Download Free Reasons For Decision In The Matter Of Transcanada Keystone Pipeline Gp Ltd Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Reasons For Decision In The Matter Of Transcanada Keystone Pipeline Gp Ltd and write the review.

The National Energy Board publishes reasons for decisions when it expects its decisions to influence actions beyond the particular case that was heard. The Board is an independent tribunal with responsibilities for regulating the oil, gas, and electricity industries. Its decisions affect the industry, energy consumers, and anyone who owns land or lives in the vicinity of pipeline and international power line rights of way. Its decisions aim to protect the public interest in safety, environmental protection, and economic efficiency. This document presents the decision of the National Energy Board regarding TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd.'s application to construct and operate the Canadian portion of the Keystone pipeline project. News releases are included in English and French.--Government of Canada's website.
Discusses the background and the report of the National Energy Board (NEB) with regard to the application by TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd. to transfer certain pipeline facilities presently comprising part of the TransCanada mainline natural gas transmission system from TransCanada to Keystone for use in Keystone's proposed new oil pipeline. Included in the data is information on the regulatory standard, a discussion of energy supply, markets and pipelines, and the potential impacts of the transfer.
This document concerns an application to the National Energy Board (NEB) dated 14 March 2008 by Trans Mountain Pipeline Inc. (TMI) for approval of proposed Tariff No. 74, Rules and Regulations Governing the Transportation of Petroleum, to be effective 1 May 2008, the in-service date for Phase 1 of the TMX Anchor Loop Expansion Project, filed with the NEB under File No. OF-Tolls-Group1-T246-2008-02 01; and Hearing Order RH-4-2008, heard in Calgary, Alberta on 4 September 2008. This document provides an overview of the matters considered by the NEB in reaching a decision on the application and details of the NEB's assessment of issues identified by the NEB or by parties to the proceeding, including: the allocation of capacity with respect to receipts and deliveries at Kamloops; the appropriate capacity to be allocated for deliveries over the Westridge Dock; the appropriate tariff, rules and regulations governing nominations and the allocation of capacity for deliveries over the Westridge Dock; the definition of Land versus Dock Deliveries; the appropriate tariff, rules and regulations governing nominations and the allocation of capacity for deliveries to land-based destinations; whether there should be a regular review by TMI and its shippers of capacity allocations to the various destinations on the Trans Mountain pipeline system; and whether the proposed allocation procedures to accommodate Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Anchor Loop TMX expansion are consistent with the National Energy Board Act.--Includes text from document.
On 30 May 2007, Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (Enbridge or the Applicant) filed an application pursuant to section 52 of the National Energy Board Act (the NEB Act) for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Alberta Clipper Expansion Project (Alberta Clipper or the Project). Under the NEB Act, the factors to be considered and the criteria to be applied in coming to a decision on public interest or the present and future public convenience and necessity may vary with the circumstances, including the application, the location, the commodity involved, the various segments of the public affected by the decision, societal values at the time, and the purpose of the applicable section of the NEB Act. The Board's decisions are made in the public interest and are based on respect for the rights of those affected, concern for the environment and a commitment to safety and security.--Document.

Reasons for Decision in the Matter of Alliance Pipeline Ltd., Enbridge Pipelines Inc., Enbridge Pipelines (NW) Inc., Foothills Pipe Lines Ltd., Kinder Morgan Cochin ULC, NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd., Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC on Behalf of Trans Mountain LP, Trans Québec and Maritimes Pipeline Inc., TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd., TransCanada PipeLines Limited, Trans-Northern Pipelines Inc., and Westcoast Energy Inc., Carrying on Business as Spectra Energy Transmission

Canada. National Energy Board

Published: 2013

Total Pages: 128


Get eBook

In early 2008, the National Energy Board (Board or NEB) identified a proposed approach for the Land Matters Consultative Initiative (LMCI), consisting of four distinct topic streams. One of the streams, Stream 3, was Pipeline Abandonment--Financial Issues. The Board indicated that the key issue to be considered in respect of that stream was: "What is the optimal way to ensure that funds are available when abandonment costs are incurred?" The Board noted two key principles fundamental to its future decisions with respect to the financial matters related to pipeline abandonment. These were: a) Abandonment costs are a legitimate cost of providing service and are recoverable upon Board approval from users of the system; and b) Landowners will not be liable for costs of pipeline abandonment. These Reasons for Decision provide an overview of the matters considered by the Board in reaching a decision in respect of the abandonment cost estimates applications.--Document.
In January 2008, the National Energy Board (Board) identified a proposed approach for the Land Matters Consultative Initiative (LMCI), consisting of four distinct topic streams. One of the four topic streams, stream 3, was "Pipeline Abandonment--Financial Issues." The Board indicated that the key issue to be considered in respect of that topic stream was the following: What is the optimal way to ensure that funds are available when abandonment costs are incurred? This document presents the Board's report and recommendations concerning this question.--Includes text from document.
The Keystone XL pipeline was most controversial North American energy infrastructure project of our time, and its history and demise serve as a cautionary tale for Canada, a country that will remain mired in regulatory dysfunction until it finds common ground between economic value and credible carbon policy.
Supreme Court of Canada decisions have defined a general framework for the "duty to consult" Aboriginal peoples and accommodate their concerns over natural resource development, but anticipate the details of that framework will be expanded upon in the future. Aboriginal Consultation, Environmental Assessment, and Regulatory Review in Canada offers a paradigm that advances that discussion. It proposes an integrated and robust planning model for natural resource extraction allowing Aboriginal peoples, industry, governments, tribunals, and the Courts to all make contributions to reconciliation in the context of sustainable development and environmental protection. Kirk Lambrecht surveys the law of actual and asserted Aboriginal rights and historical and modern Treaty rights in Canada and discusses the national and international purposes of environmental assessment and regulatory review. He appraises the fundamental principles of Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence defining aboriginal consultation and accommodation as a constitutional imperative and uses case studies involving the National Energy Board to demonstrate how integrated process has evolved over time. Finally he offers general conclusions on the practical utility, and outstanding challenges, involving an integrated planning paradigm.
On 9 March 2007, Enbridge Southern Lights GP on behalf of Enbridge Southern Lights LP (ESL) and Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (EPI), collectively the Applicants, applied to the National Energy Board (NEB or the Board) for approvals related to the Southern Lights Project (Project). This Project consists of two components: Diluent Pipeline Project; and Capacity Replacement Project. In this proceeding, the Board heard evidence on engineering design and safety issues; economic considerations, such as supply and markets; public engagement and consultation; impacts on Aboriginal people; socio-economic and environmental effects of the Project; and land and routing matters.--Document.
In From Recognition to Reconciliation, twenty leading scholars reflect on the continuing transformation of the constitutional relationship between Indigenous peoples and the Canadian state.