The controversial Heartland powerline will face judgment in front of the Alberta Court of Appeal.
A decision issued Wednesday morning found there were enough issues with the Alberta Utilities Commission hearing into the project that the case should go before the three-judge court. Court of appeal cases face a two-stage process, whereby applicants must first prove they have a legitimate case to argue and then have the panel decide on it.
Justice Ronald Berger found there were legitimate reasons for the three-judge panel to hear the case. The judgment does not conclude whether the process was flawed, only that there are significant grounds for the case to be heard.
Earlier this month local lawyer Keith Wilson argued for the case to be heard at the appeal court on behalf of Sturgeon County councillor Karen Shaw. Wilson argued there was the appearance of political interference in the process to approve the lines and that the Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) misinterpreted the legislation surrounding the hearings.
Shaw and her family own land near the end of the proposed transmission line. She said she is overjoyed that the appeal court will hear the case and there is a chance the line could be stopped.
"That's fantastic. I am so glad that he is standing up," Shaw said.
She said the entire Heartland powerline process has been very frustrating.
Wilson argued for the hearing because he believes the AUC erred last year when it failed to consider the social and economic costs of the lines.
Previously, the commission was asked to look at the need for new power lines along with their potential routing, but the government's controversial Bill 50 made the need for lines a decision of the provincial cabinet and left only the routing to the utilities commission.
In his decision, Berger wrote that, especially given the potential for many future power lines, the commission's interpretation of the new law is worth considering at the appeal court.
"The commission recognized that its interpretation of the new legislative framework had significant implications for the assessment of projects such as Heartland going forward and for the approval process," he wrote. "In my opinion, it is imperative in the interests of certainty and consistency that this court pronounce on the issue."
Political interference
Hearings on the Heartland line wrapped up almost a year ago and the commission approved the line last October. Days before that decision was rendered however, Energy Minister Ted Morton asked the commission to suspend its process on the line and two others.
Premier Alison Redford quickly corrected Morton and insisted the Heartland decision should still be issued. She said she had only wanted to suspend the process on two other lines where the hearings had not been held.
Wilson also argued there was the appearance of bias in the decision, because of the minister's suspension and comments the premier made in support of the line.
Berger dismissed the suggestion the premier's comments could have been attributed as bias, but said there was the possibility the minister's brief suspension of the process could have been read that way.
Wilson argued that if the minister had wanted to suspend the process he could have applied for the government to be part of it and formally asked the commission to suspend the process.
Berger said that would have been better than the letter Morton sent asking for the suspension.
"It seems to me unfortunate that the more formal course was not pursued," Berger wrote.
EPCOR, one of the companies constructing the line, is reviewing the court's decision and respects it, said spokesperson Anna Neale.
She emphasized the decision only allows for a hearing.
"The ruling is basically granting permission for the appeal to proceed. It is not necessarily based on the merits of the appeal," she said.
Possible injunction
Wilson said he would still have to review the decision in greater detail and consult with the Shaws, but he said it is possible he will ask the court to stop any construction or work on the transmission line until the appeal court hears the case.
"If we can get that evidence before the commission, these lines are stopped, because the only evidence that is out there is about the adverse economic impact," he said.
With that in mind, an injunction might make sense, because the cost of powerlines is being added to Alberta consumers' bills every month, he said.
"We are all starting to pay for these transmission lines already on our monthly power bills," he said.
Neale said the cost of the line is not currently on Albertans' bills, but will be when the line is finished and becomes operational. She said EPCOR has no plans to change course and will continue work on constructing the line.
"This decision does not affect the construction of the project," she said. "We have not been directed by the courts or the AUC to cease construction, so unless otherwise directed we will continue."
