Regulatory Appeal Request – Denied
In this decision, the AER considered Mr. Winchester’s request under section 38 of the Responsible Energy Development Act (“REDA”) for a regulatory appeal of the AER’s decision to issue certain well and facility licences (the (“Licences”) to Petrus Resources Corp. (“Petrus”).
The AER denied the request for regulatory appeal on the grounds that Mr. Winchester was not an “eligible person” for the purposes of requesting a regulatory appeal under REDA.
REDA, section 38, states:
38(1) An eligible person may request a regulatory appeal of an appealable decision by filing a request for regulatory appeal with the Regulator in accordance with the rules.
“Eligible person” is defined in section 36 (b)(ii) as:
A person who is directly and adversely affected by a decision referred to in clause (a)(iv).
Mr. Winchester outlined concerns with respect to noise, groundwater aquifer problems, flaring and alternate site locations with regard to Petrus’ development located at the 1-8 site.
In response, Petrus submitted that it will adhere to the AER requirements in Directive 038: Noise Control. It further submitted that it will consider a noise barrier should this become necessary during the construction and completion of the development.
In regards to flaring concerns, the AER noted Petrus’ statement that there would be no continuous flaring from the licenced projects and that it would comply with Directive 060: Upstream Petroleum Industry Flaring, Incinerating, and Venting.
The AER characterized Mr. Winchester’s concerns regarding his health and safety related concerns as “concerns only.” The AER stated the Mr. Winchester did not provide information in support of how such concerns directly affected his health or safety. The AER held that Mr. Winchester failed to establish that he is or may be directly and adversely affected by the Licences.
The AER concluded that Mr. Winchester was not directly and adversely affected by the decision to issue the Licenses and therefore not an “eligible person” under REDA section 36(b)(ii).
Accordingly, the AER dismissed the request for regulatory appeal.
