Frequently Asked Questions

 

Frequently Asked Questions

More questions regarding the Liability Management program and processes will be added as they become available. There are Q&As for the following areas:

General
Digital Data Submission (DDS)
Licence Transfer
Security Deposits
Orphan Levy
Licensee Liability Rating Management Plan
LLR / LMR Assessments
Site-Specific Liability Assessments
Large Facility Program
Nonproducer Licensee Netback
Oilfield Waste Liability
Enforcement
LLR Program Changes
Transfer of Pipeline Records
Working Interest Participants
Debtor Registry - NEW


General

Question: Who is the licensee liability rating (LLR) calculated for?
Answer: All licensees of conventional oil and gas wells, facilities (excluding large facilities), or pipelines have an LLR calculated. Large facilities are included in a licensee’s liability management rating (LMR).

Question: How and when is the licensee liability rating (LLR) calculated?
Answer: The LLR is the ratio of a licensee’s deemed assets and liabilities and is calculated the first Saturday of each month. The LLR and Liability Management Rating calculations assume the licensee has 100% interest in the well, pipeline, and facility licences.

Question: What is the difference between licensee liability rating (LLR) and Liability Management Rating (LMR)?
Answer: The LMR is a more comprehensive ratio that includes not only the LLR but also the deemed assets and liabilities of licences in the Large Facility Liability Management Program (LFP) and Oilfield Waste Liability Program.

Question: What is the industry netback Question: and when will it be updated? Answer: As defined in Directive 011: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program, the industry netback is a rolling three-year provincial industry average netback. The industry netback is $236.54 per cubic metre oil equivalent. The LLR formula parameters are updated and published annually.

Further information on the industry netback is available in Directive 011: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program.

Question: After updating Petrinex well abandonment details, why does the AER system still show the well as having abandonment liability?
Answer: Petrinex does not update AER systems. In order to change the status of a licence, licensees must use the AER’s Digital Data Submission (DDS) system.

Question: After applying for a reclamation certificate, why is there still a liability for my reclamation certified site in the Digital Data Submission System?
Answer: Until a reclamation certificate is issued, the AER considers the licensed facility to be a liability. Once a reclamation certificate is issued, the liabilities are updated to reflect this change. If the licence status in DDS is not identified as abandoned, the reclamation certificate status will not be updated, and the facility will continue to be considered a liability. The licensee is responsible for ensuring the status of the licence is accurate in the DDS system.

Question: What is the purpose of the Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program?
Answer: The purpose of the LLR Program is to minimize the risk to the Orphan Fund posed by unfunded well, facility, and pipeline abandonment and reclamation liability. The Orphan Fund pays for the abandonment and reclamation of wells, facilities, and pipelines included within the LLR Program if a licensee or working interest participant defaults on its obligations to abandon and reclaim or to pay the costs associated with those activities. The Orphan Fund is fully funded by the oil and gas industry through a levy administered by the AER.

Question: Where can I update well name changes?
Answer: The AER does not use well names and encourages licensees not to submit well name change notifications. A licensee is, however, able to submit well name change notifications to the AER through DDS. Select the subsystem AER / Notifications / Licence / Submit Well Name Change Notification. Well names can also be changed during well licence transfers. Proposed well name changes must be consistent with the Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations. The AER does not accept notification of facility name or facility name changes.

Question: What are the conditions and benefits of filing a multiwell pad notification?
Answer: A licensee may establish a multiwell pad for those sites on which it has more than one well on a single surface lease. Both the well licences and the surface lease must be held by the same licensee. The establishment of a multiwell pad provides for a reduction in the reclamation liability of the wells located on the pad.

Question: When do I notify the AER of my facility abandonment?
Answer: A licensee must notify the AER within 30 days of the completion of the abandonment of a licensed facility.

Question: I am the licensee of a well and there has been a change to one of the working interest participants (WIP). Can I update this information?
Answer: Yes; however, WIP information is only required by the AER during four stages in the life of a well (when licensed, transferred, suspended, and abandoned).

To update the WIP information outside of the four stages, the licensee of record may submit the following on company letterhead

  • licence number,
  • surface location,
  • new WIPs with the full corporate/individual names identified and the percentages (percentage must add up to 100%), and
  • any supporting documentation with the removal of any confidential information.

The above information will be included in the well file, but the AER database will not be updated.

Question: I have more than one well on a pad how do I more accurately reflect the deemed LLR reclamation liabilities?
The creation of multiwell pads in the Digital Data Submission (DDS) System enables a licensee to reduce the calculated reclamation liability component for wells located on a multiwell pad. Pursuant to appendix 3, section 5 of Directive 006: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program and Licence Transfer Process, a licensee may establish a multiwell pad for those sites on which it has more than one well on a single surface lease. Both the AER well licences and the associated surface lease must be held by the same licensee. The reclamation liability for wells located on a multiwell pad is 100% of the reclamation cost specified for a well on the regional reclamation cost map area in which the pad is located for the first well, plus 10% of the value for each additional well on the same pad.

To establish a multiwell pad log onto the DDS go to AER > Notifications > Licence > Submit Multi-Licence Pad Notification. You can either select create a new pad, which will create a pad number, and you add wells to the pad, or you can edit an existing pad.

Question: Is there a help line number that I can access that can provide assistance when needed?Answer: Yes. The help line number is 403-297-3113; if calling long distance, contact the RITE operator (310-0000) for toll free access. You can also e-mail the Liability Management Group at LiabilityManagement@aer.ca.

Back to top


DDS

Question: What is the Digital Data Submission (DDS) system?
Answer: This system supports the transmission of digital data from authorized AER customers to the AER via an Internet connection.

Question: Where do I find the DDS system on the AER website?
Answer: From the AER home page, Digital Data Submission system can be found in the Systems & Tools menu at the top of every webpage.

Question: How do I logon to the DDS system if I don not know our logon identification code and password?
Answer: It is recommended that you contact your system administrator. If your system administrator is unavailable, go to the DDS help screen and request a new username and password (subject to meeting DDS set-up requirements) from the AER's DDS administrator.

Question: Why am I not allowed access to certain DDS screens even though I have a valid login identification code and password?
Answer: The system administrator in your company assigns the access privileges for each individual or account.

Back to top


Licence Transfer

Question: Do licence transfer applications for wells, facilities, and pipelines have to be submitted via DDS?
Answer: Yes.

Question: How do I create a licence transfer application?
Answer: Access the DDS system and select Applications > Licence Transfer > Submit Licence Transfer Application. Enter all required information and when completed, click the Submit button. The applicant is responsible for contacting the other party to notify that the application has been submitted, as the application requires the second party’s acceptance before it is electronically submitted to the AER. Before a licence transfer application will be accepted by the licence transfer subsystem, both parties must confirm that the information contained within the application is correct and accept a declaration stating they have complied with a list of specified AER requirements (refer to Directive 006 for further information). An online demonstration to create a licence transfer is currently available. Select either link:

[Small-size] [Full-size]

Question: How do I accept a licence transfer application as the second party?
Answer: Access the DDS system and select Applications > Licence Transfer > Submit Licence Transfer Application. Retrieve the existing application from the drop-down menu and review the application information. If the application is acceptable, click the Approve button for the application to be submitted to the AER. An online demonstration is currently available. Select either link:

[Small-size] [Full-size]

Question: If I have a number of licences to transfer from the same transferor or transferee, do I have to enter each licence into separate licence transfer applications or can I enter them all into one single transfer application?
Answer: It is recommended that all licences be entered into a single application. A licence transfer application can contain a maximum of 250 licences.

Question: Is there another method of submitting an application with a large number of licences other than through the AER's standard licence transfer system?
Answer: Yes, an alternative for submitting licence transfers is the file upload process. Access DDS and select Applications > Licence Transfer > Submit Licence Transfer Application. From this screen, identify if your company is the transferor or transferee and then select “Upload File.” This will direct you to the requirements for the upload process. Files that are to be uploaded must be in XML format. Examples are provided automatically on the upload file screen. Once you have the file prepared, click Browse to retrieve the file and then click Upload. Once the file has been uploaded, you will get a submission acknowledgement screen. Print this for your records. Go back into Applications > Licence Transfer > Submit Licence Transfer Application and select the existing submission. Review to ensure that all information within the application is correct and then click Submit.

Question: I am trying to transfer a licence but it isn't showing up in DDS. Why?
Answer: The licence number may be incorrect, the transferor may not be the licensee of record for that licence, or the status of the licence is either reclamation exempt or reclamation certified.

Question: Can I transfer abandoned licences?
Answer: Yes. Licences with a licence status of issued, amended, suspended, or abandoned are eligible to be transferred. Refer to appendix 2, section 6, of Directive 006.

Question: Can I re-enter an abandoned well after it has been transferred?
Answer: No. The approval of a transfer of an abandoned well Licence does not permit the new licensee to re-enter that well. A licensee that intends to re-enter an abandoned well must submit an application in accordance with Directive 056: Energy Development Applications and Schedules. Contact d56helpline@aer.ca for assistance.

Question: Can a well or facility with a reclamation certificate be transferred?
Answer: No.

Question: Can a well or facility that is abandoned and reclamation exempt be transferred?
Answer: No.

Question: Do I enter the licence’s current working interest participants (WIPs)?
Answer: The WIP field on the licence transfer submission should list the post-transfer WIPs, and the cumulative WIP percentage must add up to 100% and include the full corporate/individual names. A partnership cannot be listed as a WIP; each company making up the partnership would need to be included separately as a WIP with its own WIP percentage.

Question: How long does a licence transfer application take to process?
Answer:  Licence transfer applications require a minimum of 30 days to complete the standardized review and are subject to longer timelines depending on the complexity of the transaction. Refer to Bulletin 2017-13 and Approval Transfers Application Process for additional information about the transfer application process.

Question: Will I receive a notice of approval when my licence transfer application is approved?
Answer: Yes, an electronic copy of the approval notification letter will be e-mailed to both the transferor and transferee contacts listed in the transfer application.

Question: I submitted the wrong licence number to be transferred. How can I fix this?
Answer: The transfer application will have to be cancelled if there is an error. Please see details below on how to cancel a transfer application.

Question: My licence transfer application contains an error and it has been submitted to the AER. How can I fix this?
Answer: The transfer application will have to be cancelled if there is an error. Please see details below on how to cancel a transfer application.

Question: How do I cancel a transfer application that has been submitted to the AER?
Answer: A licence transfer application can be cancelled by submitting a request to withdraw the application. This can be submitted in either of two ways:

    1. By e-mail: Requests must be received from both applicants listed on the transfer application, specifically the e-mail addresses listed on the application.
    2. By physical mail: Both transferor and transferee company must mail the request on corporate letterhead. The letter should be signed and can be scanned and e-mailed. Letters from sister companies, subsidiaries, or parent companies are not acceptable.

Requests for withdrawal can be sent to LiabilityManagement@aer.ca or mailed to the Alberta Energy Regulator, Suite 1000, 250 – 5 Street SW, Calgary, Alberta T2P 0R4. Upon receipt of application withdrawal requests from both parties involved in the transfer, the AER will process the application as withdrawn and will notify the licensees.

Question: How do I obtain copies of AER licence transfer decisions?
Answer: Copies of approved licence transfer decisions can be ordered and purchased from AER Information Services by phone (toll free) at 1-855-297-8311 or by e-mail at InformationRequest@aer.ca.

Question: How do I acquire a list of all our licences?
Answer: A licence list can be ordered and purchased from AER Information Services by phone (toll free) at 1-855-297-8311 or by e-mail at InformationRequest@aer.ca

Question: After an amalgamation, how are the licences transferred to the surviving entity?
Answer: Once the AER receives notification of an amalgamation, we review and prompt our system to transfer licences from the non-surviving to the surviving entity. We follow up this process with forwarding a corporate profile update request to the surviving company to be completed for the AER’s records.

Back to top


Security Deposits

Question: What does the AER do with the security it collects?
Answer: The AER’s Licensee Liability Rating program helps protect Albertans, and the Orphan Well Association from the cost to abandon and reclaim upstream oil and gas wells, facilities, pipelines, and their associated sites. If a licensee does not properly abandon and reclaim energy infrastructure, the AER can use the security to ensure that those activities are completed. Further information is available in Directive 006: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program and Licence Transfer Process.

Question: Why are we required to establish a security deposit with the AER ?
Answer: A licensee is required to establish a deposit when it is determined that its liabilities exceed its deemed assets. Deposits are equal to the difference between the licensee's deemed liabilities and its deemed assets (refer to Directive 006: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program and Licence Transfer Process).

Question: What forms of security deposit does the AER accept?
Answer: To satisfy security deposit requirements, the AER will only accept cash or letters of credit that meet the requirements of Directive 068: ERCB Security Deposits.

Question: How do I know if the AER has received my security deposit?
Answer: Once the AER receives the required deposit amount, the AER's Finance Branch will send a confirmation letter to the licensee.

Question: Can I establish a security deposit on behalf of another party?
Answer: The AER will only accept a security deposit from a licensee required to submit the security deposit or from a trustee, receiver, or receiver manager acting on behalf of that licensee. A security deposit submitted on behalf of a licensee by any other party will not be accepted.

Question: What conditions does our company need to meet in order to be eligible for the return of our security deposit?
Answer: Licensees that have an LMR value (deemed assets/deemed liabilities) above the threshold of 1.0 are eligible for a full refund of their security deposits. Incremental (partial) refunds are also available for cash security deposits when the difference between the deemed liabilities and deemed assets is less than the security deposit held in trust by the AER. No partial refund can be made for letter of credit security deposits unless a new letter of credit has been submitted for the reduced security deposit amount. In this instance, the letter of credit held for the larger amount, which would no longer be required, would be returned to the licensee.

Question: What is the method for requesting a refund of our security deposit?
Answer: A written refund request must be submitted on company letterhead and contain appropriate contact information. The request must be sent to the attention of the security deposit administrator of the AER's liability management group.

Question: How long does it take to refund security deposit?
Answer: You should receive your security deposit refund from the AER Finance Branch within two to three weeks.

Question: How do I know the total amount of security that is held in our name?
Answer: Monthly account statements are sent by the Royal Bank to each licensee that has established a security deposit.

Question: We have not received an account statement for a number of months. Who should we notify to get this corrected, the bank or the AER?
Answer: Your company will need to call the AER Finance Branch at 403-297-8790 to have the address corrected with the bank. Companies are not authorized to make changes directly with the bank.

Back to top


Orphan Levy

Question: What is the Orphan Fund levy?
Answer: The Alberta Energy Regulator collects the Orphan Fund levy from licensees in order to provide the operating budget for the Orphan Well Association (OWA) for a given fiscal year. The OWA manages the abandonment and reclamation of orphaned oil and gas wells, facilities and pipelines, and associated sites across Alberta. The Orphan Fund is also used to pay for the share of suspension, abandonment, and reclamation costs that a defunct working interest participant should pay. The Orphan Fund helps prevent costs for suspension, abandonment, and reclamation from being borne by Albertans.

The fund is not used to pay for facilities in the Large Facility Program, which are accounted for in a separate program.

Question: How do licensees pay into the Orphan Fund?
Answer: Each licensee receives an invoice from the AER for their share of the total levy. Licensees must pay the invoiced amount by cheque, bank draft, money order, or cash. The AER cannot currently accept payments through electronic transfer.

Licensees should not combine the orphan fund levy payment with other amounts that may be owed to the AER, such as Liability Management Rating security deposits. Third-party payment must be submitted with a copy of the invoice.

Question: When and how is the Orphan Fund levy calculated?
Answer: The amount each licensee or approval holder is levied is based upon the ratio of the deemed liabilities of the licensee to the deemed liabilities of industry as a whole. This ratio is then multiplied by the total dollar amount of the levy. The licensee or approval holder’s deemed liabilities are based on the licenced and approved wells, pipelines, and facilities on record with the AER during the monthly assessment identified in the relevant bulletin which is posted on the AER website twice per year, preceding each levy.

The licensee or approval holder, when the monthly assessment that the levy is based upon is completed, will be assessed the proportional share of the total levy. The deemed liabilities include the total liabilities for wells, facilities, and unreclaimed sites in the Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) and Oilfield Waste Liability (OWL) programs at the time of the previous month’s assessment.

Historical assessments are available on AER’s DDS system by selecting subsystem AER>Reports>Liability Rating>View Liability Rating.

Question: When and how is the Orphan Fund levy collected?
Answer: The Orphan Fund levy is generally collected twice per year in February/March and August/September, although dates can vary based on the timeliness of budget approval from the AER, the Government of Alberta, Orphan Well Association, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, and Explorers and Producers Association of Canada.

Question: What happens if the licensee, approval holder, or working interest partner (WIP) does not pay their proportionate share of suspension, abandonment and reclamation costs?
Answer: If a licensee, approval holder, or working interest participant defaults on their end-of-life obligations, including suspension, abandonment, and reclamation, they are not released from their liabilities. Suspension, abandonment, and reclamation are required by the AER. Failure to properly complete these end-of-life obligations will result in noncompliance with AER requirements and subsequent enforcement action by the AER. The AER has a variety of compliance and enforcement tools available under its energy resource and specified enactments to compel compliance and to correct and deter future noncompliance. When a noncompliance is identified, the AER uses the most appropriate compliance and enforcement tools such as regulator orders, suspension and abandonment orders.

Question: How can I find out what wells and facilities were assessed in the levy?
Answer: Assessments can be viewed by accessing the DDS system and selecting subsystem Reports > Liability Rating > View Liability Rating. Go to the History tab and choose the February 04, 2012, monthly assessment. The Wells and Facilities tabs will provide the liability assessed for each licence for the 2013 Orphan Levy.

Question: Why are we assessed a levy when we transferred all our wells and facilities?
Answer: At the time the levy was assessed, the wells and facilities were still licensed to your company.

Question: Can a third party pay the levy invoice on behalf of the licensee?
Answer: Yes, third party payment will be accepted but must be submitted with a copy of the invoice.

Back to top


Licensee Liability Rating Management Plan

Question: What is the Licensee Liability Rating Management Plan (LLRMP)?
Answer: The LLRMP allows licensees with a Liability Management Rating below one to make quarterly payments based on the amount owed. The LLRMP expires December 2017, at which point all licensees in the LLRMP must be compliant with Licensee Liability Rating security deposit requirements. While in the plan, companies are encouraged to undertake appropriate measures (i.e., abandonment, reclamation) in order to meet their Licensee Liability Rating Program requirements.

Further information is available in AER Bulletin 2014-06: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program Management Plan.

Question: When can a Licensee enter the Licensee Liability Rating Management Plan?
Answer: A licensee can apply to enter the Licensee Liability Rating Program Management Plan if they have an LMR rating below 1.0 and owe more than $25,000 in security to the AER. If closure or abandonment orders have been issued to a company, they are not eligible to enter the LLRMP.

Further information is available in AER Bulletin 2014-06: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program Management Plan.

Question: Can a Licensee enter the Licensee Liability Rating Management Plan (LLRMP) if its Licensee Liability Rating is over 1.0?
Answer: No, the Licensee cannot enter the program. Further information is available in AER Bulletin 2014-06: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program Management Plan.

Back to top


LLR / LMR Assessments

Question: How can I view our monthly LLR / LMR assessment?
Answer: Assessments can be viewed by accessing the DDS system and selecting subsystem Reports > Liability Rating > View Liability Rating. These assessments can be downloaded.

Question: Why is the status indicator for my well showing active when my well has not produced in the last few months?
Answer: A well is considered active if it has reported an operation (production or injection) in the last 12 calendar months.

Question: What conditions do I need to meet in order to receive a 50 per cent reduction in the reclamation liability determined for my abandoned well or facility?

Answer: A licensee may request a 50 per cent reduction in the reclamation liability determined for an abandoned well or facility by the LLR formula if all of the work required to obtain a reclamation certificate from Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development has been completed and if the delay in obtaining a reclamation certificate is solely related to the re-establishment of vegetative cover.

Question: What is the formula for calculating the LLR?

Answer: The LLR calculation is provided under Appendix 4 of Directive 006.

Question: Can I view the detailed monthly assessment of another company?
Answer: No, the monthly assessment is only accessible to the licensee.

Back to top


Site-Specific Liability Assessments

Question: What are the exact site-specific liability assessment cost estimate requirements for 20-well-equivalent and 10-well-equivalent gas plants?
Answer: In order to determine the deemed liability of a 20-well-equivalent gas plant, licensees must complete a site-specific Phase I environmental site assessment (ESA) and, if required by the Phase I ESA, a Phase II ESA. The required ESAs must be approved the AER. The deemed liability of a 10-well-equivalent gas plant is based on a site-specific liability assessment meeting Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA) standards that is provided by the licensee and accepted by the AER.

Question: How should licensees determine suspension and abandonment costs?
Answer: Information on how to determine costs related to suspension and abandonment is available in Directive 001: Requirements for Site-Specific Liability Assessment in Support of the AER’s Liability Management Programs.

Estimated costs for suspension and abandonment can be determined by desktop review if the licensee or approval holder has conducted an on-site investigation to accurately report the costs. If a desktop review is completed, the site-specific liability assessment report must clearly indicate what information was reviewed in order to determine the costs for suspension and abandonment.

Question: What is a site-specific liability assessment (SSLA)?
Answer: A site-specific liability assessment (SSLA) is an assessment conducted by a licensee to estimate the cost to suspend, abandon, remediate, and reclaim a site (section 4, Directive 006). An SSLA cost estimate must meet the requirements as outlined in Directive 001.

Question: When is a SSLA required?
Answer: SSLAs are required when a licence is issued for

  • gas processing and gas fractioning plants,
  • facilities in the Large Facility Program (LFP; for further information see below),and
  • facilities in the Oilfield Waste Management Program (OWL; for further information see below).

SSLAs are also required when a licensee requests an LLR variation and when a site has been identified by the AER as a potential problem site (for further details regarding these see below).

Question: What is included in the scope of an SSLA for a gas plant under the LLR Program?
Answer:

  • Gas processing and gas fractioning plant:
    • 40-well-equivalent gas plant: Cost estimate is based on a SSLA that fully meets the requirements of Directive 001.
    • 20-well-equivalent gas plant: Cost estimate that meets Directive 001 and is based on a site-specific Phase I environmental site assessment (ESA), with additional work to a Phase II ESA standard where required by the results of the Phase I ESA.
    • 10-well-equivalent gas plant: Cost estimate that meets Directive 001 and is based on a SSLA meeting Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA) standards.
  • Potential and designated problem sites: Cost estimate is based on a SSLA that fully meets the requirements of Directive 001.

All SSLAs must meet the general requirements of Directive 001 (i.e., roles and qualifications of personnel, certification of work, etc.). This list is not exhaustive. Please review Directive 001 and ensure that all of the required information is provided.

Question: How often do I need to update the site-specific liability assessment cost estimate?
Answer: SSLAs must be updated every five years from the date of the last SSLA unless otherwise required by the AER (section 9 of Directive 001). For a designated problem site, the SSLA update is required at a minimum every three years.

A licensee may update its SSLA more frequently than every five years if conditions warrant an update.
See Directive 001, section 9, for further information.

Question: I just received a licence that has a SSLA obligation under the LLR program. When is my SSLA cost estimate required?
Answer: Once the licence is issued, the SSLA cost estimate values are to be inputted into the AER’s Digital Data Submission (DDS) System.

Please note that a new facility, as defined in appendix 6 of Directive 006, will not have its deemed abandonment and reclamation liability included in its LLR calculation until the earliest of its first reported throughput, abandonment date, or twelve calendar months from its licence approval date.

Question: If I consider the liabilities for my sites to be different than those deemed by the AER, what can I do to ensure liabilities are accurately represented?
Answer: A licensee may request the use of site-specific abandonment or reclamation costs rather than those determined by the AER if it believes these more accurately reflect actual abandonment or reclamation costs. These requests are called an LLR parameter variation (refer to appendix 7 of Directive 006).

A variation request is only considered by the AER when a licensee’s liability management rating (LMR) ratio is less than 1.0.

A licensee is required to provide licence-specific data for all parameters, including both deemed asset and deemed liability parameters for all wells and facilities, thus the AER requires submission of a site-specific liability assessment cost estimate for all wells and facilities licensed to your company. The requirements of Directive 001 must be met. The submission for a request for variation must include the following:

  • Phase I ESA,
  • Phase II ESA (if applicable),
  • completed Directive 006 appendix 11 Facility Liability Declaration Form, and
  • SSLA cost estimate (documentation that clearly itemizes and shows the subtotal for all major tasks as required under section 5 of Directive 001).

For additional details please consult appendix 1 of Directive 001.

A netback submission is requested for the asset allocation within the LLR variation request. A licensee requesting a variation of its netback must submit a letter requesting the variation, a completed Licensee Netback Calculation Form, and financial information acceptable to the AER supporting its three-year historical netback, shrinkage, or conversion values. If a licensee does not have three years of history, its netback must include the industry average for those years required to make up the three-year period.

Question: My site is almost ready for a reclamation certificate. How can I reduce the liability for this site?
Answer: A licensee may apply for a 50 per cent reduction in reclamation liability if all of the required work to obtain a reclamation certificate has been completed and the delay in obtaining the reclamation certificate is solely to re-establish vegetative cover (appendix 7, Directive 006). The AER will consider a request for 50 per cent reclamation reduction by a licensee only when its LMR threshold is below 1.0.

Question: What do I need to submit if my company qualifies for a 50 per cent reduction in reclamation liability?
Answer: Your submission must include the following for each site:

  • cover letter outlining the nature of the request,
  • Phase I ESA,
  • Phase II ESA (if required),
  • remediation reports (if required),
  • reclamation assessment (soil, landscape, and vegetation; the vegetation assessment will show that re-establishment of vegetative cover is required), and
  • signed professional declarations forms.

If approved, the changes in liabilities are valid for one year after the reclamation assessment, after which the licensee must resubmit a request. The licensee must have an LMR threshold below 1.0 to resubmit.

Question: When completing an SSLA cost estimate, can my company include a credit for salvageable equipment?
Answer: Credit for salvageable equipment is not permitted under any of the AER liability management programs. However, companies can include a credit for shredded metal that will be used as scrap. Please note that the AER does not accept credit issued by recyclers for reprocessing metal tanks.

Question: What are the transfer requirements for facilities that require site-specific liability assessments?
Answer: SSLAs must be submitted to the AER at the time of a transfer application. The SSLA must be less than three years old and be accompanied by an evaluation of cost changes since the SSLA was last completed. Factors to be considered when updating existing SSLAs include changes in site conditions, unit rates used in estimating costs, and regulatory requirements.

Question: When does a facility fall under the Large Facility Program?
Answer: As indicated in Directive 024, a facility in the large facility program (LFP) includes

  • current, future (new or amended licences), and historic sulphur recovery gas plants that at any time produced elemental sulphur, but excluding those sites licensed under Directive 056 as a facility category type 300;
  • current, future (new or amended licences), and historic standalone straddle plants;
  • current, future (new or amended licences), and historic in situ oil sands central processing facilities having an approved design capacity of 5000 m3/d or greater; and
  • current, future (new or amended licences), and historic oil sands upgraders integrated into an in situ oil sands central processing facility having an approved design capacity of 5000 m3/d or greater.

Question: Is a site-specific liability assessment required for a facility under the LFP?
Answer: A site-specific liability assessment that fully meets Directive 001 is required for facilities in this program.
Submissions are to include

  • Phase I ESA,
  • Phase II ESA (if applicable),
  • Directive 024 appendix 7 Facility Liability Declaration Form, and
  • SSLA cost estimate with documentation that clearly itemizes and shows the subtotal for all major tasks as required under section 5 of Directive 001 (Directive 001 forms A-F can be used as a guide for completing the cost estimates).

This list is not exhaustive. Please review Directive 001 and ensure that all of the required information is provided.

Question: I just received a licence that has a SSLA obligation under Directive 024. When is my SSLA cost estimate required?
Answer: Once the licence is issued, the SSLA deemed liability values are to be inputted into the AER’s Digital Data Submission (DDS) system.

Please note that a newly licensed facility in the LFP will not have its deemed site liability included in its LMR calculation until the earlier of

  • 60 calendar months from its facility licence approval date,
  • first throughput reported to Petrinex,
  • a transfer of the facility licence to another party, or
  • facility abandonment.

Question: How often do I need to update the site-specific liability assessment cost estimate for a licence in the LFP?
Answer: For licences held under the LFP, there is a requirement under appendix 5 of Directive 024 to update the SSLA cost estimate within 60 days of a licensee becoming aware of a cumulative increase in estimated liability equal to or in excess of either $2 million or 20 per cent of a facility’s current liability, the licensee must provide the AER with either

  • an updated liability cost estimate or
  • a report indicating the nature and timing of an assessment to determine the increase in a facility’s estimated liability.

Please note that at any time the AER may require a licensee to provide an updated liability cost estimate based on a site-specific liability assessment conducted to Directive 001 if it considers appropriate.

Question: What are the SSLA transfer requirements for facilities in the LFP?
Answer: SSLAs must be submitted to the AER at the time of a transfer application and must have been completed within the last calendar year.

Question: What are the site-specific liability assessment requirements for a new oilfield waste management facility?
Answer: Companies applying for a new oilfield waste management (WM) facility approval must address financial security before the approval is issued. Under the Oilfield Waste Liability Program, a new oilfield WM facility (that is not a landfill) must meet the requirements of Directive 075 and Directive 001. The following must be submitted under a separate attachment in the application:
  • Phase I ESA,
  • Phase II ESA (if applicable),
  • Directive 075 appendix 7 Facility Liability Declaration Form, and
  • SSLA cost estimate that clearly itemizes and shows the subtotal for all major tasks as required under section 5 of Directive 001, forms 001-A to 001F.

This list is not exhaustive. Please review Directive 001 and ensure that all of the required information is addressed.

Question: What are the site-specific liability assessment requirements for a new oilfield waste management facility that is a landfill?
Answer: Companies applying for a new oilfield WM facility approval for a landfill must address financial security before the approval is issued. Appendix 1, section 2, of Directive 075 states that landfills held by WM approval holders that are approved by the AER remain subject to full security requirements.

Directive 001 is to be used as a guide in completing the SSLA with the items below to be submitted as part of the application:

  • Phase I ESA,
  • Phase II ESA (if applicable),
  • Directive 075 appendix 7 Facility Liability Declaration Form, and
  • SSLA cost estimate that clearly itemizes and shows the subtotal for all major tasks as required under section 5 of Directive 001 (forms 001-A to 001-F can be used as a guide for completing the cost estimates).

Question: Can I prepare my own site-specific liability assessment cost estimate?
Answer: A SSLA cost estimate submitted to the AER for consideration must be based on a SSLA conducted by appropriately trained and experienced personnel. The assessment must be supervised and signed and stamped or sealed by a lead assessor who has completed post-secondary education in a directly related discipline; has prior experience estimating site-specific costs for suspension, abandonment, or reclamation; and is a member in good standing of an association regulated by a professions or societies act of Alberta or be certified in Canada to conduct environmental site assessments by an agency that provides a comparable degree of professional accountability. See Directive 001, sections 6.3 and 6.4, for further information.

Question: If modifications to my oilfield waste management facility result in a liability increase of more than $1 000 000 or 10% of the facilities liability however my liability management rating (LMR) is greater than 1.0, even with the increase in liability, do I have to post financial security?
Answer: Financial security submission is dependent on the liabilities currently determined for the subject facility. Nonproducer licensees (NPL) in the Oilfield Waste Management Program (OWL) have their LMR calculated monthly on both a corporate and a facility-specific basis. If the deemed liabilities exceed the deemed assets for a specific WM approval facility, a security deposit must be paid for the difference for that facility.

If you are a NPL, you will need to pay a security deposit until such time as the new facility has had a minimum of twelve months of volumetric throughput. The facility’s deemed asset value is based on the previous twelve months of NPL volumes. In the absence of twelve months of throughput, the asset value is zero. For new facility licences in the OWL program, a licensee will be required to initially pay a security deposit for the full amount of the deemed liability of the facility based on a site-specific liability cost estimate. A licensee can request a netback and provide the required financial backup for the AER to review once they have had a minimum of twelve months of NPL volumetric throughput.

Question: How do I notify the AER of an update to a site-specific cost estimate for an oilfield waste management facility?
Answer: Please do both of the following:

  • Update the site-specific cost estimates in the DDS system. Ensure that the costs are separated out for each suspension, abandonment, decontamination, and surface land reclamation.
  • Submit a copy of the Directive 075 Facility Liability Declaration Form to the AER by e-mail to liabilitymanagement@aer.ca.

Question: How do I account for class 1b disposal wells located outside the footprint of my oilfield waste management facility in my site-specific liability assessment cost estimate?
Answer: The deemed liability for class 1b disposal wells located outside the footprint of an oilfield waste management facility is included the LLR program, so it does not need to be included in the cost estimate for the oilfield waste management facility. See Directive 075, appendix 1, for facility, well, and pipeline types included in and excluded from the OWL program and the Orphan Fund.

Question: When is a site-specific liability assessment required for an oilfield WM facility?
Answer: SSLA cost estimates are required for oilfield WM facilities approved under Directive 058 in accordance with Directive 075.

Question: How often do I need to update the site-specific liability assessment cost estimate for an oilfield WM facility?
Answer: Licensees must provide the AER with an updated SSLA every five years from the date of the last site-specific liability assessment unless otherwise directed (section 9 of Directive 001). For a designated problem site, the SSLA update is required at a minimum every three years.

Conversely, a licensee may update its SSLA earlier than five years.

See Directive 001, section 9 for further information.

For licences held under the OWL, there is a requirement under appendix 5 of Directive 075 that states that a licensee must provide the AER with an updated SSLA within 60 days of the licensee becoming aware of a cumulative increase in a facility’s estimated liability equal to or in excess of either one million dollars or ten per cent of the facility’s current liability.

Question: How do I submit an application to transfer a Waste Management Facility Approval?
Answer: Approval holders seeking to transfer an oilfield waste management facility must submit their application by e-mail Directive058@aer.ca.

Question: I have already provided a type A liability assessment for my Waste Management facility as part of the Oilfield Waste Management Security Program. I am proposing to transfer this facility. Do I need to provide a new liability assessment?
Answer: A new type A liability assessment is required where the transferor is aware of a cumulative increase in estimated liability equal to or in excess of either one million dollars or ten per cent of the facility’s current liability or if the type A liability assessment on file is approaching 30 days from the expiry of the five-year period approved for the cost estimate used for the licence transfer application. If the assessment currently held on file by the AER is less than five years old and not within 30 days from expiry of the five-year period, an update consisting of an assessment of any changes to site conditions, inflation, incidences, and any remediation or reclamation activities that have occurred since the assessment was prepared may be provided by the transferor instead.

Question: What is required to transfer an oilfield waste management facility with respect to the site-specific liability assessment and financial security?
Answer: For transfers of oilfield WM facilities, the following information must be submitted to satisfy site-specific liability assessment and financial security requirements:

  • Phase I ESA,
  • Phase II ESA (if applicable),
  • Directive 075 appendix 7 Facility Liability Declaration Form, and
  • SSLA cost estimate that has been completed within the past calendar year, including documentation that clearly itemizes and shows the subtotal for all major tasks as required under section 5 of Directive 001.

This list is not exhaustive. Please review Directive 001 and ensure that all of the required information is addressed.

Question: How is the Orphan Fund involved in the OWL Program?
Answer: WM approval holders included within the OWL program will pay into an Orphan Fund by way of a levy administered by the AER. A licensee is assessed based on its proportionate share of any Orphan Levy based on its deemed liability in the OWL and LLR programs compared to the total deemed liability within the OWL and LLR programs.

Question: Are deemed assets calculated differently in the OWL program than in the LLR program?
Answer: Yes. A multiplier of 0.5 is used in the facility deemed asset calculation to establish a minimum asset-to-liability ratio of 2.0. An oilfield waste management facility’s deemed assets is the sum of the previous 12 months of NPL volumes multiplied by the AER approved netback for these volumes, multiplied by 3 years, multiplied by 0.5.

Question: How do I report a waste management approval facility that is no longer operational and has been suspended, abandoned, closed, etc.?
Answer: Contact Directive058@aer.ca as they will need to amend the facility’s approval to reflect the current status.

Question: One of my waste management approvals is for a facility which does not have any reporting requirements to Petrinex. How will assets for this approval be calculated?
Answer: The asset calculation for a licensee not required to report volumetric data to Petrinex is the same as for a licensee reporting volumes to Petrinex. The only difference is that the licensee reports the volumes directly to the AER. If you have any further questions, please contact the customer contact centre and ask for Liability Management.

Question: If a Phase I ESA finds evidence of contamination, can we estimate liability based upon the Phase I investigation?
Answer: No, the requirement in Directive 001 states, “Contaminant and similar environmental issues warranting further assessment identified in the phase I report must be further evaluated....” This statement makes it clear that contaminants warrant further assessment. The evaluation of contaminant concerns based upon observation alone is not acceptable. Observation alone cannot be used to evaluate the significance of contaminant issues nor quantify the effects. Visual observation, smell, texture, etc. may indicate the minimum areas of concern. For example soil staining may show the top few centimetres of soil are affected (e.g., release of crude oil will stain soil). But these observations alone cannot be used to determine the extent of contamination that has leached from the original source and is not detectable to human observation (e.g., migration of BTEX constituents).

Question: We recently submitted a site-specific liability assessment and are now modifying that facility. Do we need to redo the liability assessment?
Answer: A significant change to the facility, such as the addition of a new process unit or a new landfill cell, requires that the site-specific liability assessment be updated if those changes materially affect the associated liability. When the assessment report is very recent (typically less than one year old), a supplement to that report is sufficient rather than rewriting the whole report. Modifying the facility typically would require a reassessment of the suspension and abandonment liabilities or, for landfills, the cell closure and long-term monitoring costs. The need to reassess the liability for decontamination and reclamation after facility modification depends on the effect of construction on the outstanding decontamination and reclamation obligations. If the construction does materially affect (ten per cent or greater of the facility’s current liability) the cost of the outstanding decontamination and reclamation obligation, then the liability attributed to those tasks needs to be updated.

Question: Where do I find facility SSLA cost estimates on DDS and where is the expiry date?
Answer: Search in the DDS system under the company BA code and go to AER > Reports > Liability Rating > View Liability Rating. Views and searches of all properties licensed to the company can be accessed. For example: Click on the facilities tab; there will be a list of facilities with licence numbers. For each facility, cost estimates can be viewed by clicking on the view button at the far right hand side of the screen, which will indicate expiry date and other relevant data.

Back to top


Large Facility Program

Question: What is the Large Facility Management Program?
Answer: The Large Facility Liability Management Program (LFP) is a liability management program that helps protect Albertans and the OWA from the cost to abandon and reclaim large upstream oil and gas facilities. Details on the types of facilities included in this program are available in Appendix 1 of Directive 024: Large Facility Liability Management Program.

Question: Do licensees of large facilities have to pay security?
Answer: The AER calculates a licensee’s Liability Management Rating monthly or during the licence transfer process; a licensee is required to pay security when it is determined that its liabilities exceed its deemed assets. Further information is available in Directive 024: Large Facility Liability Management Program.

Question: How is the large facility orphan levy calculated?
Answer: A licensee in the Large Facility Liability Management Program (LFP) is responsible for its percentage of any LFP orphan levy. A facility’s share of the levy is calculated as the sum of the deemed liability of facilities in the program (for which it is the licensee to the total liability of all facilities in the LFP) less the liability of any facilities licensed to a defunct licensee as of the date the levy is calculated, in accordance with the following formula:

Facility's share of levy=A/B × required levy amount where

  • A is the facility’s deemed liability on the date the levy is calculated, and
  • B is the deemed liability of all facilities in the LFP less the liability of any facilities licensed to a defunct licensee on the date the levy is calculated.

Further information is available in AER Directive 024: Large Facility Liability Management Program.

Question: What is the large facility orphan levy used for?
Answer: The large facility orphan levy is used to pay for a defaulting large facility licensee’s share of suspension, abandonment, and reclamation costs for large facilities in the Large Facility Liability Management Program that have been orphaned.

Question: What happens if a licensee in the Large Facility Liability Management Program (LFP) becomes defunct?
Answer: The AER can declare a facility in the LFP as an orphan when the licensee of that facility does not exist, cannot be located, or does not have the financial means to contribute to the suspension, abandonment, and reclamation costs of the facility.

Question: When does the site-specific liability assessment cost estimate for a facility in the Large Facility Program need to be submitted?
Answer: The site-specific liability assessment cost estimate is submitted at the same time as a licence application. As well, within 60 days of a licensee becoming aware of an increase in estimated liability of either $2 million or greater or 20 per cent of a facility’s current liability, the licensee must provide the AER with:

  • an updated liability cost estimate or
  • an assessment determining the increase in the estimated liability.

Back to top


Nonproducer Licensee Netback

Question: How do I become a Nonproducer Licensee (NPL)?
Answer: Pursuant to Directive 006, an NPL is a licensee whose deemed assets from midstream activities in the Licensee Liability Rating (LLR), Large Facility Program (LFP), and Oilfield Waste Liability (OWL) programs exceed its deemed assets from production volumes reported to PETRINEX or a licensee having only facilities included in the LFP or OWL programs.

Question: What is a netback? What items should be included or excluded?
Answer: Netback is net revenue generated from midstream activities per a unit of third-party volume processed. For the purposes of a netback submission, net revenue is earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization and is equal to gross margin (midstream revenue less cost of goods sold) less direct operating costs and applicable general and administrative expenses.

Net revenue is that which a similar midstream licensee could achieve if it operated the same midstream facility. Net revenue is generated from conducting the day-to-day midstream operations. Therefore, revenue and expense items that would not be typical of facility operations should be excluded from the netback calculations.

Production volumes refer to the 12 months of total received inlet volumes reported to PETRINEX against the reporting facility ID codes attached to a facility’s license. Report only third-party volumes from which revenue is generated. Volumes from a licensee’s own production are not to be included. The 12-month reported volumes must correspond to the same accounting period as the licensee’s most recent fiscal year.

Question: What documentation is required to support an Appendix 13 – Nonproducer Licensee Netback calculation form (Directive 006) and an Appendix 9 – Facility Netback calculation form (Directive 024)?
Answer:

  • An annual report containing an independent auditors’ report, audited financial statements, and its notes for the most recent fiscal year end or unaudited financial statements with an accountant’s report and its notes accompanied by an income tax return for the same most recent fiscal year.
  • The AER must verify the information submitted on the netback calculation form to the financial information provided. Where this verification is not evident, an in-house profit and loss statement, any additional supporting documents and an explanation of the methodology are required.
  • All furnished information including netback calculation form, financial statements, income tax return, production volumes, and additional supporting documents must have the same reporting period, consistent with the most recent fiscal year. For example, a licensee whose fiscal year is a calendar year, the accounting period is from January to December.
  • Netback information submitted should be marked "confidential." The Appendix 10 submissions are protected by the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Appendix 6 submissions are protected under the Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations for 5 years absolutely, and after the 5 years it is protected by the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
  • If the licensee's net revenue is negative for all the facilities that would be recorded on the Netback Calculation Form, then the submitted netback will be amended to zero, because an asset value will not be generated for a negative net revenue value.
  • The netback calculation form and its supporting documents must be provided within 6 months of the licensee’s fiscal year end.

Question: How are the production volumes reported differently when we are not the 100% owner of the facility?
Answer: The licensee needs to provide the financial information for the third party volumes that they receive revenue from. They also need to indicate what percentage the overall third-party volumes represents for the facility and whether this netback value would be representative of the netback for the facility as a whole.

Question: Straddle Plants – The netback for straddle plants according to Directive 024 is based on the licensees most recent five fiscal years. How should this information be provided?
Answer: Please submit a 5-year average netback using Appendix 6 of Directive 024 and mark the form as "5-year average – confidential". All relevant information is only required for the most recent fiscal year rather than all most recent five years information. Please supply the 5-year average in the following format:

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 5-Yr Avg.
(A) Revenue ($)            
(B) Operating costs ($)            
(C) Specific G&A costs ($)            
(D) Net Revenue ($)            
(E) Production volumes (103m3)            
(F) Netback (103 m3) (F = D / E)            

Question: Straddle Plants – How can a licensee provide a 5-year average netback of a straddle plant being owned less than 5 years?
Answer: If a licensee has owned a straddle plant for less than five years, the AER will use the average for the number of years that the licensee has owned the facility until such time as a five year average is available.

Question: How are the deemed asset values associated with a netback application handled when those facilities are being transferred to another licensee?
Answer: Please refer to the section “Deemed Asset on Transfer, Appendix 2 of Directive 024.

Back to top


Oilfield Waste Liability (OWL) Program and Licence Transfer Process

Question: How is the Orphan Fund involved in the OWL Program?
Answer: Waste Management (WM) approval holders included within the OWL program will pay into an Orphan Fund by way of a levy administered by the AER. A licensee is assessed based on its proportionate share of any Orphan Levy based on its deemed liability in the OWL and LLR Programs compared to the total deemed liability within the OWL and LLR Programs.

Should an OWL nonproducer licensee (NPL) become defunct within the first five years of the effective date of the OWL Program, the remaining OWL NPLs will be subject to a separate OWL NPL levy to address up to the first $2 million of any suspension, abandonment, decontamination, and surface land reclamation costs. Any remaining costs over $2 million will be an expense of the Orphan Fund. These costs will be recovered in the same manner as any other Orphan Levy cost, which will be payable by licensees in both the LLR and OWL Programs.

Question: Are deemed assets calculated differently in the OWL Program than in the LLR Program?
Answer: Yes. A multiplier of 0.5 is used in the facility deemed asset calculation to establish a minimum asset-to-liability ratio of 2.0. An oilfield waste management facility’s deemed assets is the sum of the previous 12 months of NPL volumes multiplied by the AER approved netback for these volumes, multiplied by 3 years, multiplied by 0.5.

Question: My Liability Management Rating (LMR) is greater than 1.0, but I am being asked to pay a security deposit on specific WM approval facility. Why?
Answer: NPLs in the OWL Program will have their LMR calculated monthly on both a corporate and a facility-specific basis. If the deemed liabilities exceed the deemed assets for a specific WM approval facility, a security deposit must be paid for the difference for that facility.

Question: I have an LMR greater than 1.0 and recently received approval for a new WM facility. Will I be required to pay a security deposit for this new facility?
Answer: If you are an NPL, you will need to pay a security deposit until such time as the new facilities has had a minimum of 12 months of volumetric throughput. The facility’s deemed asset value is based on the previous 12 months of NPL volumes. In the absence of 12 months of throughput, the asset value is zero. New facilities in the OWL Program will thus initially be required to pay a security deposit for the full amount of the deemed liability of the facility, based on a site-specific liability cost estimate. A licensee can request a netback and provide the required financial back-up for the AER to review once they have had a minimum of 12 months of NPL volumetric throughput.

Question: Why are licensees in the LLR and OWL Programs treated differently?
Answer: The differences are based on feedback from industry stakeholders and their level of risk tolerance. In transitioning from a full security program to a risk based program, it was decided that more stringent program guidelines were to be implemented until the program was proven effective in protecting the public of Alberta from bearing the costs should a licensee become defunct, and to minimize the risk to the Orphan Fund posed by the unfunded liability of facilities, wells, and pipelines included within the program.

Question: How will my Waste Management (WM) approval number be represented in the OWL Program?
Answer: In the manual tracking sheet, WM approval numbers will be used.

Question: How will the Oilfield Waste Management Facility Full Security Program be amended into a risk-based program?
Answer: Part 16.6: Security of the Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations will be amended to be consistent with the requirements of the OWL directive. Licensees who are eligible for a full or partial refund of their security deposit make a written request for a refund on company letterhead. Corporate eligibility criteria include the licensee having an LMR equal to or greater than 1.0 and compliance with AER security deposit requirements. Facility-specific eligibility criteria includes the licensee being compliant with AER security deposit requirements, a facility having reported 12 calendar months of throughput to PETRINEX, and the facility’s OWL ratio is equal to or greater than 1.0.

Landfills approved by the AER are excluded from the OWL program and will remain subject to the full security requirements outlined in Part 16.6: Security of the Oil and Gas Conservation Rules and Regulations.

Question: How is the deemed liability for 1b disposal wells located on the same surface lease as a WM approval calculated?
Answer: The deemed liability for 1b disposal wells located on the same surface location as a WM approval is split between the LLR and OWL Programs. The abandonment liability is to be calculated and only reflected in the LLR Program. Decontamination and surface land reclamation liability is to be calculated and only reflected in the OWL Program. Licensees should notify the AER of any 1b disposal wells located on the same surface location as a WM approval to ensure the liability for these wells is captured properly.

Question: I have already provided a Type A Liability Assessment for my WM facilities as part of the Oilfield Waste Management Security Program. I am proposing to transfer this facility. Do I need to provide a new liability assessment?
Answer: If the assessment currently held on file by the AER is less than 5 years old, an update consisting of an assessment of any changes to site conditions, inflation, incidences, and any remediation or reclamation activities that have occurred since the assessment was prepared must be provided by the transferor. A cost estimate based on a new assessment meeting the requirements of Directive 001 would be required if the transferor is aware of a cumulative increase in estimated liability equal to or in excess of either $1 million or 10 per cent of the facility’s current liability or if the assessment on file is approaching 30 days prior to the expiry of the five-year period approved for the cost estimate used for the licence transfer application.

Question: How do I submit an application to transfer a licence in the OWL Program?
Answer: WM approval holders seeking to transfer a facility included in the OWL Program apply to the AER's waste and storage section. The transferor can submit a transfer application via the AER Digital Data Submission (DDS) System for any licenses associated with WM approvals. The approval of the transfer of these licenses will coincide with the transfer of the WM approval.

Question: How do I report a Waste Management approval facility that is no longer operational and has been suspended, abandoned, closed, etc.?
Answer: Contact the AER's waste and storage section as they will need to amend the facility’s approval to reflect the current status.

Question: One of my Waste Management approvals is for a facility which does not have any reporting requirements to PETRINEX. How will assets for this approval be calculated?
Answer: The asset calculation for a licensee not required to report volumetric data to PETRINEX is the same as for a licensee reporting volumes to PETRINEX. The only difference is that the licensee reports the volumes directly to the AER. If you have any further questions, please contact the customer contact centre and ask for Liability Management.

Question: What is the deadline to populate the manual OWL Program spreadsheet?
Answer: The deadline date is the date set by PETRINEX for Waste Management Reporting for a given month. Data or amendments submitted after this date will not be accepted until after the monthly LMR run.

Question: What happens if I fail to submit volumetric data by the deadline?
Answer: If no value is submitted for volumetric data, the volume will be entered in as zero for that month, which will lower the assets of the subject facility.

Question: What happens if I make a reporting error on the manual spreadsheet?
Answer: If a reporting error is made on the manual spreadsheet, the AER must be notified immediately via e-mail to LiabilityManagement@aer.ca. If notification is submitted prior to PETRINEX’s deadline for Waste Management Reporting of that month, the correction will be made before the monthly LMR run. Otherwise, the correction will be reflected in the data for the next deadline date for Waste Management Reporting to PETRINEX.

The AER will be checking the volumetric data reported against what is reported to PETRINEX. If a discrepancy is noted, the licensee will receive a letter advising of the discrepancy and will then have until PETRINEX’s deadline for Waste Management Reporting of that month to make the change. Failure to do so will result in escalating enforcement.

Question: If I meet the eligibility criteria and have submitted a written request for a refund of a security deposit on corporate letterhead, how long can I expect it to take for that request to be processed?
Answer: The AER will endeavor to refund security deposits within 30 days of receipt of a written request from an eligible licensee.

Question: How do I submit new liability costs for WM approvals?
Answer: Currently, the WM approval holder must conduct a site-specific liability cost estimate for the costs associated with suspension, abandonment, decontamination, and surface land reclamation in accordance with Directive 001. The WM approval holder must then provide the AER with a completed Directive 075: Oilfield Waste Liability (OWL) Program Appendix 7 form.

Back to top


Enforcement

Acronyms:
CORES – Alberta Corporate Registries
ERCA – Energy Resources Conservation Act
AER – Alberta Energy Regulator
LLR – Licensee Liability Rating
LMG – Liability Management Group
LSD – Legal Subdivision
OFL – Orphan Fund Levy
OGCA – Oil and Gas Conservation Act
OGCR – Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations
OWA – Orphan Well Association
WIP – Working Interest Participant

Question: What is the Board Order enforcement process?
Answer: Below is a list of Board Orders in order of escalating consequences. Board Orders are public documents. Both a complete Index of Board Orders issued and a statistical report listing monthly enforcement actions (ST108) are available.

Miscellaneous Order

  • Used primarily for financial noncompliances (e.g. failure to pay a security deposit in accordance with the Licensee Management Rating Program, the Orphan Fund Levy, or the Administration Fees).
  • Consequence: a demand for payment, can be accompanied by the imposition of the Global REFER status.
  • Duration: 10 days provided for compliance to be achieved.

Closure Order

  • Consequence: licences captured in the Order are ordered suspended and closed; no production allowed while Closure Order is in effect; AER suspension signs are placed at properties and equipment is locked and chained.
  • Duration: stays in effect until noncompliance is addressed – 30 days provided before enforcement is escalated.
  • Working Interest Participants: any working interest participants in the properties which are subject to a Closure Order will be given notice of the noncompliance and informed that if Abandonment Orders are issued, the working interest participants will be named as parties responsible for the abandonment.

Abandonment Order

  • Consequence: properties listed in Orders are ordered abandoned.
  • Duration: 30 days provided to abandon properties listed in Order or to address initial noncompliance.
  • Working Interest Participants: any working interest participants in properties which are ordered abandoned are named as parties responsible for ensuring the abandonment of the properties in which they have a working interest by the deadline provided in the Abandonment Order.

Question: Is there a process to appeal a Board Order?
Answer: Appeals of Orders, decisions, and directions of the AER may be made in accordance with either Section 39 or 40 of the Energy Resources Conservation Act (ERCA) or Part 4 of the AER's Rules of Practice. Appeals under Section 40 of the ERCA require an application for a hearing be made within 30 days of the Order or decision for which the hearing is requested. Details of the information which is to be submitted within the application are outlined in Part 4 of the AER's Rules of Practice.

Question: What is a regulator-directed transfer (RDT)?
Answer: Under section 24(6) of the Oil and Gas Conservation Act (OGCA), the AER can direct the transfer of a licence to a person who agrees to accept it and who, in the opinion of the AER, has a right to receive it. For instance, this may occur when a party would like to acquire a well that is licensed to an inactive company or that is under the care and custody of the Orphan Well Association.

Question: How is a regulator-directed transfer (RDT) processed?
Answer: Licensees can request an RDT from the AER by email to liabilitymanagement@aer.ca. The email should include the name of the current licensee, the name of the company requesting to receive the licence, and the legal land description and licence number of the property or properties.

This process differs from a routine transfer under Directive 006: Licensee Liability Rating Program and Licence Transfer Process. Routine transfers are conducted by submitting requests electronically through the AER Digital Data Submission System.

Question: What are the requirements for a regulator-directed transfer?
Answer: The transferee must

  • meet AER requirements, including eligibility to hold AER licences in accordance with Directive 067: Applying for Approval to Hold EUB [AER] Licences;
  • provide information regarding their right to hold surface and mineral rights;
  • include any pipelines associated with the well that they wish to transfer as associated pipeline licences are not transferred automatically; and
  • be prepared to pay post-transfer security or meet other conditions set by the AER.

Question: I sold my well in a private transaction years ago. Why is the AER contacting me?
Answer: The sale or transfer of a property does not affect the transfer of an AER licence. A licence may only be transferred with written approval from the AER. In the absence of the AER’s approval, the licensee that the AER has on record will continue to be contacted and is obligated to comply with all AER requirements.

Question: I acquired the mineral and surface rights but not the AER licence. Am I entitled to the licence?
Answer: There is no entitlement to an AER licence. In order to hold the AER licence, the AER must consent in writing to the transfer. Consent may be subject to any conditions, restrictions and stipulations that the AER may prescribe.

Question: What happens to properties upon the breaching of an Abandonment Order?
Answer: If an Abandonment Order is not complied with by the deadline date provided in the Order, a review of the parties responsible for the abandonment (the Licensee and any working interest participants) is undertaken. The test set out in Section 70 of the OGCA is used to determine whether the AER or the Orphan Well Association will address the properties.

If the criteria set out in Section 70(2)(b) of the OGCA are met by a responsible party, that party will be deemed a defaulting working interest participant.

If all of the responsible parties for a property are deemed to be defaulting working interest participants, then the property will be designated orphan and sent to the Orphan Well Association to be addressed.

If some or all of the responsible parties do not fall within the criteria set out in Section 70(2)(b) of the OGCA, the AER will undertake the abandonment of the properties and pursue the responsible parties for the costs it incurs in doing so.

Question: As a WIP, how am I affected by enforcement processes?
Answer: Definition of working interest participant in Section 1(fff) of the OGCA: a person who owns a beneficial or legal undivided interest in a well or facility under agreements that pertain to the ownership of that well or facility.

WIPs will receive notice at the Closure Order stage that they are a responsible party according to the records of the AER.

If, subsequent to the Closure Order, an Abandonment Order is issued, any WIP will be named as a party responsible for the abandonment of the properties listed in the Order in which it is named. WIPs are expected to comply with any Order in which they are named as responsible parties. Failure to do so may result in the imposition of the Global REFER status against the WIP. If the AER undertakes the abandonment of the properties captured in an Abandonment Order because a WIP fails to comply with the Abandonment Order, the WIP will be pursued for the costs of the abandonment incurred by the Board in accordance with its proportionate share in the abandoned properties.

Question: I am a WIP who completed suspension/abandonment/reclamation work and am looking to collect reimbursement for the costs I incurred that are above my proportionate share. How do I do this?
Answer: If the other WIP(s), that you are seeking to collect costs, has an active status on CORES, and you have not taken steps to attempt to collect the debt through the courts, you can apply under Section 30 of the OGCA for assistance from the AER in attempting to collect those costs

Section 3.071(1) of the Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations (OGCR) sets out a detailed list of the information which must be provided in an application under Section 30 of the OGCA. An application under the above Section should be sent by mail to the AER, attention Liability Management Group, or by e-mail to Enforcement@aer.ca.

If the WIP that you are seeking to collect costs from does not have an active status on CORES or you have pursued the working interest participant for its share of the costs through the court system to a minimum stage of registering a writ of enforcement, you can apply pursuant to Section 70(1)(c) of the OGCA to be reimbursed for costs from the OWA.

Section 16.541(1) of the OGCR sets out a detailed list of the information which must be provided in an application under Section 70(1)(c) of the OGCA. An application under the above Section should be sent by mail to the AER, attention Liability Management Group, or by e-mail to Enforcement@aer.ca.

Question: What is Global Refer and its implications?
Answer: According to Directive 019: ERCB Compliance Assurance

Refer status – An enforcement status (focused or global) assigned to a licensee that is unable or unwilling to comply with the direction from the AER. Refer status results in a more rigorous review of the licensee’s pending and future applications, having regard for the compliance performance of the licensee. The Refer status is removed when compliance is achieved.

Focused Refer – An enforcement status that results in the processing of applications respecting a specific activity or operation (e.g., pipelines, commingling, waste facilities) as nonroutine, taking into consideration a licensee’s compliance performance in one or more compliance categories or AERgroups, the licensee’s applications specific to this activity or operation being brought before the Board for disposition, and possible additional terms or conditions on business associate codes, licences, or approvals.

Global Refer – An enforcement status that results in all of the licensee’s applications being processed as nonroutine, all of the licensee’s applications and decisions being brought before the Board for disposition, and possible additional terms or conditions on business associate codes, licences, or approvals.

Question: What is Directive 019? Where can I get more information on the AER's noncompliance enforcement?
Answer: Directive 019 specifically focuses on the prevention and enforcement aspects of compliance assurance and applies to all AER requirements and processes. The AER publishes the monthly enforcement activity it has undertaken in a report called ST108: Monthly Enforcement Action Summary. An Enforcement FAQ is also available. If a member of the public has concerns regarding field noncompliances, please contact the local AER field centre first.

Question: What is the AER's Section 106 process?
Answer: When a licensee, approval holder, or working interest participant has failed to comply with an Order of the Board or has an outstanding debt to the Board/OWA for suspension, abandonment, or reclamation costs, and the Board considers it in the public interests to do so, the Board can make a declaration against the person(s) in control of the licensee, approval holder, or working interest participant. This could result in sanctions in accordance with Section 106(3) of the OGCA against any oil and gas company that person(s) controls or prevent that company from doing business routinely with the AER. The sanctions could include suspending operations, refusing to grant a BA Code to be a licensee, refusing to approve applications, and/or requiring security deposits for abandonment and reclamation of licensed properties.

Question: What if a licensee wants to meet with AER Liability Management staff to discuss a noncompliance or the enforcement process?
Answer: If a licensee has already been in contact with a member of LMG, please make requests through that staff member. For general inquiries, please contact the LMG at Enforcement@aer.ca.

Question: What is the AER's Receivership (also Monitor, Manager, Trustee) process?
Answer: If a receiver has been assigned to a licensee in Alberta that holds AER licences or approvals, the LMG asks that the receiver contact the LMG at Enforcement@aer.ca. The AER will work with the Receiver to dispose of all oil and gas properties (assets and liabilities) to the extent possible. Remaining oil and gas properties will be subjected to the OGCA Section 70 test and, if no WIPs are found, the remaining oil and gas properties are transferred to OWA for abandonment and reclamation.

Back to top


LLR Program Changes

Question:What has changed in the LLR Program?
Answer: With the March 12, 2013 release of updated versions of Directive 006 and Directive 011 the following changes were made to the LLR Program:
  1. The well abandonment deemed liability costs were updated.
  2. The well deemed asset cost parameters were updated and changed from a 5-year average to a 3-year average.
  3. Present Value Salvage (PVS) discounting for active wells and facilities was removed.
  4. A requirement to vary all asset and liability parameters was added if licensees choose to vary parameters under Directive 006, Appendix 7.

Additional administrative corrections and clarifications were also included.

Year 2 (2014) of the implementation plan will also see updates to the facility abandonment cost parameter and updates to the reclamation liability costs.

See Bulletin 2013-09:Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program Changes and Implementation Plan for more information.

Question: Why is the AER making these LLR changes?
Answer: The LLR changes result in a more accurate representation of abandonment and reclamation costs, minimize financial risk to the Orphan Fund and protect Albertans from the costs associated with the liabilities from oil and gas sites.

Question: Are the new LLR changes being implemented all at once or over time?
Answer: The LLR Changes are being phased-in over three years. See Bulletin 2013-09 for additional information on how the phase-in will work.

Question: Why was industry not consulted on this?
Answer: Industry was consulted. The LLR changes are fully supported and agreed upon by CAPP and EPAC. The changes include updates to deemed asset and deemed liability calculation parameters and parameter variation requirements. Due to industry agreement and the limited nature of the changes, additional stakeholder consultation was not required.

Question: I don’t like how the Liability Management programs work (LLR, LFP, or OWL), who can I talk to?
Answer: The Liability Management programs were created in consultation with Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) & Explorers and Producers Association of Canada (EPAC). Companies should talk to either CAPP or EPAC. CAPP and EPAC are able to bring industry concerns forward to the AER’s Liability Management group. Alternatively companies can send a letter identifying their specific concerns with the liability management programs to the AER’s Liability Management Group.

Back to top


Transfer of Pipeline Records

Question: When should the records for a pipeline segment be transferred from the seller (transferor) to the purchaser (transferee)?
Answer: The seller must transfer the records for the pipeline segment being sold before the application is made to the AER to transfer the applicable pipeline licence. Both the seller and the purchaser must confirm on the licence transfer application that the applicable records have been maintained and transferred.

Records transfer should be a matter of discussion between the seller and the purchaser prior to finalization of the sale; consideration should be given to including records-related matters in the contractual agreement.

Question: Who is responsible for ensuring that all required records are transferred?
Answer: Both parties. Sellers are responsible for transferring these records, and purchasers are responsible for ensuring that any records transferred meet the applicable requirements (e.g., have been properly maintained) since these records are what show that the pipeline is safe to operate for the intended purpose. The purchaser should use professional judgement to determine if the records are adequate.

If required records are incomplete, they must be re-established and the pipeline must be proven to be fit for service through an engineering assessment. The purchaser’s pipeline expert should use professional judgement to determine the scale of the assessment based on the risk associated with the pipeline. (Clauses 3 and 10 of CSA Z662: Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems should be used as a reference.) The AER recognizes that some records cannot easily be replaced; the engineering assessment should provide confidence that the pipeline can be operated safely.

The new licensee is responsible for producing the records required by CSA Z662 and the Pipeline Rules on request by the AER. Any licensee who fails to do so will be in noncompliance with AER requirements.

Question: Does the purchaser need to review all required records before agreeing to the licence transfer on the AER’s system?
Answer: The seller and purchaser must agree on the records to be transferred as part of the sales arrangement. This is likely to require the involvement of technical experts before the licence is transferred. The purchaser’s pipeline expert must use professional judgement in determining that the pipeline can be operated safely based on the records.

If the records are insufficient to meet the requirements, the two parties must decide what engineering assessments are needed and who will complete them.

Question: Does the new pipeline licence transfer process announced in Bulletin 2015-34 apply to discontinued and abandoned pipelines?
Answer: Yes. The purchaser must review available records to confirm that the pipeline has been properly discontinued or abandoned. If records are insufficient, the two parties must decide how that will be addressed. An appropriate engineering assessment may be required and further work completed. The pipeline expert should use professional judgement to determine the scale of the assessment based on the risk associated with the pipeline.

Question: Does the new pipeline records transfer process announced in Bulletin 2015-34 apply to licensees that are bankrupt or otherwise unable to carry on with normal business?
Answer: Yes. Records transfer should be a matter of discussion between the seller and purchaser and part of the sales arrangement, even if the party responsible for a pipeline is a receiver. The purchaser still needs to evaluate the available records to determine if the pipeline can be operated safely. If records are missing and need to be re-established, it is likely that the onus will fall on the purchaser to undertake an appropriate engineering assessment to re-establish any missing records and determine that the pipeline is fit for its intended purpose.

Question: If after the licence transfer is completed, the purchaser finds that the pipeline records are not in accordance with CSA Z662 and the Pipeline Rules, what should be done?
Answer: If after the licence is transferred, the purchaser finds that the records do not meet what is required or are missing, it is the purchaser’s responsibility as the current licensee to have the appropriate engineering assessment done to re-establish any missing records and demonstrate that the pipeline is fit for its intended use and safe to operate. The engineering assessment must be included in the purchaser’s integrity management program so that the records are re-established in a timely manner.

Question: What would the AER consider an appropriate engineering assessment?
Answer: The purchaser must use professional judgement to determine what constitutes an appropriate engineering assessment; the assessment must demonstrate that a pipeline is fit for its intended use and safe to operate. Assessments should be scaled according to the risk associated with the pipeline. Clauses 3 and 10 of CSA Z662 should be used as a reference on engineering assessments.

The AER expects professionals to conduct assessments that are appropriate for ensuring that the pipeline is safe to operate.

Question: Does the AER have a list of what kinds of records should be transferred, including what it may consider an adequate substitute if those records are missing?
Answer: No. The details of what records a pipeline licensee must maintain are outlined in CSA Z662 and the Pipeline Rules and are based on a number of factors, including the pipeline specifications and product transported. The purchaser reviewing the records should use professional judgement to determine if the records are adequate.

Question: How will the AER choose a licence transfer application for compliance review?
Answer: The AER will choose an application to review at random or during a routine field inspection. The AER may also decide to review an application if a pipeline segment is considered high risk (e.g., there is a major water crossing). As the AER completes more reviews, licensee performance in complying with record transfers may become a factor in the selection process.

Question: What are the consequences of noncompliance if the AER determines that the records are inadequate?
Answer: The licensee of record is responsible for complying with AER requirements. Noncompliances are addressed under the AER’s Integrated Compliance Assurance Framework. The consequences vary with the circumstances. If records are missing, the licensee, at a minimum, will be required to obtain or generate adequate records. This may include having to do a risk-based engineering assessment to show that the pipeline is fit for its intended use and safe to operate. The AER may also shut in a pipeline segment until it is satisfied that the records are adequate.

Question: Are there any requirements in Directive 056: Energy Development Applications and Schedules regarding the transfer of pipeline records?
Answer: No. However, the parties may review Directive 056 application records as part of normal due diligence.

Back to top


Working Interest Participants

Question: What is a working interest participant (WIP)?
Answer: A working interest participant (WIP) is a person who owns a beneficial or legal undivided interest in a well or facility under agreements that pertain to the ownership of that well or facility. WIPs may be required to suspend, abandon, and reclaim a well or facility that they have a working interest in and are required to pay their share of suspension, abandonment, and reclamation costs.

Question: Does the Working Interest Participant (WIP) have to incur all costs of suspension, abandonment, and reclamation if the other WIPs are defunct?
Answer: In the event that a WIP becomes defunct and defaults on the costs to suspend, abandon, or reclaim energy infrastructure, existing licensees may apply to the AER for cost reimbursement for that defunct working interest participant’s share of costs. The AER works with the Orphan Well Association (OWA) to establish if costs should be paid. If approved, the OWA reimburses the applicant. Abandonment meeting AER requirements must be completed before applying for reimbursement of abandonment costs. A reclamation certificate must have been issued before applying for reimbursement of reclamation costs.

Applications for reimbursement must be sent to AER’s Liability Management group by traditional mail or by email at liabilitymanagement@aer.ca The party who conducted the suspension, abandonment and /or reclamation work initiates a cost reimbursement application under section 70(1)(c) of the OGCA;section 16.541(1) of the OGCR sets out a detailed list of the information that must be provided in a cost reimbursement application.

Back to top


Debtor Registry

Question: What is the Debtor Registry?
Answer: The registry is a listing of any person, including AER-regulated companies, with debts owing to the AER. This list provides the full company name and current debt amounts and may include the status of the company.

Question: What is a lien and when does it occur?
Answer: Generally there are many different types of lien, but a lien broadly refers to the right of a creditor to retain property or interests of the debtor until the debt has been satisfied. Under the Oil and Gas Conservation Act (OGCA), the AER’s lien takes effect when a debtor fails to pay levies or certain other amounts as they become due.

Question: What debts are included on the Debtor Registry?
Answer: The registry lists debts for which the AER has a lien under section 103 of the (OGCA). This means debts incurred as a result of nonpayment of the orphan fund levy or administration levy. In the future, the registry will be expanded to include all debts owing to the AER.

Question: Is this list exhaustive? Are some companies not included on this list?
Answer: The registry lists debtors who owe debts described in A3, including companies that are or have been in insolvency proceedings (receivership, bankruptcy, or Companies Creditors’ Arrangement Act protection) and companies that have had licences sent to the Orphan Well Association.

Question: Why are Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) security deposits not included on the registry?
Answer: LLR security deposits are not debts under the OGCA.

Question: What is a notice of lien?
Answer: A notice of statutory lien is normally sent to debtors following the nonpayment of a levy by the deadline specified in prior notices. It notifies the company of the AER’s lien and provides steps the company can take to get into compliance before the AER takes further remedial action.

In most cases, the AER provides notice to the company that it has a lien in respect of the company’s debt on the company’s interest in any wells, facilities and pipelines, land or interests in land, including mines and minerals, equipment, and petroleum substances. However, the AER does not have a statutory obligation to provide a notice of the lien, and in some cases it may not.

Question: What is a notice of garnishment?
Answer: When the AER has information to suggest that a debtor is a working interest participant in a third party’s well or other facility, a notice of garnishment is normally issued to that third party. This means that the third party must forward money and revenue to the AER that it owes to the debtor, to go towards the debt owing. Failure to comply with a notice of garnishment is an offence under the Oil and Gas Conservation Act.

Question: What do I need to do if my company has been identified as a payor?
Answer: A company that has been identified as a payor and has received a notice of garnishment should consult its records and determine what, if any, amounts are owed to the debtor. If the payor owes funds to the debtor, these amounts should be promptly directed to the AER. If you are mailing a cheque or bank draft, attach a copy of the notice. If you have identified that no funds are owed by your company (the payor) to the debtor, or you believe that your company has been incorrectly identified as a payor, submit all supporting documentation to collections@aer.ca.

Question: What if a debt remains unpaid by the deadline indicated in a notice of statutory lien or notice of garnishment?
Answer: If a debtor has not paid its debt and if potential payors have not paid all or some of the debt, then the AER may pursue other remedial actions on a case-by-case basis, which may include issuing an order or naming individual directors, officers, or other persons in direct or indirect control of the regulated company under section 106 of the OGCA. The AER may also enforce its lien in court.

Question: Can I appeal the debt or the lien?
Answer: Appeal deadlines are indicated in initial notices and in bulletins announcing the levies. Appeals will not be considered following the passing of the appeal deadlines.

Question: Does this lien have priority over other liens?
Answer: Yes. As stated in the OGCA, the AER’s statutory lien has priority over all other liens, charges, rights of set-off, mortgages, and other security interests.

Question: Is there a threshold amount for debts to appear on the registry?
Answer: No. All debts are posted on the registry regardless of the amount.

Question: Are the notices of statutory lien, notices of garnishment, and the debtor registry tools under Manual 013: Compliance and Enforcement Program?
Answer: These instruments do not fall within the scope of Manual 013 since a lien is not a fee, an administrative penalty, or an administrative sanction. The lien arises automatically upon the debtor’s failure to pay the outstanding amount when it is due. The notices of statutory lien, notices of garnishment, and the debtor registry simply provide notice of the existence of a lien and set out the associated obligations of the debtor.

Back to top

Questions regarding liability management can be directed to the customer contact centre by phone (toll free) at 1-855-297-8311 or by email at LiabilityManagement@aer.ca.