corporation v. Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2025 FCA 31 (CanLII).

PDF Version: Taking Stock of the Grassy Mountain Project and Other Coal Matters: Update 4, October 2025

In addition to ABlawg’s coal law and policy series and the Coal Law and Policy ebook, we have provided occasional posts updating readers on the status of the Grassy Mountain Coal project and the related litigation. As the title of the post suggests, this is the fourth update following earlier updates in February 2024, August 2024, and June 2025.

Benga, now known as Northback, first applied for permits for the Grassy Mountain Coal Project in May 2015 (GM.1).  A Joint Review Panel (JRP) consisting of federal and provincial regulators held a hearing from October 2020 to January 2021. The JRP report in June 2021 denied provincial permits for the project and in August 2021, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change denied federal permits for the project. Recognizing that the project requires both federal and provincial permits, Northback brought litigation relating to the provincial permits in Alberta courts and litigation relating to the federal permits in federal courts in its efforts to get the project approved. In order to revisit the JRP report and decision and revive GM.1, Northback needed to succeed with its litigation in both the Alberta courts and the federal courts. The most recent developments confirm that all of Northback’s attacks on the provincial decision-making have failed and GM.1 is dead and buried. While there is some outstanding litigation in the federal courts relating to GM.1, even if Northback or the First Nation applicants are successful, the remaining litigation cannot obtain the permits necessary for GM.1 to proceed.

Unlawful Production and Restitutionary Damages

By: Nigel Bankes

Case Commented On: Signalta Resources Limited v Canadian Natural Resources Limited, 2025 ABCA 306 (CanLII) and Signalta Resources Limited v Canadian Natural Resources Limited, 2023 ABKB 108 (CanLII).

PDF Version: Unlawful Production and Restitutionary Damages

There are two principal substantive issues in this important unanimous decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal (referred to as ABCA decision). The first issue relates to the rules pertaining to the right of a Crown oil sands lessee (Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL)) to produce gas cap (or non-solution) gas in the course of producing oil sands (or bitumen) when the Crown has leased the natural gas rights in the same location (and indeed the same formation) to another party (Signalta). The second substantive issue relates to the legal consequences of the unlawful production of somebody else’s natural gas, specifically the assessment of damages for such unlawful production.

Page 2 of 58

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén