A Notice of Appeal was received on March 19, 2010 from the Town of Okotoks with respect to Alberta Environment's February 9, 2010 decision to issue Water Act Preliminary Certificate No. 00250484-00-00 to Sandstone Springs Development Corp. authorizing a licence, upon completion of certain work, for the diversion of 98,550.0 cubic metres of groundwater annually from wells located in E 1/2 24-20-1-W5M for municipal purposes (230 lot country residential subdivision and 70 patio homes), near Okotoks in the MD of Foothills.

On April 8, 2010 Sandstone challenged the Town's appeal stating the Town is not directly affected and their appeal was filed late. On April 28, 2010 the Board placed the motions on hold. The mediation meeting held June 17, 2010 was unsuccessful. The Board set a schedule to receive submissions on: 1. How is the Town of Okotoks directly affected by the Preliminary Certificate? 2. Was the Notice of Appeal filed on time? and 3. What are the issues to be heard at a hearing, should one be held? On January 14, 2011, the Board issued a Decision accepting the Town of Okotoks as directly affected and their Notice of Appeal was filed on time. The Board also determined that the issues to be heard at a Hearing are:

1. Is the water allocated to Sandstone groundwater that naturally flows to and from surface water sources within the South Saskatchewan River Basin and therefore reserved under the Bow, and Oldman and South Saskatchewan River Basin Allocation Order?
   
2. Is the water allocated to Sandstone already licenced to the Town of Okotoks or connected to the Town's water sources?


3. Are the conditions in the Preliminary Certificate suffcient to mitigate any reasonably foreseeable harm that the Town of Okotoks may incur as a result of the Preliminary Certificate and subsequent water licence?

Notice of Appeal was received on August 31, 2010 from Anadarko Petroleum with respect to Alberta Environment and Water's August 3, 2010 decision to cancel Reclamation Certificate No. 00245656-00-00 that was issued to Anadarko Petroleum for the Gordondale well located at 7-22-79-11-W6M, as a result of an audit of the site near Gordondale. Anadarko and Alberta Environment and Water requested the appeal be placed in abeyance while they discuss the appeal. On December 9, 2011 Anadarko requested the appeal continue to be placed in abeyance so that the site could be monitored. Alberta Environment and Water supported Anadarko's request. On January 23, 2012, the Board advised that it would not place the appeal in abeyance for an additional two years, and requested that on September 28, 2012 status reports be provided including an update on the condition of the site. At that time, the Board would consider any further requests for an abeyance.

A Notice of Appeal was received from 719722 Alberta Ltd. on November 19, 2010 with respect to Alberta Environment's November 12, 2010 decision to issue Environmental Protection Order No. EPO-2010/48-CR under the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act to 719722 Alberta Ltd. in relation to the clean up of a retail gas station located at 4710-50 Avenue in Calmar. At the request of Alberta Environment and the Appellant, the appeal was placed in abeyance while they discuss. On June 10, 2011, the parties requested the appeal proceed to a mediation meeting. A mediation meeting was held July 19, 2011 in Edmonton and a further mediation meeting was held February 27, 2012. Mediation meetings are not open to the public. Alberta Environment and Water and the Appellant are still in discussions.

The Hearing scheduled for April 11-13, 2012 has been rescheduled to September 25-27, 2012. Hearings are open to the public for viewing only. The issues to be heard at the Hearing are:

1. Should the Order be varied to identify other persons responsible (i.e. previous owners or adjacent landowners)? The sustances of this issue will necessarily include a determination as to whether Alberta Environment and Water was correct in naming only the Appellant in the Order, and will also include the possibility that the Board may recommend that another person or persons be named in the Order.
2. Are the terms and conditions in the Order reasonable (meaning technically and scientifically sound)?
3. Is the Appellant responsible for all of the contamination that is required to be addressed under the Order?

A Notice of Appeal was received on November 26, 2010 from Westridge Utilities Inc. with respect to Alberta Environment's October 29, 2010 decision to issue Water Act Licence No. 00255373-00-00 to Rocky View County authorizing them to operate a works and divert up to 277,533 metres of water annually from the Elbow River at NE 13-023-05-W5M for municipal purposes. This Licence is a result of the transfer of a water allocation from Allen's Trout Farms' water licence. Rocky View has requested the Board dismiss the appeal of Westridge Utilities for not being directly affected by their Licence. A Preliminary Motions Hearing was held on June 14, 2011 in Calgary, and a decision was issued October 29, 2011 dismissing the appeal. On December 15, 2011, Westridge filed a judicial review of the Board's decision in the Court of Queen's Bench. The judicial review is scheduled for October 25, 2012 in Special Chambers, Court of Queen's Bench, Calgary.

A Notice of Appeal was received on December 10, 2010 from Gas Plus Inc. and Handel Transport (Northern) Ltd. with respect to Alberta Environment's December 3, 2010 decision to issue Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act Environmental Protection Order No. EPO-2010/58-SR (EAB 10-034) to Gas Plus Inc. and Handel Transport (Northern) Ltd. in relation to a retail gas station located at 6336 Bowness Road NW, Calgary. A second Notice of Appeal was received from Gas Plus and Handel Transport on April 28, 2011 with respect to Alberta Environment's April 21, 2011 decision to issue Amendment No. 1 (EAB 11-002) to the Environmental Protection Order. A third Notice of Appeal was received from Gas Plus and Handel Transport on June 9, 2011 with respect to Alberta Environment's June 2, 2011 decision to issue Amendment No. 2 (EAB 11-008). Amendment No. 2 resets the deadlines for the requirements under the Order. A fourth Notice of Appeal was received on September 19, 2011 from Gas Plus and Handel Transport with respect to Alberta Environment's September 13, 2011 decision to issue Amendment No. 3 (EAB 11-023). The Amendment relates to two options for a remediation program.

Gas Plus requested a Stay of EPO Amendment No. 1. On May 9, 2011 the Board issued a temporary Stay with respect to the Source Removal Program only described in EPO Amendment No. 1. The Board requested submissions on the Stay and on May 24, 2011 the Board denied Gas Plus' Stay request with respect to the Source Removal Program and issued a Decision. Gas Plus requested a second Stay of EPO Amendment No. 2 and the Board received objections from Alberta Environment to the request because Amendment No. 2 merely changes the dates previously set in Amendment No. 1. Gas Plus subsequently withdrew the Stay request on June 15, 2011. Two further requests for a Stay were received related to Amendment No. 3. One request was withdrawn, and the request with respect to the commencement of option B (source containment and on-site remedial program, clause 23 of the EPO) was denied.

Hearing - The Hearing was held on November 22, 23, 24 and 25, 2011 in Calgary and was open to the public for viewing only. Hearing Schedule The issues that were heard at the Hearing:

1. Are the remediation techniques and timelines included in the amended EPO to address the on-site and off-site contamination appropriate? The Appellants and Alberta Environment have identified a number of proposed remediation techniques including: digging up and removing the contaminated material (Option A); using different configurations of secant walls to contain the contaminated material (Option B being a perimeter secant wall, and Option C being a smaller "triangular" secant wall); using bio-remediation (Option D); and using combinations of these techniques (Option E). The Board expects that in response to this first, all of these options, and any other options that are available, will be addressed by the participants.


2. Should the amended EPO be reversed or varied based on the alleged "frustration" of Gas Plus Inc. with respect to the Bow Liquor Inc. lease?


3. Should the amended EPO be varied to identify only Handel Transport (Northern) Ltd. as the person responsible, as opposed to both Gas Plus Inc. and Handel Transport (Northern) Ltd. as currently identified in the amended EPO?

Notices of Appeal were received on December 17, 2010 from Ecojustice on behalf of the Alberta Wilderness Association, Trout Unlimited Canada, Water Matters Society of Alberta, Cheryl Bradley, Lorne Fitch and Walter Hohloch with respect to Alberta Environment's November 18, 2010 decision to issue Water Act Licence Amendment No. 00071066-00-01 to the Eastern Irrigation District. The licence amendment permits the water to be used for municipal, agricultural, commercial, industrial, habitat enhancement, and recreational use.

Alberta Environment requested the appeals be dismissed for not being directly affected by the Licence Amendment and for raising issues that are outside the Board's jurisdiction. The Board set a schedule to receive submissions and the participants are to also identify what issues in the Notices of Appeal should be considered by the Board should the matter proceed to a hearing. In the Board's June 1, 2011 letter, all appeals with the exception of Mr. Hohloch's appeal were dismissed. The Board's Decision was released on August 30, 2011.

Mr. Hohloch's appeal was on hold pending the outcome of various preliminary motions regarding the appeals of the Licence Amendments issued to the Western Irrigation District (EAB 10-053-055 and EAB 11-009-011), and the Bow River Irrigation District (EAB 11-012-014). The Board issued a letter on January 9, 2012 dismissing the appeals of the Licence Amendments issued to the WID and BRID. The letter also requested that Mr. Hohloch, EID and Alberta Environment and Water advise by January 16, 2012 how they wished to proceed with Mr. Hohloch's appeal. Mr. Hohloch advised he wished to proceed directly to a hearing and not mediation.

The Hearing scheduled for April 23 and 24, 2012 was adjourned at the request of counsel for the EID as he was a candidate in the election on April 23, 2012. The Board requested dates from the parties for May, June, July and August and there were no common dates. The hearing has been rescheduled to September 17 and 18, 2012.

The Hearing is open to the public for viewing only. The issues to be heard at the Hearing are:

1. Did the Director, Alberta Environment and Water, in his consideration of the application and in issuing the Licence Amendment, act in accordance with the Water Act and the applicable Alberta Environment and Water policies, including the South Saskatchewan River Basin Water Management Plan and the Water Licence Change of Purpose: Administrative Licencing Criteria?
2. What effect will the Licence Amendment have on Mr. Hohloch's water supply for his cattle?

Notices of Appeal were received on January 20, 2011 from the Town of Okotoks with respect to Alberta Environment's December 17 and 21, 2010 decisions in relation to Water Act Licence Nos. 00268349-00-00, 00268350-00-00, 00268353-00-00 and 00268354-00-00. Licence Nos. 00268349-00-00 and 00268353-00-00 were issued to the Town of Okotoks as a result of transfers from Harry and Gaylene Irving and CanEra Resources, for municipal purposes. Licence Nos. 00268350-00-00 and 00268354-00-00 were issued to the Minister of Environment as a result of the 10% holdback from the licence transfers to the Town of Okotoks. A mediation meeting was held on April 12, 2011. Mediation meetings are not open to the public. Discussions are ongoing and regular status reports are to be provided. The next status report is due May 18, 2012.

A Notice of Appeal was received on March 14, 2011 from the Sucker Creek First Nation with respect to Alberta Environment's March 2, 2011 decision to issue Water Act Approval No. 00283963-00-00 to the Minister of Environment for the construction and operation of a weir modification at section 07-073-05-W5M of the Lesser Slave River. Sucker Creek First Nation requested the mediation meeting scheduled for September 27, 2011 in Peace River be cancelled. As all parties were in agreement, the mediation meeting was cancelled. The parties are currently in discussion and regular status reports are to be provided. On October 27, 2011 Sucker Creek First Nation advised that additional time was required to finalize an agreement and they would then be withdrawing their appeal. On March 15, 2012, Sucker Creek First Nation advised that final discussions will take place with Alberta Environment and Water the week of March 19. The Board has asked for a further update on March 26, 2012. The update advised that a grant application has been filed and once approved should resolve the remaining issues. The next status report is due June 4, 2012.

Notices of Appeal were received on March 18, 2011 from Ecojustice on behalf of the Alberta Wilderness Association, Trout Unlimited Canada, and Water Matters Society of Alberta, with respect to Alberta Environment's February 18, 2011 decision to issue Water Act Licence Amendment No. 00045938-00-02 to the Western Irrigation District (WID). The Licence Amendment expands the purpose of the licence to include delivery of water for municipal and commercial use in Wheatland County. The appellants requested the appeals be held in abeyance until such time as the Board makes a decision on the preliminary motions raised with respect to the appeals filed regarding the Licence Amendment issued to the Eastern Irrigation District (EID) (10-038-043). The WID and Alberta Environment agreed to hold the WID appeals in abeyance. In the Board's June 1, 2011 letter, all the EID appeals with the exception of Mr. Hohloch's appeal were dismissed. Mr. Hohloch's appeal of the EID Licence Amendment will proceed to a hearing. The Board's Decision was released on August 30, 2011. With respect to the WID and Bow River Irrigation District (BRID) appeals, the Board received submissions on various preliminary motions, and on January 9, 2012 the appeals of the Alberta Wilderness Association, Trout Unlimited Canada, and Water Matters Society of Alberta were dismissed with reasons to follow. The Board's Decision was issued on April 10, 2012, and the file is now closed.

A Notice of Appeal was received on March 14, 2011 from Water Conservation Trust of Canada with respect to Alberta Environment and Water's February 11, 2011 decision to refuse a Water Act application from the Water Conservation Trust of Canada for a water licence transfer to them to hold an allocation of 100 acre-feet of water in the Medicine River at SW 02-039-03-W5M, for instream flow in the Red Deer River for habitat enhancement, recreation, fish and wildlife, and water management. Alberta Environment and Water advised that section 51(2) of the Water Act states that only the government can hold a licence that provides or maintains a rate of flow or water level requirement and only in support of a water conservation objective. The appeal is in abeyance while the participants are in discussions. The Board's January 23, 2012 letter requested status reports and schedules for a mediation meeting in May 2012, by January 30, 2012. The mediation meeting scheduled for May 3, 2012 in Calgary has been cancelled due to a request from the Appellant, and will be rescheduled. A further status report is due June 1, 2012 from the Appellant. Once the Appellant provides their available dates for a mediation meeting, Alberta Environment will be consulted on their availability. Mediation meetings are not open to the public.

A Notice of Appeal and request for a Stay were received on May 2, 2011 with respect to Alberta Environment's April 27, 2011 decision to issue under the Water Act and the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act Enforcement Order Nos. WA-EO-204/01-NR and EO-2011/01-NR to Jack (John) Purdy and Half Moon Lake Resort Ltd. for the alleged contraventions of: section 49 of the Water Act in relation to the diversion of water without authorizations (Licences); sections 61, 227(j) and 176 of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act in relation to the operation of a wastewater system without the required registrations or approvals; and the discharge of wastewater to a wetland area at Half Moon Lake Resort near Sherwood Park.

On May 9, 2011 the Board denied the Stay request with reasons to follow, and requested further information from Mr. Purdy and Alberta Environment on the residence at Half Moon Lake Resort. The information was received from Mr. Purdy and Alberta Environment and on May 26, 2011 the Board granted a limited Stay allowing Mr. Purdy to use Well #3 for household use within strict conditions. See the Stay Letter describing the conditions for the Stay.

Mr. Purdy filed applications with Alberta Environment and Water for a water licence, water distribution system, and wastewater system. As of June 7, 2011, monthly status reports are required on the progress of the applications, as well as notifying the Board of any changes that may be made to the Order. Alberta Environment and Water advised on March 1, 2012 that the Resort's application for a water licence, a water distribution system and wastewater system are administratively complete and they will now make a decision. The Order will remain in place as is the requirement for monthly meter readings on the Resort's Well #3. The next status reports are due April 2, 2012. On April 10, 2012 Alberta Environment and Water advised that Water Act Licence No. 00308449-00-00 was issued for the diversion of water, Approval No. 295283-00-00 was issued for the operation and reclamation of a waterworks system and EPEA Approval No. 291452-00-00 was issued for the wastewater system at Half Moon Lake Resort and the Order was closed. On April 23, 2012, the Board advised that since the Order was closed, the appeal was moot, and it would be closing its file. The Board further advised that if the Appellant had any concerns wtih the newly issued Licence or Approvals, to file a new appeal.

A Notice of Appeal was received on May 25, 2011 from Bonavista Energy Corporation with respect to Alberta Environment's April 19, 2011 decision to cancel Reclamation Certificate No. 00252822-00-00 that was issued to Bonavista Energy Corporation for the Bonavista Dixonville 12-11-87-25-W5M well. The Certificate was cancelled as a result of an audit that revealed contouring of the wellsite does not blend or conform with adjacent land, and soil quality, soil profile, and vegetation do not meet criteria. A mediation meeting was scheduled for October 14, 2011, however was cancelled as the land was disturbed. Mediation meetings are not open to the public. Alberta Environment and Bonavista are in discussions and an update is due June 29, 2012 to allow for a proper assessment since the land was disturbed.

Notices of Appeal were received from Ecojustice on behalf of the Alberta Wilderness Association, Trout Unlimited Canada and Water Matters Society of Alberta on June 10, 2011 with respect to Alberta Environment's June 2, 2011 decision to issue Water Act Licence Amendment No. 00045938-00-03 to the Western Irrigation District (WID) expanding the type of use for the water and altering the volume for each purpose. The appellants requested the appeals be held in abeyance until such time as the Board makes a decision on the preliminary motions raised with respect to the appeals filed regarding the Licence Amendment issued to the Eastern Irrigation District (EID) (10-038-043). The WID and Alberta Environment agreed to hold the WID appeals in abeyance. In the Board's June 1, 2011 letter, all the EID appeals with the exception of Mr. Hohloch's appeal were dismissed. Mr. Hohloch's appeal of the EID Licence Amendment will proceed to a hearing. The Board's Decision was released on August 30, 2011. With respect to the WID and Bow River Irrigation District (BRID) appeals, the Board received submissions on various preliminary motions, and on January 9, 2012 the appeals of the Alberta Wilderness Association, Trout Unlimited Canada, and Water Matters Society of Alberta were dismissed with reasons to follow. The Board's Decision was issued on April 10, 2012, and the file is now closed.

Notices of Appeal were received from EcoJustice on behalf of the Alberta Wilderness Association, Trout Unlimited Canada and Water Matters Society of Alberta on June 10, 2011 with respect to Alberta Environment's June 2, 2011 decision to issue Water Act Licence Amendment No. 00045808-00-013 to the Bow River Irrigation District (BRID) expanding the purpose of the water. The appellants requested the appeals be held in abeyance until such time as the Board makes a decision on the preliminary motions raised with respect to the appeals filed regarding the Licence Amendment issued to the Eastern Irrigation District (EID) (EAB 10-038-043). In the Board's June 1, 2011 letter, all the EID appeals with the exception of Mr. Hohloch's appeal were dismissed. Mr. Hohloch's appeal of the EID Licence Amendment will proceed to a hearing. The Board's Decision was released on August 30, 2011. With respect to the WID and BRID appeals, the Board received submissions on various preliminary motions, and on January 9, 2012 the appeals of the Alberta Wilderness Association, Trout Unlimited Canada, and Water Matters Society of Alberta were dismissed with reasons to follow. The Board's Decision was issued on April 10, 2012, and the file is now closed.

A Notice of Appeal was received on August 20, 2011 from Mike Rudakewich with respect to Alberta Environment's June 17, 2011 decision to issue Water Act Approval No. 00288056-00-00 to Clear Hills County to re-route the flow of Jack Creek from SE 29-084-04-W6 to NW21-084-04-W6 by installing a culvert diagonally at a local road intersection (Range Road 44 and Township 844) and constructing channel re-alignment works upstream and downstream of the culvert, near Hines Creek. The mediation meeting held November 17, 2011 in Peace River did not result in the appeal being resolved, and the Appellant advised he wished to proceed with his appeal.

The Board requested the parties provide any preliminary motions as well as hearing dates. The Board received motions from Alberta Environment and Water and Clear Hills County advising that the Appellant is not directly affected by the Approval and that some of the issues he raises in his Notice of Appeal are not issues the Board can hear. Submissions were received and on April 4, 2012 the Board issued its Decision advising that Mr. Mike Rudakewich is directly affected given the location of his property with respect to Jack Creek and the highly erodible soils that exist in the area. A hearing is scheduled for May 29, 2012 in Peace River and the issue to be heard at the hearing will be: Did the Director adequately consider the impct of erosion on Jack Creek and does the Approval mitigate all potential impacts? The hearing will be open to the public for viewing only.

Any person, other than the parties, who wished to make a representation before the Board on this appeal was to submit a request to the Board by April 27, 2012. The Board granted intervenor status to Mr. Ed Mierzewski because he owns property on the southwest corner of the realignment intersection and the realignment will impact the creek that crosses his property.

Copies of material filed with the Board up to April 10, 2012 respecting this appeal are available for viewing at the Fairview Public Library during its normal operating hours, or by appointment at the Board's office in Edmonton.

The information requested is necessary to allow the Board to perform its function. The information is collected under the authority of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, section 33(c). Section 33(c) provides that personal information may only be collected if that information relates directly to and is necessary for the processing of this appeal. The information provided will be considered a public record.

Following the Hearing, the Board will provide the Minister of Environment and Water with its Report and Recommendations within 30 days of the hearing closing, pursuant to the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. The Minister will make the final decision on this appeal by issuing a Ministerial Order.

The Board received 36 Notices of Appeals with respect to Alberta Environment and Water's September 22, 2011 decision to issue Water Act Approval No. 0026612-00-00 to Waste Management of Canada Corp. for the placing, constructing, operating, maintaining, removing, disturbing works, in or on any land, water or water body; for the purpose of removing wetlands, constructing wetland compensation works and managing surface water run-on and run-off for the Thorhild Class II landfill. The Board received 35 Notices of Appeals with respect to Alberta Environment and Water's September 22, 2011 decision to issue EPEA Approval 236328-00-00 to Waste Management of Canada Corp. for the construction, operation and reclamation of the Thorhild Class II landfill where more than 10,000 tonnes per year of waste is disposted of, not including hazardous waste. A copy of Alberta Environment and Water's documents they considered in making their decision to issue the Approvals are available for viewing at the Thorhild and District Municipal Library.

The appeal of the Confederacy of Treaty Six First Nations appeared to relate to the duty to consult which this Board is not legislated address and obligations under the Historical Resources Act. The Board requested the CTSFN provide a more detailed Notice of Appeal clearly outlining their environmental impacts from the landfill. The CTSFN did not respond to the Board's requests, and on November 8, 2011, the Board dismissed the appeal and issued a Decision.

Stay Request - The Board received requests for a Stay the Water Act Approval and a temporary stay of the Water Act Approval was issued on November 8, 2011. Following receipt of additional information on January 11, 2012, the Board removed the temporary stay. Although the Hilts (Appellants) demonstrated there is a serious issue to be heard, they did not provide sufficient information to meet the requirements for the stay to remain in place. The Hilts, as applicants for the stay, had the onus of demonstrating to the Board that they would be irreparably harmed by the work allowed under the Approval during the time it will take to hear the appeals. In particular, they did not provide sufficient evidence to show the landfill site, and in particular the surface water flows off-site, could not be re-established should the Board decide the Approval should not have been issued or should be varied. Since the stay is no longer in place, the WMCC can do work allowed under the Approval should it decide to proceed. However, the WMCC should be aware that, should the Board recommend to the Minister of Environment and Water that the Approval should not have been issued or should be amended, the WMCC will be responsible for returning the site to pre-disturbance conditions or making the necessary changes to comply with any amendments. Also, whether or not any work has been done by the WMCC will not be a factor in the Board's decision-making regarding any recommendations. The Board issued its Decision on March 14, 2012 providing reasons for removing the temporary stay on January 11, 2012.

Stay Reconsideration Request - On March 9, 2012 the Board received a request from the Hilts to reconsider its decision to remove the temporary stay. Reconsideration is a two step process. The first step is to determine if the Board has made an error in interpreting the law that was the basis of the decision or if new information that was not available at the time of the decision has become available. Information that was available but not presented to the Board does not meet the requirement of the first step. The Board received supplemental information from the Hilts on March 12 and 26 and will decide if it will accept the request to reconsider its decision on the stay. If the Hilts have presented information that shows the Board made an error in law or that the information was new information not previously available, then it will ask Alberta Environment and Water and WMCC for their input, and give the Hilts a final opportunity to comment before deciding if the reconsideration is appropriate. If the Board decides that it is appropriate to reconsider its stay decision, the Board will proceed to the second step of the reconsideration process. The Board will not make a decision adverse to any participant without giving them an opportunity to comment.

Preliminary Motions - On November 22, 2011, the WMCC requested that preliminary motions be addressed and on November 25, 2011 the Board requested submissions on the following motions:

1. Did each of the Appellants file a Statement of Concern with Alberta Environment and Water?
   
2. Were the Notices of Appeal filed within the time frames specified in section 116(1)(a)(ii) of the Water Act?
   
3. Are the Appellants directly affected by the Water Act Approval and the EPEA Approval?
   
4. Is the Concerned Citizens of Thorhild County group directly affected by the Water Act Approval and the EPEA Approval?
   
5. Are there any other issues raised in the Notices of Appeal that are not properly before the Board and how does this impact the validity of the Notices of Appeal?
   
6. How can the issues in the Notices of Appeal be consolidated in to categories or groups that can be dealt with together?
   
7. If this matter proceeds to a hearing, what issues included in the Notices of Appeal should be considered by the Board?
   

The Board received 72 Notices of Appeal with respect to Alberta Environment Water's August 30, 2011 decision to issue Water Act Licence No. 285465-00-00 to Matt Schultz authorizing him to operate a works and divert up to 70,000 cubic metres of water annually for commercial purposes (hauling heated water).

The Board received requests for a stay of the Licence and on December 5, 2011 the Board dismissed the application, and reasons are to be issued. The purpose of a stay is to stop work from being undertaken under the licence that could cause irreparable harm to the appellants requesting the stay. To provide the basis for granting a stay, the work that could cause the irreparable harm should be expected to happen before the Board has a chance to address the appeals. The Board dismissed the application for a Stay as the Appellants did not demonstrate that irreparable harm would occur. In the Board's view, the harm that the Appellants have identified are either too speculative or will not occur between now and the time the appeals have been addressed. The Board's reasons will be issued in due course.

Alberta Environment and Water and Matt Schultz raised motions regarding the appeals. Submissions are to be filed on the following motions:

1. Did each of the Appellants file a Statement of Concern with Alberta Environment and Water?
2. Were the Notices of Appeal filed within the time frame specified in section 116 of the Water Act or by November 4, 2011 (date specified by the Board in this case)?
3. Are the Appellants directly affected by the Licence?
4. Are the Notices of Appeal received in relation to the Licence in "template form" and how does this impact (i) each Appellant's standing and (ii) the validity of their Notice of Appeal?
5. Are there any other issues raised in the Notices of Appeal that are not properly before the Board and how does this impact the validity of the Notices of Appeal?
6. If this matter proceeds to a hearing, what issues included in the Notices of Appeal should be considered by the Board?

A Notice of Appeal was received from the landowner on October 7, 2011 regarding Reclamation Certificate No. 00291862-00-00 issued to Advantage Oil and Gas by Alberta Environment and Water on August 9, 2011 for a well located near Villeneuve. Advantage Oil and Alberta Environment and Water suggested the appeal be placed in abeyance pending a site visit in late spring or early summer. The Appellant was to provide comments on the request for an abeyance by the other parties, and after two extensions he provided his position on February 29, 2012. On March 16, 2012 the Board requested mediation meeting dates in August and September by March 23, 2012 to allow for site visits to take place. The appellant has requested that the mediation meeting be held via conference call. The mnediation meeting is scheduled for September 4, 2012 via conference call. Mediation meetings are not open to the public.

A Notice of Appeal from Cypress County with respect to 4 decisions of Alberta Environment and Water to issue:

1. Water Act Licence No. 00298247-00-00, for the operation of a works and diversion of up to 36,960 cubic metres of water annually at a maximum rate of diversion of 0.056 cubic metres per second from the source of water for municipal purposes from NW 35-012-06-W4M through the works of the City of Medicine Hat and re-diverted at NE 27-012-06-W4M through the Seven Persons Potable Water Gate, for the Hamlet of Seven Persons;
2. Water Act Licence No. 00298055-00-00, for the operation of a works and diversion of up to 81,111 cubic metres of water annually at a maximum rate of diversion of 0-009 cubic metres of water per second from the source of water for municipal purposes from NW 35-012-06-W4M through the works of the City of Medicine Hat and re-diverted at NE 11-012-06-W4M through the Southwest Potable Water Gate for the Hamlet of Dunmore;
3. Water Act Licence No. 00298104-00-00, for the operation of a works and diversion of up to 296,667 cubic metres of water annually at a maximum rate of diversion of 0.03 cubic metres per second from the source of water for rural residential purposes from NW 35-012-06-W4M through the works of the City of Medicine Hat and re-diverted at NE 27-012-06-W4M through the Seven Persons Potable Water Gate, for Westside Water Co-op Ltd.; and
4. Water Act Licence No. 00298106-00-00, for the operation of a works and diversion of up to 84,445 cubic metres of water annually at a maximum rate of diversion of 0.046 cubic metres of water per second from the source of water for rural community purposes from NW 35-012-06-W4M through the works of the City of Medicine Hat and re-diverted at NE 11-012-06-W4M through the southwest potable water gate, for rural community in Cypress County between Medicine Hat and Dunmore.

A Notice of Appeal was received from the Orphan Well Association on October 14, 2011 regarding Alberta Environment and Water's October 14, 2011 decision to cancel Reclamation Certificate No. 00264135-00-00 that had been issued to Fife Petroleum c/o the Orphan Well Assoc. for a well located in the County of Grande Prairie. The reclamation certificate was cancelled as a result of an audit conducted September 1, 2011 that revealed the vegetation failed to meet criteria and the contouring of the wellsite does not blend or conform with adjacent land. A mediation meeting was held on February 14, 2012 and discussions are ongoing. A second mediation is scheduled for May 24, 2012. Mediation meetings are not open to the public.

A Notice of Appeal was received from the landowner on December 14, 2011 with respect to the decision of Alberta Environment and Water to issue Reclamation Certificate No. 00299049-00-00 to Devon Canada Corporation for the NUMAC ET AL BIGORAY 6-21-54-7 Well, located at SW 21-054-07-W5M, near Stony Plain. Devon advised they are in discussions with the Appellant and requested the appeal be placed on hold until July 31, 2012. The Board's January 18, 2012 letter requests status reports from Devon and the Appellant by June 29, 2012.

A Notice of Appeal and a request for a Stay was received on December 20, 2011 from Cleanit Greenit Composting System Inc. and Kirstin Castro-Wunsch with respect to the December 13, 2011 decision of Alberta Environment and Water to issue Enforcement Order No. EO-2011/03-NR to Cleanit Greenit Composting System Inc. and Kirstin Castro-Wunsch in relation to a composting facility in Edmonton. Since the filing of the appeal, the Appellant and Alberta Environment and Water have been in discussions with regular status reports on those discussions being provided to the Board. The next status reports are due May 31, 2012. The mediation meeting scheduled for May 30, 2012 was cancelled due to scheduling issues. Parties are to advise if they wish to proceed to mediation and if so, approximately when the mediation should be held.

A Notice of Appeal was received on January 3, 2012 with respect to the November 28, 2011 decision of Alberta Environment and Water to issue Licence Amendment No. 00285465-00-01 to Matt Schultz for the operation of a works and the diversion of up to 70,000 cubic metres of water annually for commercial purposes (hauling heated water), in Drayton Valley. The Licence Amendment modifies condition 4.2 of the Licence, and the work under the Licence Amendment is to be completed by December 20, 2011. On January 17, 2012, Alberta Environment and Water requested the appeal be dismissed as the Licence Amendment is not appealable and the matter is moot since the work was completed by December 20, 2011. The appellant provided comments on Alberta Environment and Water's letter on January 25, 2012, and on February 9, 2012 the Board issued a Decision dismissing the appeal for being moot.

A Notice of Appeal was received on March 6, 2012 from Alberta Foothills Properties Ltd. (Wind Walk) with respect to the February 9, 2012 decision of Alberta Environment and Water to refuse to issue a Licence or Preliminary Certificate to them for the diversion and use of groundwater from the Wind Walk water supply wells located at NW 16-20-29-W4M in the Municipal District of Foothills. In consultation with the parties, a mediation meeting is scheduled for June 7, 2012, in Calgary. Mediation meetings are not open to the public.

A Notice of Appeal was received on March 6, 2012 from College Farms Ltd. and Aubern G. Hubbard with respect to the February 12, 2002 decision of Alberta Environment and Water to amend Licence Nos. 00030071-00-00 and 00035717-00-00 by changing the name of the Licence Holder from Aubern P. Hubbard to Cyril Hubbard and Gerald Hubbard. The Licences are for irrigation purposes for College Farms Ltd. at SW-29-8-22-W4M near Lethbridge. The appellants state that they were not given notice of the change in name of the Licence Holder and the Director erred in changing the name of the Licence Holder. The Board requested comments from the Appellants by March 23, 2012 on whether or not the matter is appealable pursuant to the Water Act. On March 26, 2012 the Appellant requested the appeal be placed in abeyance while he is in discussions with Alberta Environment and Water. The Board granted the request and status reports are due May 28, 2012.

A Notice of Appeal was received on April 20, 2012 from the Stoney Tribal Administration with respect to the March 16, 2012 decision of Alberta Environment and Water to cancel a water licence held by the Stoney Nation in connection with lands located at NW 34-24-08-W5M. The licence was used by the Fort Chiniquay Petro-Canada service station on Highway 1 before it closed down. The Board will determine how the appeal will be processed once Alberta Environment and Water's records are received by May 18, 2012.

A Notice of Appeal and request for a Stay were received on April 19, 2012 from Mr. Peter deGraaf and deGraaf Farming with respect to the April 2, 2012 decision of Alberta Environment and Water to issue Water Act Enforcement Order No. WA-EO-2012/01-SR to Mr. Peter deGraaf and deGraaf Farming for allegedly infilling a wetland without an approval at SE-19-13-17-W4M in Lethbridge. Alberta Environment and Water's records due by May 18, 2012. Parties are holding June 19-22 for a potential mediation and are to provide hearing dates in July, by May 14, 2012.

A Notice of Appeal and request was received on April 25, 2012 from Mr. Jack Purdy and Half Moon Lake Resort with respect to Alberta Environment and Water's decision to issue to Half Moon Lake Resort a water licence for 17,760 cubic meters of water annually for commercial purposes (recreational use), near Sherwood Park. The Board will determine how the appeal will be processed once Alberta Environment and Water's records are received by May 23, 2012.