The Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) denied the Minnie Lake Conservation Society (MLCS) its cost claim submitted after the hearing on CNRL oil drilling near the lake in March, 2011.
The ERCB approved the drilling of 15 wells from eight surface locations in June, 2011.
The ERCB released its decision to deny the cost claim of almost $70,000 in September. MLCS claimed costs for experts, preparation and attendance honoraria totaling $57,550, expenses worth $8,775 and GST at $2,814.
MLCS plans to reach out for donations and is considering a fundraiser, said Walter Czuroski with the society, by phone last week. “We did what we could," he said. While the MLCS didn't win, it gave some valuable information, he added. “Nobody expected that they would just back right away from us."
The experts hired to provide opinion for the society were worth every penny that they charged and went over and above expectations, Czuroski said.
The society requested the ERCB review the cost claim decision in October and continues to await the final decision. The ERCB expects the decision to be reached within a month, the communications department confirmed. MLCS could not afford to appeal to the Alberta Court of Appeal, said spokeswoman Coralee Beaulieu.
“We know we took every step available to us," she said. The process is “not set up to address environmental and social issues but to give an appearance of a legitimate process," she added, clarifying the statement reflects her own views and not the society.
Even though MLCS did not meet the test for funding in 2010, the board decided to conduct a hearing “on its own initiative," the ERCB decision stated. “The panel finds no reason to change the original July 27, 2010, decision to deny standing to the objecting parties," the ERCB panel said.
In its submission, MLCS claimed evidence it provided at the hearing in Glendon showed members and the society may be directly and adversely affected by the CNRL project. The society claimed it and its members fall under landowner and/or occupants status and thus qualified for local intervener status.
The ERCB panel recognized evidence from the hearing showed members of MLCS have interests in and occupy lands, but evidence did not establish there “may or will be a direct and adverse effect upon MLCS, its members, or the rights and interests of those hearing participants. Accordingly, MLCS is not entitled to an award of costs associated with its participation in the hearing."
CNRL opposed the cost claim “in the strongest possible terms" and said the society did not meet the test for an award of costs. CNRL pointed to an ERCB decision in July 2010, which stated MLCS did not appear to have rights or interests that may be directly or adversely affected by a board decision.
CNRL noted the society applied in November 2010, for advance intervener status and advance funding, which were opposed by CNRL. The panel denied the applications and said MLCS did not meet the test.
The decision from Dec. 10, 2010, stated “MLCS does not have the requisite interest in or right to occupy land in a manner sufficient to establish local intervener status," adding the legislation does not include members of the public who may use public facilities from time to time. CNRL claimed MLCS experts provided no assistance regarding the applications and asked the cost claims be denied.
