PSSG: Session Round 2 - Grande Prairie

Location:

Grande Prairie

Date:

October 24, 2000

Number of Participants:

21

Other Locations:

October 17 Leduc
October 18 Drayton Valley
October 19 Rocky Mountain House
October 23 Sundre
October 24 Grande Prairie
October 25 Red Deer
October 26 Calgary
October 30 Pincher Creek

Summary Aboriginal

Summary Response Forms
MEETING NOTES
1. Development Planning

Coordination of surface and subsurface planning and development

No comments

Coordination of planning and development of subsurface resources

No comments

2. EUB Role

Content of regulations

The Oil & Gas Act of 1986 made no mention of agriculture. They are ignoring farmers.

Integrity of old sour pipelines and old standing sour wells.

Pipeline safety is not being addressed by regulations we have now. 95% of pipelines in Alberta are not safe. This is a government report. What is being done about this? Also there are no concerns for landowners in regards to safety when construction of pipelines takes place.

Effectiveness of the field surveillance system and other enforcement measures

Good companies are tainted by the bad companies. There should be a stick and a carrot for the companies.

Offenders should be made public

one woman said she had heard of the enforcement ladder: some people should be prioritized to be more closely monitored. If she wants to know if a company is on the list she can't just phone up and find out. Public should be able to know.

Klein is a problem. Politics stops enforcement. For example, letting the oil companies keep royalties from the tar sands.

Committee is on the right track regarding self-regulation. Penalties must be strict enough. This has been addressed through monitoring, etc. Companies need a big enough carrot and stick. Not sure this is moving fast enough.

What is an appropriate penalty? Everything is relative. This is an important discussion to have.

Industry pays the EUB. Whoever pays dictates the rules.

Oil companies were running the ERCB in the past

Here the county has about 2 wells for every resident. One bad well makes it bad for everyone.

Application and decision process

Some employees don't have appropriate training for working on sour wells. If all wells were classified as sour this wouldn't' be a problem. Everyone would have to have training for everything.

Hearing process is the biggest waste of money and time because you can tell they have been bought off already from the company wanting to put something in.

Criticisms that the EUB favors the industry.

Relationship with Stakeholders

Improve communications material.

3. Monitoring

Gas travels in pockets. It is not consistent, therefore it is difficult to monitor.

Gas accumulates in low pockets.

an Air Shed Management Zone is being developed for Peace River so better information on air and water quality can be developed

Monitoring must be in close proximity or it is meaningless. There is a public perception that there are residual effects, the public doesn't know that sulfur is heavy and would never be able to carry so far. Some of the things people are asking for are meaningless. Ie. monitors on farm may give different results that are unrelated to sour gas activity.

4. Jurisdiction

Question: what is a one window concept?

The onus for ensuring that employees have appropriate training is on the owner of the equipment. Some onus also falls on Occupation Health and Safety Act. May be a jurisdiction issue.

Developing one window concept.

5. Industry Procedures and Personnel

Question: if a flare goes out, must a company record it? If yes, how can the public get this information? One landowner had 5 cows die overnight last year. He asked if the flare had gone out. The plant told him no, they just lit it yesterday…why was it lit if it hadn't gone out? He can't prove it was sour gas. The workers won't tell him. The EUB has been good about it, but he still doesn't have answers.

It is difficult to keep experienced people. Truckers must have so many tickets to hire someone. Once they get experience they can go elsewhere and get paid more.

Some companies provide yearly training to employees. Sour gas training is given to every new employee, and everyone must renew it every 3 years. One employee commented that he had no issues with the training directions in the document.

Question: is there a process of randomly checking subcontractors to ensure they have the proper training? People without H2S Alive work on well sites. Ie. a vac truck had a 14 year old driving it. Broader checking is needed. In the 1980's no one had training or took it seriously. It has improved, but still some service trucks, swampers, etc aren't trained.

The onus for training is on the owner of the equipment. Some onus also falls on Occupation Health and Safety Act. This may also be a jurisdiction issues.

Most companies are good, but some people don't use safety equipment when no one is around, and workers may not have necessary tickets.

6. Emergency Response Planning and Preparedness

Gas accumulates in low spots. By the time people notice it it's gone, but animals are dead.

Companies have come a long way with ERPs. But they are sometimes lacking personnel to effectively communicate the plans.

ERPs are headed in the right direction, but they are only as good as the people who know and understand them. Producers hands are tied because people don't know and aren't' interested to learn about it. Everyone wants safety, but they want it brought to them.

volunteer fire fighters must attend 3 of 12 meetings per year. This is not enough to learn sufficient info. Rural culture says that in an emergency everyone will show up to help. This is dangerous, and a major issue if it involves sour gas. Local people will be on the site before authorities, who may have to travel 50 miles. Everyone in the community would be dead before the authorities got there.

Need a regional coordinator, but small jurisdictions don't have taxation base to create this.

Question: who is responsible for notifying people close by? Usually the public is aware first, and they call the RCMP or government office. The RCMP should contact the EUB.

In 1981 one man was not notified of an incident near him. He heard it outside his door, called, and received no follow-up or explanation. He hopes it has improved since then.

Lack of coordination in safety planning. ie. the County sent trucks out to lay gravel, but a company chased the trucks away saying there was a sour well being tested and the trucks couldn't come on the road for safety reasons. No communication. The gravel was dumped where is was not needed, so the County lost money on the gravel and on wages. The company should not have priority, and they should coordinate with the County office.

7. Understanding Health Effects

Question: does anyone know anything about long term effects? Company's think if you're not dead you're OK. Response: some things are known, but it's difficult to eliminate other variables during studies. We are trying to reduce exposure as a precaution.

8. Technical Knowledge

Dispersion modeling

Public needs to have confidence in the data input for dispersion modeling. Ie. for a facility that collects and incinerates gas the data for dispersion modeling was taken from a weather station 90 miles away. This is not appropriate. Especially for areas with unique situations such as chinook winds.

Comment from industry rep: it would help if there was some standard. Experts are often not from the area you are dealing with, and so you don't know what to use.

Risk assessment

No comments

9. Setbacks

Criteria for setbacks

The larger the setbacks the better

Setbacks is a difficult issues because it is difficult to get a clear answer to: "Where am I safe?"

From the county's perspective setbacks go beyond health concerns: it also involves land utilization and land value. This is a big concern for counties. If residents smell odor their property value goes down. They ask to have the land reassessed and therefore the county gets less taxes.

Question: what happens to setbacks when a sweet well turns sour?

Effects of setbacks

No comment

10. Public Consultation by Industry

Good luck getting industry to consult with the public!

information is only as good as the trust you have in the person giving it. Much 'catch-up' is needed. Information in the past was biased and unreliable.

There has been much improvement. Attitudes have changed. Companies used to 'flash a lawyer at us and we would crumble'.

Comment from industry: One company recently developed a Land Agent's Guide. They gathered information from engineers, pictures, descriptions, etc. Now the land agent can look up information with the landowner, or leave the guide with them to review. It will be used by both contractors and employees. No feedback yet, but one land agent used it with a landowner for 3 hours and left the guide with her. She was happy. There had been a lack of information before. Land agents would say different things and didn't know what they were talking about.

There is now a school for land agents in Olds.

Sometimes even land agents are given the wrong information.

Who is the contact person? This is a very important issue. Industry is moving away from employee relationship and contracting everything out. It is difficult for the public to trust. Everyone at the local level is a hired-gun.

Workers who are local (live in the area) are more trusted.

11. Public Awareness and Education

Question: if a well is 1% sour, is it ALL 1% sour? Is it sometimes more or less? The public has been told by a company that for a sweet gas flare, the only time you will see smoke is when there is a shot of sour gas. This is not true. These things need to be explained to the public.

Question: Does water injection make sweet wells sour? Even if it is a gradual process the public is very concerned about this!! People don't trust or feel safe when these changes arise, even if its not considered a big deal by the EUB and the company.

Public is concerned about companies drilling and then finding that the gas is more sour than they expected. What happens? Do companies have to reapply? These things need to be understood.

12. Aboriginal Issues

Cross cultural impacts must be considered. This goes beyond language. Industry staff and personnel training is needed. There will be communication problems if this isn't considered.

13. Implementation

Recommendations are good, if that is the way it is going to be. Must be implemented.

Will these issues be prioritized?

14. Non-mandate but Important Issues

Water quality should not be excluded from mandate. The public is very concerned about this. How can you talk about health and safety while excluding this issue? Water affects health, it cannot be broken off as not relevant.

Integrating is an issue. The other committee doing work related to ground water near sour gas wells is mainly related to agricultural use. It is too fragmented. There are also forestry issues related to water. Jurisdiction is a problem here. It leads to problems if the issue of water quality is not looked at holistically. People should be talking to each other about this.

	Location:	Grande Prairie
	Date:	October 24, 2000
	Number of Participants:	21

Other Locations: October 17 Leduc October 18 Drayton Valley October 19 Rocky Mountain House October 23 Sundre October 24 Grande Prairie October 25 Red Deer October 26 Calgary October 30 Pincher Creek Summary Aboriginal Summary Response Forms	MEETING NOTES 1. Development Planning Coordination of surface and subsurface planning and development No comments Coordination of planning and development of subsurface resources No comments 2. EUB Role Content of regulations The Oil & Gas Act of 1986 made no mention of agriculture. They are ignoring farmers. Integrity of old sour pipelines and old standing sour wells. Pipeline safety is not being addressed by regulations we have now. 95% of pipelines in Alberta are not safe. This is a government report. What is being done about this? Also there are no concerns for landowners in regards to safety when construction of pipelines takes place. Effectiveness of the field surveillance system and other enforcement measures Good companies are tainted by the bad companies. There should be a stick and a carrot for the companies. Offenders should be made public one woman said she had heard of the enforcement ladder: some people should be prioritized to be more closely monitored. If she wants to know if a company is on the list she can't just phone up and find out. Public should be able to know. Klein is a problem. Politics stops enforcement. For example, letting the oil companies keep royalties from the tar sands. Committee is on the right track regarding self-regulation. Penalties must be strict enough. This has been addressed through monitoring, etc. Companies need a big enough carrot and stick. Not sure this is moving fast enough. What is an appropriate penalty? Everything is relative. This is an important discussion to have. Industry pays the EUB. Whoever pays dictates the rules. Oil companies were running the ERCB in the past Here the county has about 2 wells for every resident. One bad well makes it bad for everyone. Application and decision process Some employees don't have appropriate training for working on sour wells. If all wells were classified as sour this wouldn't' be a problem. Everyone would have to have training for everything. Hearing process is the biggest waste of money and time because you can tell they have been bought off already from the company wanting to put something in. Criticisms that the EUB favors the industry. Relationship with Stakeholders Improve communications material. 3. Monitoring Gas travels in pockets. It is not consistent, therefore it is difficult to monitor. Gas accumulates in low pockets. an Air Shed Management Zone is being developed for Peace River so better information on air and water quality can be developed Monitoring must be in close proximity or it is meaningless. There is a public perception that there are residual effects, the public doesn't know that sulfur is heavy and would never be able to carry so far. Some of the things people are asking for are meaningless. Ie. monitors on farm may give different results that are unrelated to sour gas activity. 4. Jurisdiction Question: what is a one window concept? The onus for ensuring that employees have appropriate training is on the owner of the equipment. Some onus also falls on Occupation Health and Safety Act. May be a jurisdiction issue. Developing one window concept. 5. Industry Procedures and Personnel Question: if a flare goes out, must a company record it? If yes, how can the public get this information? One landowner had 5 cows die overnight last year. He asked if the flare had gone out. The plant told him no, they just lit it yesterday…why was it lit if it hadn't gone out? He can't prove it was sour gas. The workers won't tell him. The EUB has been good about it, but he still doesn't have answers. It is difficult to keep experienced people. Truckers must have so many tickets to hire someone. Once they get experience they can go elsewhere and get paid more. Some companies provide yearly training to employees. Sour gas training is given to every new employee, and everyone must renew it every 3 years. One employee commented that he had no issues with the training directions in the document. Question: is there a process of randomly checking subcontractors to ensure they have the proper training? People without H2S Alive work on well sites. Ie. a vac truck had a 14 year old driving it. Broader checking is needed. In the 1980's no one had training or took it seriously. It has improved, but still some service trucks, swampers, etc aren't trained. The onus for training is on the owner of the equipment. Some onus also falls on Occupation Health and Safety Act. This may also be a jurisdiction issues. Most companies are good, but some people don't use safety equipment when no one is around, and workers may not have necessary tickets. 6. Emergency Response Planning and Preparedness Gas accumulates in low spots. By the time people notice it it's gone, but animals are dead. Companies have come a long way with ERPs. But they are sometimes lacking personnel to effectively communicate the plans. ERPs are headed in the right direction, but they are only as good as the people who know and understand them. Producers hands are tied because people don't know and aren't' interested to learn about it. Everyone wants safety, but they want it brought to them. volunteer fire fighters must attend 3 of 12 meetings per year. This is not enough to learn sufficient info. Rural culture says that in an emergency everyone will show up to help. This is dangerous, and a major issue if it involves sour gas. Local people will be on the site before authorities, who may have to travel 50 miles. Everyone in the community would be dead before the authorities got there. Need a regional coordinator, but small jurisdictions don't have taxation base to create this. Question: who is responsible for notifying people close by? Usually the public is aware first, and they call the RCMP or government office. The RCMP should contact the EUB. In 1981 one man was not notified of an incident near him. He heard it outside his door, called, and received no follow-up or explanation. He hopes it has improved since then. Lack of coordination in safety planning. ie. the County sent trucks out to lay gravel, but a company chased the trucks away saying there was a sour well being tested and the trucks couldn't come on the road for safety reasons. No communication. The gravel was dumped where is was not needed, so the County lost money on the gravel and on wages. The company should not have priority, and they should coordinate with the County office. 7. Understanding Health Effects Question: does anyone know anything about long term effects? Company's think if you're not dead you're OK. Response: some things are known, but it's difficult to eliminate other variables during studies. We are trying to reduce exposure as a precaution. 8. Technical Knowledge Dispersion modeling Public needs to have confidence in the data input for dispersion modeling. Ie. for a facility that collects and incinerates gas the data for dispersion modeling was taken from a weather station 90 miles away. This is not appropriate. Especially for areas with unique situations such as chinook winds. Comment from industry rep: it would help if there was some standard. Experts are often not from the area you are dealing with, and so you don't know what to use. Risk assessment No comments 9. Setbacks Criteria for setbacks The larger the setbacks the better Setbacks is a difficult issues because it is difficult to get a clear answer to: "Where am I safe?" From the county's perspective setbacks go beyond health concerns: it also involves land utilization and land value. This is a big concern for counties. If residents smell odor their property value goes down. They ask to have the land reassessed and therefore the county gets less taxes. Question: what happens to setbacks when a sweet well turns sour? Effects of setbacks No comment 10. Public Consultation by Industry Good luck getting industry to consult with the public! information is only as good as the trust you have in the person giving it. Much 'catch-up' is needed. Information in the past was biased and unreliable. There has been much improvement. Attitudes have changed. Companies used to 'flash a lawyer at us and we would crumble'. Comment from industry: One company recently developed a Land Agent's Guide. They gathered information from engineers, pictures, descriptions, etc. Now the land agent can look up information with the landowner, or leave the guide with them to review. It will be used by both contractors and employees. No feedback yet, but one land agent used it with a landowner for 3 hours and left the guide with her. She was happy. There had been a lack of information before. Land agents would say different things and didn't know what they were talking about. There is now a school for land agents in Olds. Sometimes even land agents are given the wrong information. Who is the contact person? This is a very important issue. Industry is moving away from employee relationship and contracting everything out. It is difficult for the public to trust. Everyone at the local level is a hired-gun. Workers who are local (live in the area) are more trusted. 11. Public Awareness and Education Question: if a well is 1% sour, is it ALL 1% sour? Is it sometimes more or less? The public has been told by a company that for a sweet gas flare, the only time you will see smoke is when there is a shot of sour gas. This is not true. These things need to be explained to the public. Question: Does water injection make sweet wells sour? Even if it is a gradual process the public is very concerned about this!! People don't trust or feel safe when these changes arise, even if its not considered a big deal by the EUB and the company. Public is concerned about companies drilling and then finding that the gas is more sour than they expected. What happens? Do companies have to reapply? These things need to be understood. 12. Aboriginal Issues Cross cultural impacts must be considered. This goes beyond language. Industry staff and personnel training is needed. There will be communication problems if this isn't considered. 13. Implementation Recommendations are good, if that is the way it is going to be. Must be implemented. Will these issues be prioritized? 14. Non-mandate but Important Issues Water quality should not be excluded from mandate. The public is very concerned about this. How can you talk about health and safety while excluding this issue? Water affects health, it cannot be broken off as not relevant. Integrating is an issue. The other committee doing work related to ground water near sour gas wells is mainly related to agricultural use. It is too fragmented. There are also forestry issues related to water. Jurisdiction is a problem here. It leads to problems if the issue of water quality is not looked at holistically. People should be talking to each other about this.