Bill proposed to support sand and gravel operators

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Bluesky
• Share on X
• Copy Link

· Amend the definition of “minerals” and “pits” to align in the EPEA with definitions in existing regulatory frameworks.

Nighttime construction on Hwy 3 in Lethbridge starts April 17

Apr 17, 2025

SASHA launches #BuyABed fundraiser to support vulnerable Lethbridge residents

Apr 04, 2025

$20K grants available: TELUS STORYHIVE Pan-Asian Edition opens applications April 1

Mar 18, 2025

In the Public Lands Act, the new bill would:

· Remove specific references to “silica sand” to create certainty about the interpretations of sand by eliminating redundant terminology.

Because sand is already defined in provincial legislation, the province says also defining silica sand makes application documents “unnecessarily complicated” for operators.

“Job creators should not need interpreters to understand legislation and regulatory laws. That’s why the government is taking action to ensure that sand and gravel operators have clear definitions that are accurate in legislation,” said Minister of Environment and Parks Jason Nixon.

“Environment and Parks has had an effective and environmentally sound regulatory system in place for more than 15 years to review and approve projects. This bill will provide clarity and consistency for job creators in the sand and gravel industry while still maintaining stringent environmental protection regulations.”

Earlier this year, on May 6, the Alberta Court of Appeal ruled that sand is a mineral under the EPEA definitions of “minerals”.

Before that decision, all projects that saw the removal of sand, gravel, clay or marl were regulated as “pits” under the EPEA.

Following the court decision, all sand operations above 45,000 tonnes each year must be regulated as a “quarry” under the EPEA, instead of a pit.

The government says this in turn has created regulatory uncertainties for sand and gravel operators.

The province has noted that the court decision impacts approximately 500 applications that are currently awaiting review.

Applicants have submitted documents needed for a “pit” removal, and not a “quarry” removal, therefore those applications are now incomplete and cannot be authorized in their current state without the passing of Bill 31.