The National Energy Board publishes reasons for decisions when it expects its decisions to influence actions beyond the particular case that was heard. The Board is an independent tribunal with responsibilities for regulating the oil, gas, and electricity industries. Its decisions affect the industry, energy consumers, and anyone who owns land or lives in the vicinity of pipeline and international power line rights of way. Its decisions aim to protect the public interest in safety, environmental protection, and economic efficiency. This document presents the decision of the National Energy Board regarding Alliance Pipeline Ltd.'s application in respect of its British Columbia Expansion Project.--Government of Canada's website.

In early 2008, the National Energy Board (Board or NEB) identified a proposed approach for the Land Matters Consultative Initiative (LMCI), consisting of four distinct topic streams. One of the streams, Stream 3, was Pipeline Abandonment--Financial Issues. The Board indicated that the key issue to be considered in respect of that stream was: "What is the optimal way to ensure that funds are available when abandonment costs are incurred?" The Board noted two key principles fundamental to its future decisions with respect to the financial matters related to pipeline abandonment. These were: a) Abandonment costs are a legitimate cost of providing service and are recoverable upon Board approval from users of the system; and b) Landowners will not be liable for costs of pipeline abandonment. These Reasons for Decision provide an overview of the matters considered by the Board in reaching a decision in respect of the abandonment cost estimates applications.--Document.

The National Energy Board publishes reasons for decisions when it expects its decisions to influence actions beyond the particular case that was heard. The Board is an independent tribunal with responsibilities for regulating the oil, gas, and electricity industries. Its decisions affect the industry, energy consumers, and anyone who owns land or lives in the vicinity of pipeline and international power line rights of way. Its decisions aim to protect the public interest in safety, environmental protection, and economic efficiency. This document presents the decision of the National Energy Board regarding TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd.'s application to construct and operate the Canadian portion of the Keystone pipeline project. News releases are included in English and French.--Government of Canada's website.

The National Energy Board (NEB) held hearings in Saint John, New Brunswick during the week of 28 January 2008 in the matter of applications dated 12 July 2007 and 7 August 2007 by Emera Brunswick Pipeline Company Ltd., for approval of the Plans, Profiles, and Book of Reference respecting the detailed route for the Brunswick Pipeline Certificate GC-110 from the Canaport Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Terminal at Mispec Point, New Brunswick to a point on the US border near St. Stephen, New Brunswick. The issues considered during the Brunswick Pipeline Detailed Route Hearing included the best possible detailed route for the pipeline and the most appropriate methods and timing of constructing the pipeline. At the hearing the NEB considered objections from the following: Sierra Supplies Ltd.; Galbraith Construction Ltd. and Galbraith Equipment Co. Ltd.; Frederick Tuddenham; Melvin Hannan and Beatrice Latour; and Estate of A.J. Debly. This document is a compilation of the NEB decisions on each objection.--Includes text from publisher's website.

On 1 September 2011, TransCanada PipeLines Limited (TransCanada), NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NOVA or NGTL) and Foothills Pipe Lines Ltd. (Foothills) applied to the Board under Parts I and IV of the National Energy Board Act for approvals required to implement a proposed restructuring of the services on the TransCanada Mainline pipeline system (Mainline), the TransCanada Alberta System (Alberta System) and the TransCanada Foothills System (Foothills System). TransCanada also applied for orders fixing and approving tolls that it shall charge for transportation services provided on the Mainline between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013.--Document.

On 7 February 2011, Vantage Pipeline Canada LLC applied to the National Energy Board (NEB), pursuant to section 52 of the NEB Act, for a Certificate to construct and operate Vantage Pipeline (Pipeline), which will carry liquid ethane from Hess Corporation's natural gas processing plant near Tioga, North Dakota, United States (U.S.) through Saskatchewan to interconnect with the Alberta Ethane Gathering System (AEGS) near Empress, Alberta (AB). This report describes the matters considered by the NEB in reaching a decision on the application. In coming to its findings, the NEB considered all of the evidence on the record in this matter including economic feasibility, Aborginal matters, land matters, environment and socio-economic matters, engineering matters, public convenience, and necessity.--Includes text from document.

In January 2008, the National Energy Board (Board) identified a proposed approach for the Land Matters Consultative Initiative (LMCI), consisting of four distinct topic streams. One of the four topic streams, stream 3, was "Pipeline Abandonment--Financial Issues." The Board indicated that the key issue to be considered in respect of that topic stream was the following: What is the optimal way to ensure that funds are available when abandonment costs are incurred? This document presents the Board's report and recommendations concerning this question.--Includes text from document.

This major collection contains selected papers from the second Public Law Conference, an international conference hosted by the University of Cambridge in September 2016. The collection includes contributions by leading academics and judges from across the common law world, including senior judges from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK. The contributions engage with the theme of unity (and disunity) from a number of perspectives, offering a rich panoply of insights into public law which significantly carry forward public law thinking across common law jurisdictions, setting the agenda for future research and legal development. Part 1 of the volume contains chapters which offer doctrinal and theoretical perspectives. Some chapters seek to articulate a unifying framework for understanding public law, while others seek to demonstrate the plurality of public law through the method of legal taxonomy. A number of chapters analyse whether different fields such as human rights and administrative law are merging, with others considering specific unifying themes or concepts in public law. The chapters in Part 2 offer comparative perspectives, charting and analysing convergence and divergence across common law systems. Specific topics include standing, proportionality, human rights, remedies, use of foreign precedents, legal transplants, and disunity and unity among subnational jurisdictions. The collection will be of great interest to those working in public law.