Appeal No. 99-146

Date of Report and Recommendations - April 12, 2000

 

N THE MATTER OF Sections 84, 85, 87, 92 and 93 of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, (S.A. 1992, ch. E-13.3 as amended);

-and-

IN THE MATTER OF an appeal filed by Shell Canada Limited with respect to Approval No. 11587-01-00 issued to Shell Canada Limited by the Director, Bow Region, Alberta Environment.

Cite as: Shell Canada Limited v. Director, Bow Region, Alberta Environment.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BACKGROUND 1
MEDIATION MEETING/SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 3
RECOMMENDATIONS 4
RESOLUTION AGREEMENT 5
ORDER 6

 

MEDIATION MEETING BEFORE

Mr. Ron V. Peiluck

 

APPEARANCES

Appellant: Ms. JoAnn P. Jamieson, counsel, Shell Canada Limited, representing Mr. Kim Johnson, Mr. Fred West, Mr. Gary Kjersem, Shell Canada Limited

Department: Ms. Heather Veale, counsel, Alberta Justice, representing the Director, Bow Region, Alberta Environment, Mr. Robert Kemp, Mr. Arthur Bollo-Kamara, Mr. Joe Feehan, Alberta Environment

 

BACKGROUND

[1] On July 30, 1999, Mr. Robert Kemp, Director, Bow Region, Alberta Environment (Department) issued Approval No. 11587-01-00 to Shell Canada Limited for the operation and reclamation of the Jumping Pound sour gas plant for the processing of natural gas.

[2] On August 27, 1999, the Environmental Appeal Board (Board) received a Notice of Appeal dated the same day, from Ms. JoAnn P. Jamieson, counsel, representing Shell Canada Limited (Appellant), advising of their wish to appeal sections 2.4.1, 4.2.19 and 4.2.22 of Approval No. 11587-01-00.

[3] The Board wrote to the Appellant on August 30, 1999, acknowledging receipt of the Notice of Appeal, and by copy of that letter, requested the Department provide copies of all related correspondence, documents and materials related to this matter.

[4] According to standard practice, on August 30, 1999, the Board wrote to the Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB) and the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB) asking whether this matter had been the subject of a hearing or review under their respective Boards' legislation. Reply was subsequently received from the NRCB on September 8, 1999 stating that they did not hold any hearing or review under their legislation. However, the AEUB in its letter received September 17, 1999, did state:

"The last application received by the EUB on this plant was on 25 March 1993 (Application No. 930472) for a sulphur degasification project. The approval issued pursuant to that application is No. 6047a. I am enclosing microfiche copies of the application and the approval issued pursuant to that application. The most recent application prior to that was in 1989 and I have included copies of that application as well. The approval issued pursuant to that application is No. 6047."

[5] On December 23, 1999, copies of the documents requested by the Board were provided by the Department. On December 30, 1999, the Board wrote to the Appellant on procedural matters asking the Appellant if they wished to have a mediation meeting under section 11 of the Environmental Appeal Board Regulation(1), and if there were any other persons who might have an interest in the appeal. The Board also enclosed for the Appellant the information received from the Department on December 23, 1999. On the same date the Board wrote to the Department asking for comments on participating in a mediation meeting and asking whether there were any other persons who may have an interest in the appeal.

[6] On January 10, 2000, the Appellant responded to the Board's letter of December 30, 1999, advising that they were receptive to a mediation meeting and in their belief, no other persons would have an interest in this matter. On January 11, 2000, the Department also advised that they would like to go forward with a mediation if the Board decided to proceed with the appeal.

[7] On January 19, 2000, the Board wrote to all the parties advising them that a mediation meeting/settlement conference would be held on March 15, 2000, at the Federal Court of Canada in Calgary. A Notice of Mediation Meeting/Settlement Conference and Public Hearing was placed in the Calgary Herald and the Cochrane Times on January 25 and 26, 2000, respectively. On February 16 and 23, 2000, the Department requested that the mediation meeting/settlement conference date be changed (due to a scheduling conflict). On February 29, 2000, the Board advised that in consultation with the parties the mediation meeting/settlement conference would be rescheduled to April 11, 2000, in Calgary. Accordingly, a further Notice of Mediation Meeting/Settlement Conference and Public Hearing was placed in the Calgary Herald and the Cochrane Times.

MEDIATION MEETING/SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

[8] Pursuant to section 11 of the regulations(2) the Board conducted a mediation meeting/settlement conference in Calgary, Alberta, on April 11, 2000, with Mr. Ron Peiluck as presiding Board member.

[9] According to standard practice the Board called the mediation meeting/settlement conference in an attempt to mediate or facilitate through a settlement conference the resolution of this appeal; or failing that, to structure procedural arrangements for the oral hearing. The Board invited representatives from each party to participate in the mediation meeting/settlement conference.

[10] In conducting the mediation meeting/settlement conference, Mr. Peiluck reviewed the appeal and mediation process and explained the purpose of the mediation meeting/settlement conference. He then circulated copies of the "Participants' Agreement to Mediate". All parties signed the Agreement and discussions ensued.

[11] Following productive and detailed discussions, a resolution evolved at the April 11, 2000, mediation meeting/settlement conference and the attached settlement was signed (page 5 of this report).

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

[12] The Board recommends that the Minister of Environment approve the conditions of the Resolution contained herein.

[13] Further, with respect to section 92(2) and 93 of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, the Board recommends that copies of this Report and Recommendations and of any decision by the Minister be sent to the following parties:

 

Dated April 12, 2000, at Edmonton, Alberta.

Mr. Ron V. Peiluck

 

ORDER

I, Gary Mar, Q.C. Minister of Environment, pursuant to Section 92 of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, hereby make the order in the attached schedule being the Environmental Appeal Board Appeal number 99-146-R Order.

Dated at Edmonton this 20th day of April, 2000.

Honourable Gary Mar, Q.C.
Minister of Environment


FOOTNOTES

1. AR 114/93 (hereinafter "the regulations").

2. Section 11 of the Environmental Appeal Board Regulation (AR 114/93) states:

11 Where the Board has determined the parties to the appeal, the Board may, prior to conducting the hearing of the appeal, on its own initiative or at the request of the any of the parties, convene a meeting of the parties and any other interested persons the Board considers should attend, for the purpose of

(a) mediating a resolution of the subject matter of the notice of appeal, or

(b) determining any of the matters referred to in section 13.

 

home back to decisions