2 total
Appeals of wind turbine renewable energy approvals dismissed; no two-step process or shifting onus applies.
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.
Appeal of wind turbine Renewable Energy Approval dismissed for failing to prove serious harm to health or environment.
The Appellant appealed a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) issued for a 5-turbine wind facility, arguing it would cause serious harm to human health and serious and irreversible harm to the natural environment, and that the REA process violated section 7 of the Charter.
The Tribunal reviewed extensive expert evidence on wind turbine noise, infrasound, and health impacts, concluding the Appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the project would cause serious harm to human health.
The Tribunal also found no Charter violation due to the lack of an evidentiary foundation for serious physical or psychological harm.
Finally, the Tribunal rejected the environmental claims, finding the project would not cause serious and irreversible harm to bird species at risk or their habitat.
The appeal was dismissed.