Skip to main content

Using Risk to Make Decisions

Companies developing Alberta’s energy resources (oil, gas, bitumen, coal, geothermal, and hydrogen) and mineral resources must do so responsibly.  Our job is to create and enforce requirements that protect people, wildlife, and the environment. As part of this work, we must examine the risks associated with every development.

To evaluate risk, we must know the likelihood of something negative happening and the consequences. 

We need a comprehensive and holistic view of energy or mineral resource development.  Our Integrated Decision Approach is changing the way we regulate by looking at the entire project life cycle, rather than on a step-by-step basis. With this approach, we are better positioned to

  • focus on what matters (i.e., provide greater regulatory oversight to higher-risk activities) and
  • apply the right amount of regulatory oversight at the appropriate time in a project’s life cycle.

How We Assess Risk

Using risk information when making decisions is not new for us. However, through our Integrated Decision Approach, we are moving towards an even more consistent way of using risk information to make decisions. To do this, we have developed risk-informed assessment criteria to ensure higher-risk projects receive greater scrutiny.

Assessment criteria are risk-informed conditional statements that guide our regulatory actions.

The assessment criteria help us to:

  • determine the risk an activity may pose to our mandate outcomes,
  • dictate where and when additional oversight of an energy or mineral development is needed (e.g., review, inspection, or audit) or further exploration of the risk is necessary, and 
  • target a specific risk at the most cost-effective and appropriate time in an energy or mineral development’s life cycle.

Assessment criteria are driven by the context of the energy or mineral resource development—such as the location, the company or companies involved, and the technical nature of the activity—to inform how much oversight should be applied. For example, developing a well close to the habitat of a sensitive species is a high-risk scenario and assessment criteria could be developed to ensure that any time a well is constructed close to the habitat of a sensitive species, it would be subject to increased oversight.

Two Levels of Review

Our Integrated Decision Approach involves two review levels: routine (baseline) and nonroutine (additional).

  • Routine (baseline) review: This level of review applies to applications involving low-risk activities.
  • Nonroutine (additional) review: This review applies to applications that involve higher-risk activities or uncertainty and require evaluation by our technical experts.

Our automated OneStop system evaluates each application using assessment criteria and will determine whether the application is routine or nonroutine. OneStop will conduct routine assessments, allowing us to focus on higher-risk activities (nonroutine). Applications for developments or activities not supported by OneStop will be manually assessed to determine the appropriate review level (routine or nonroutine). 

  • Reasons for More Oversight
    Additional oversight may be necessary for any of the following reasons:  Government policy: Government of Alberta policy, legislation, or regulations may require us to apply additional oversight.
  • Variances: An operator has requested a deviation from our standard rules and requirements.
  • New activity or technology:  The proposed project involves an innovation not previously assessed by us. The innovation may be a new technology or way of conducting an activity.
  • Stakeholder concerns or complaints: Stakeholders have filed statements of concern or complaints regarding the application or activity.
  • High risk or uncertainty: Some attributes of the proposed project or activity (e.g., the location, operator, or activity) increase its risk or introduce uncertainty.

Staying Current

We will periodically review our assessment criteria to ensure that they appropriately reflect

  • Government of Alberta policy,
  • information gathered from stakeholders and Indigenous peoples,
  • changes to energy and mineral resources development,
  • changes to the population and landscape of Alberta.