Andrea Huckins

The Association for the Protection of Amherst Island appealed the Director's decision to issue a Renewable Energy Approval to Windlectric Inc. for a 26-turbine wind facility on Amherst Island.

The Appellant argued the project would cause serious harm to human health from turbine and concrete batch plant emissions, and serious and irreversible harm to animal life, specifically Bobolink, raptors/owls, bats, and Blanding's turtles.

The Environmental Review Tribunal found that the Appellant failed to meet the statutory onus under the Environmental Protection Act to prove that the project would cause serious harm to human health or serious and irreversible harm to the natural environment.

The appeal was dismissed and the Director's decision was confirmed.

The appellants appealed decisions of the Environmental Review Tribunal confirming the director's issuance of renewable energy approvals for two wind turbine projects.

They argued that section 145.2.1 of the Environmental Protection Act requires a two-step process shifting the onus to the approval-holder, that the tribunal erred in rejecting the material contribution test for causation, and that they were denied procedural fairness when an adjournment was refused.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeals, finding that the statute imposes a single onus on the appellants to prove harm, the material contribution test was properly rejected, and the tribunal reasonably exercised its discretion in denying the adjournment.

The Appellant appealed the Director's decision to issue a renewable energy approval for a wind project.

Due to the complexity of the hearing and numerous motions, the statutory six-month deadline for disposition was approaching.

The Tribunal ordered an adjournment on its own initiative, with the consent of the Appellant and Director, to allow sufficient time to deliberate and write its decision.

The Tribunal, on its own initiative, adjourned the hearing of appeals regarding a Renewable Energy Approval for the Fairview Wind Project.

The statutory six-month deadline for the Tribunal to dispose of the hearing was approaching.

Because the parties requested a lengthy period for filing final written submissions, the Tribunal determined that a 64-day adjournment was necessary to ensure sufficient time to deliberate and issue a written decision on the merits.

At a preliminary hearing regarding appeals of a Renewable Energy Approval for a wind turbine project, the Environmental Review Tribunal considered requests for participant and presenter status.

The Tribunal granted participant status to the Canadian Owners and Pilots Association and presenter status to several individuals and organizations, finding they had genuine interests in the proceeding.

The Tribunal also issued procedural directions for the main hearing.

The Director of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change issued an order regarding a spill of environmental contaminants at a site in Fort Erie.

Several parties appealed the order.

After the required remediation work was completed by some of the appellants, the Director proposed to revoke the order.

The Environmental Review Tribunal found the proposed revocation to be consistent with the purpose of the Environmental Protection Act and in the public interest.

The Tribunal revoked the order and dismissed the appeals.

The appellant in an appeal of a Renewable Energy Approval for a wind project requested a summons for a Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry herpetologist to testify about impacts on Blanding's turtles.

The Tribunal granted the request to issue the summons but simultaneously granted the proposed witness's application to cancel it, finding that while the evidence was relevant, it was not necessary because the appellant was already calling its own expert on the subject.

The appellant appealed a Renewable Energy Approval granted to the approval holder for a wind facility.

At a preliminary hearing, the Environmental Review Tribunal considered unopposed requests for participant and presenter status from various individuals and organizations.

The Tribunal granted participant status to a conservation authority and a local resident, and presenter status to a naturalist group and a citizens' coalition.

The Tribunal also issued procedural directions and a schedule for the proceeding.

The appellant appealed the Director's decision to issue a Permit to Take Water (PTTW) to the permit holder for dewatering a limestone quarry.

The appellant argued the supporting documentation was inadequate, the terms did not safeguard public interests, and the permit holder had a history of non-compliance.

The Environmental Review Tribunal allowed the appeal in part, finding that while recent structural geology investigations and monitoring data adequately addressed hydrogeological uncertainties, the PTTW required amendments.

The Tribunal ordered reductions in the permitted water taking volume, enhanced groundwater monitoring, the implementation of water conservation measures, and the addition of specific triggers and compliance mechanisms to the contingency plan.

The Tribunal held a preliminary hearing by telephone conference call regarding appeals of a Director's Order related to a spill of environmental contaminants.

Several entities requested party status.

Finding that the entities were named in a Notice of Allegation and could be directly affected by the outcome of the appeal, the Tribunal granted party status to Amercoat Canada, Rubyco Ltd., and Danroh Inc. The preliminary hearing was adjourned to allow for the completion of work required under interim amendments to the Director's Order.

The Tribunal held a telephone conference call to set procedural directions and hearing dates for appeals of a Director's Order issued under the Environmental Protection Act regarding the unauthorized storage of hazardous waste materials at a site in Hamilton.

The Tribunal ordered a schedule for the exchange of witness statements and documents, and set hearing dates for December 2015 and March 2016.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order requiring them to secure and remediate a site containing hazardous waste.

During a telephone conference call, the Royal Bank of Canada requested to be removed as a party, which was granted on consent.

The parties also requested an adjournment of the preliminary hearing to continue mediation, which the Tribunal granted.

At a preliminary hearing regarding an appeal of a Director's Order related to an environmental spill, several individuals and entities sought party and participant status.

The Tribunal granted party status to several potential orderees and individuals named in the order, finding their interests could be directly and substantially affected.

The Regional Municipality of Niagara was granted participant status due to its genuine interest as an adjacent property owner.

The preliminary hearing was adjourned to allow ongoing remediation work to proceed.

The appellant appealed a Permit to Take Water issued to the instrument holder for quarry dewatering.

The Environmental Review Tribunal allowed the appeal in part and ordered amendments to the permit.

The amendments included reduced daily water taking limits, enhanced groundwater monitoring requirements, and the implementation of a contingency plan with specific trigger events.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order relating to a spill of environmental contaminants, including toluene and acetone, at a site in Fort Erie.

Several appellants brought motions to stay the Director's Order pending the final resolution of the appeals.

At the hearing, the moving parties and the Director presented an agreement for a partial stay and interim amendments to the Order.

The Environmental Review Tribunal approved the consent agreement, finding that the stay would not result in a danger to health, safety, or the environment, and that the balance of convenience favoured granting the stay to allow necessary investigative work to proceed.

The Permit Holder brought a motion to amend an earlier Tribunal order that partially lifted an automatic stay on a Permit to Take Water for a quarry.

The Permit Holder sought to extend the dewatering period from 10 to 30 days, citing a larger than expected volume of accumulated spring melt water and precipitation.

The Appellant opposed the extension, raising concerns about potential environmental impacts and questioning the Permit Holder's claims of irreparable harm.

Applying the RJR-MacDonald test and section 102(3) of the Ontario Water Resources Act, the Tribunal found that the Permit Holder would suffer irreparable harm if unable to access the quarry floor, and that a short-term extension would not pose a serious risk of environmental impairment.

The Tribunal partially granted the motion, extending the stay lift for an additional 10 days to allow the removal of up to 23 million litres of water, subject to strict monitoring and contingency conditions.

The appellants appealed a Director's Order requiring work to prevent the discharge of contaminants from a site in Fort Erie.

On consent of the parties, the Environmental Review Tribunal granted an interim stay of portions of the Order and amended specific items pending the final resolution of the appeal.

The amended Order established new compliance dates and requirements for investigating soil, groundwater, sediment, and surface water impacts.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Superior Court of Justice declining to entertain its s. 24(1) Charter application based on post-trial delay.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the application judge's exercise of discretion, as the appellant had already raised the s. 11(b) Charter issue in an appeal to the Provincial Offences Appeal Court under the Provincial Offences Act.

The moving party, Windlectric Inc., proposed a wind energy project on Amherst Island.

The Ministry of the Environment deemed the application complete, initiating the technical review phase.

The responding party, an association opposing the project, sought judicial review to quash the completeness determination, arguing the application lacked an adequate emergency response plan.

Windlectric brought a motion to quash the application for judicial review.

The Divisional Court granted the motion, finding that a completeness check is an administrative step, not a statutory power of decision or a matter subject to public law remedies.

The court also held that the application for judicial review was premature, as the administrative process and available appeals had not been exhausted.

The Municipality of North Middlesex appealed two decisions of the Environmental Review Tribunal regarding a Renewable Energy Approval under the Environmental Protection Act.

The Tribunal had struck the Municipality's Notice of Constitutional Question and refused to grant it public interest standing.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Tribunal correctly applied the law, did not err in principle, and provided compelling reasons.