Environmental Review Tribunal
Tribunal de l’environnement
ISSUE DATE:
July 31, 2015
CASE NO.:
15-038
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 140(1) of the Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.E.19, as amended
Appellant:
Garry Swagerman (ERT Case No.: 15-038)
Appellant:
Mary Anne Swagerman (ERT Case No.: 15-039)
Respondent:
Director, Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change
Subject of appeal:
Order to complete an environmental investigation program including a vapour assessment
Reference No.:
2156-9W3SPK-1
Property Address/Description:
6 Thomas Street / 52 Simcoe Road
Municipality:
Bradford West Gwillimbury
Upper Tier:
County of Simcoe
ERT Case No.:
15-038
ERT Case Name:
Swagerman v. Ontario (Environment and Climate Change)
Heard:
July 27, 2015 in Bond Head, Ontario
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel/Representative+
Director, Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change
Justin Jacob and Stephanie Hewson (summer student)
Garry Swagerman and Mary Anne Swagerman
Self-represented
Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury
Brian Chung
ORDER DELIVERED BY HUGH S. WILKINS
REASONS
Background
1On May 19, 2015, the Director, Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (“MOECC”) issued Order No. 2156-9W3SPK (the “Order”) to Garry Swagerman, Mary Anne Swagerman and 1493243 Ontario Limited requiring the completion of an environmental investigation program, including a vapour assessment, to determine the extent of contamination at and in the vicinity of 6 Thomas Street / 52 Simcoe Road, Bradford West Gwillimbury, Ontario (the “Site”) and assess the potential for adverse effects in relation to the contamination. Garry and Mary Anne Swagerman own the Site and operated a dry cleaning facility there from the mid-1980s until 2001. 1493243 Ontario Limited purchased the dry cleaning business in 2001 and has operated it at the Site since then. 1493243 Ontario Limited has not appealed the Order.
2A preliminary hearing was held in Bond Head, Ontario, on July 27, 2015. At the preliminary hearing, the Environmental Review Tribunal (“Tribunal”) addressed a request for party status from the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury (the “Town”) and adjourned the preliminary hearing to a telephone conference call (“TCC”) to be held on September 21, 2015 at 2 p.m.
Issue
3The issue is whether the Tribunal should grant party status to the Town.
Relevant Rules
4The relevant rules of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice are:
- In deciding whether to name a person as a Party to the proceeding, the Tribunal may consider relevant matters including whether:
(a) a person's interests may be directly and substantially affected by the Hearing or its result;
(b) a person has a genuine interest, whether public or private, in the subject matter of the proceeding; and
(c) a person is likely to make a relevant contribution to the Tribunal's understanding of the issues in the proceeding.
- A Party to the proceeding before the Tribunal may:
(a) bring motions;
(b) be a witness at the Hearing;
(c) be questioned by the Parties;
(d) call witnesses at the Hearing;
(e) cross-examine witnesses;
(f) make submissions to the Tribunal, including final argument;
(g) receive copies of all documents exchanged or filed by the Parties;
(h) participate in a mediation;
(i) attend site visits; and
(j) claim costs or be liable to pay costs where permitted by law.
Discussion, Analysis and Findings
5The Town was represented by Brian Chung. He stated that the Provincial Officer’s report associated with the Order states that there is the potential for the contamination to spread off-site. He said the Town owns property adjacent to the Site and it will be directly and substantially affected by the hearing or its result should the contamination extend on to its property. He said the Town has a genuine interest as the local municipality and an adjacent land owner and can make a relevant contribution to the Tribunal’s understanding of the issues in the proceeding by providing municipal expertise on how to address the contamination.
6The Appellants and the Director did not oppose the Town’s request for party status.
7The Tribunal finds that as an adjacent land owner and public authority with expertise that will likely contribute to the Tribunal’s understanding of the issues in the proceeding, the Town meets the criteria under Rule 63 and grants it party status.
Other Procedural Issues
8The Director stated that the parties are presently making progress in satisfying the Order’s work items. The Director proposed that the scheduling of the hearing, setting of procedural due dates, discussions on the possibility of Tribunal assisted mediation, and other procedural matters should be postponed until work has progressed further. He suggested that a status update TCC should be scheduled for a date in mid-September 2015 at which time these issues can be better addressed.
9The parties consented to the Director’s proposed adjournment. The Tribunal finds that it is practical to postpone the scheduling of procedural due dates, the hearing, and possible mediation until after the work under the Order is further underway and the parties have a clearer perspective on the way forward.
10The Tribunal adjourns the preliminary hearing to a TCC to be held on September 21, 2015 at 2 p.m.
ORDER
11The Tribunal grants party status to the Town.
12The preliminary hearing is adjourned to a TCC to be held on September 21, 2015 at 2 p.m. The Tribunal case coordinator will forward call-in details for the TCC to the parties.
Request for Party Status Granted
Preliminary Hearing Adjourned
“Hugh S. Wilkins”
HUGH S. WILKINS
MEMBER
If there is an attachment referred to in this document,
please visit www.elto.gov.on.ca to view the attachment in PDF format.
Environmental Review Tribunal
A constituent tribunal of Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario
Website: www.elto.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248