Date of Discontinuance - June 25, 1997
IN THE MATTER OF Sections 84, 85, 86 and 87 of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, (S.A. 1992, ch. E-13.3 as amended);
IN THE MATTER OF an appeal filed by Andreas Dzurny with respect to Amending Approval No.'s 236-00-15 and 237-00-10 issued by the Director of Air and Water Approvals, Alberta Environmental Protection to Dow Chemical Canada Inc. and the letter of withdrawal dated June 24, 1997, the Board hereby discontinues its proceedings in this matter and will be closing its file pursuant to section 87(7) of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act.
Cite as: Andreas Dzurny v. Director of Air and Water Approvals, Alberta Environmental Protection.
On May 21, 1997, Ms. Erika Gerlock of Duncan and Craig filed a Notice of Appeal on behalf of Mr. Andreas Dzurny to the Environmental Appeal Board with respect to Amending Approval No.'s 236-00-15 and 237-00-10 issued by the Director of Air and Water Approvals to Dow Chemical Canada Inc. Amending Approvals 236-00-15 and 237-00-10 are for the Fort Saskatchewan chemical manufacturing plant.
By copy of the letter dated May 22, 1997, the Board requested the Department of Environmental Protection provide all related correspondence, documents and materials. On that same date, the Board wrote to Dow Chemical Canada Inc. informing them that an appeal was received by Mr. Andreas Dzurny and that the Board would be in contact with them when material was received from the Department.
Correspondence dated June 3, 1997, was received from Mr. William McDonald regarding Statement of Concerns previously filed with the Department which he stated:
"Mr. Dzurny's original statement of concern had six additional names attached and section 84(1)(a)(iv) expressly requires a person filing a Notice of Objection to have previously filed a statement of concern. In this Notice of Objection, the relief that is requested relates to Ethylene emissions from the facility. These concerns were not referenced to in the original Statement of Concern filed by Mr. Dzurny. The Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act provides for directly affected persons to make their concerns known to the Director pursuant to s.70 so that the Director can consider them and incorporate them into the approval as appropriate."
Mr. McDonald's correspondence of June 3, 1997, also raised the issue of Ethylene emissions from the facility stating:
"The Statement of Concern that was filed, dealt with noise, flaring and the proximity to residential development. All of these matters were addressed by the EUB and were considered by the Director when issuing the approval. However, specific concerns related to health impact from ethylene emissions were not raised in the Statement of Concern, and were not considered in this context by the Director. It is the Director's position that in any decision of jurisdiction that the Board consider that those matters that can be brought pursuant to s.87(3) to a hearing be limited to matters raised in this statement of concern and not new matters that had not been previously raised. The Director also refers the Board to the Energy and Utilities Board decision that is included in the materials, for consideration under section 87(5)(b)."
All correspondence requested by this Board was received from the Department of Environmental Protection and a copy was sent to Ms. Gerlock on behalf Mr. Dzurny on June 11, 1997. Along with the information sent, the Board requested comments to the following from the Appellant:
- Explain how you are "directly affected" by the decision issued by the Director [regarding Amending Approval No.'s 236-00-15, 237-00-10].
- Explain in more detail the environmental concerns you have with the decision issued by the Director [regarding Amending Approval No.'s 236-00-15 and 237-00-10].
- Please provide comments to Mr. McDonald's letter of June 3, 1997 relating to the issue of Statement of Concerns.
- Please provide comments to the issue of Ethylene emissions from the facility as indicated by Mr. McDonald's letter of June 3, 1997.
- Explain in more detail the issues you feel were not "adequately" addressed by the Energy and Utilities Board.
The Board requested comments to the following procedural issues from the Appellant and the Department:
- In the event that the Board decides to proceed with this appeal, do you wish to have a mediation meeting under section 11 of the Environmental Appeal Board Regulation?
- In your opinion, are there any other persons who have an interest in this matter?
On June 11, 1997, correspondence was received from Mr. Richard Neufeld of Milner Fenerty advising that he now acts for Dow Chemical Canada Inc. in respect to this appeal.
On June 23, 1997, the Board had requested, in relation to EAB file 97-017, the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB) and the Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB) both advise whether the matter was the subject of a public hearing or review under either of their Boards. On June 25, 1997, the NRCB advised that this appeal did not deal with a matter that had been the subject of any hearing or review under their Board. As of the date of withdrawal, no response was received from the AEUB.
On June 24, 1997, the Board received a letter from Ms. Gerlock stating:
"Please be advised that our client, Mr. Andreas Dzurny (on behalf of a number of local landowners) is hereby withdrawing his appeal of the issuance of the above-noted AEP approvals. Unfortunately, Mr. Dzurny and the other landowners are not in a financial position to further pursue this matter. We would like to thank the Board for its time and consideration of the appeal to date."
The Board advised all parties in writing of this information on June 25, 1997, indicating that pursuant to section 87(7) of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, the Board hereby discontinues its proceedings in this matter and will be closing its file.
The appeal is therefore withdrawn.
Dated on June 25, 1997, at Edmonton, Alberta.
William A. Tilleman, Chair