Environmental Review Tribunal
Tribunal de l’environnement
ISSUE DATE:
December 21, 2016
CASE NO.:
16-064
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 140(1) of the Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19, as amended
Appellant:
Robert Anderson
Respondent:
Director, Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change
Subject of appeal:
Order to clean up and remove asbestos waste material
Reference No.:
8435-A9PLUN-1
Property Address/Description:
3632 Highway 15
Municipality:
City of Kingston
Upper Tier:
County of Frontenac
ERT Case No.:
16-064
ERT Case Name:
Anderson v. Ontario (Environment and Climate Change)
Heard:
In writing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
Robert Gary Anderson
Self-represented
Director, Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change
Paul McCulloch
DECISION DELIVERED BY JERRY V. DEMARCO
REASONS
Background
1On June 1, 2016, Brian Kaye, Director of the Kingston Office, Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change issued Director’s Order No. 8435-A9PLUN-1 (“Director’s Order”) to Robert Gary Anderson. The Director’s Order relates to material, alleged to be asbestos waste, that has been deposited on property owned by Mr. Anderson, located at 3632 Highway 15 in the City of Kingston.
2Mr. Anderson appealed the Director’s Order to the Environmental Review Tribunal (“Tribunal”) on June 6, 2016, and requested a stay of the work items. In an order dated July 29, 2016, the Tribunal granted the stay.
3On December 9, 2016, Mr. Anderson sent an “Asbestos Disposal Record” to the Tribunal and the Director. On December 13, 2016, Mr. Anderson wrote to the Tribunal indicating that he was withdrawing his appeal if the Director is satisfied that the material has been cleaned up. Later that day, the Director wrote to the Tribunal as follows:
Please see enclosed email from the provincial officer to Mr. Anderson indicating that the Director is satisfied with the clean-up efforts. There has not been any changes to the Director’s Order that is the subject of the appeal. The Director agrees that the appeal can be withdrawn. In accordance with Mr. Anderson’s email below, I ask that the Tribunal accept Mr. Anderson’s withdrawal and dismiss the appeal in accordance with Rule 199 of the Tribunal Rules.
Issue
4The only issue is whether the proceeding should be dismissed under Rule 199 of Tribunal’s Rules of Practice ("Rules").
Relevant Rule
5The following Rule applies:
Termination of Proceedings
- Where there has been a proposed withdrawal of an appeal agreed to by all Parties and the decision under appeal is not altered by a settlement agreement, a proposed withdrawal of an application, or a proposed revocation of an order made under section 74 of the Ontario Water Resources Act, the Tribunal shall issue a decision dismissing the proceeding.
Analysis and Findings
6By operation of Rule 199, the Tribunal shall dismiss a proceeding where there has been a proposed withdrawal of an appeal that has been agreed to by all parties, and the decision under appeal is not altered. As the decision under appeal is not altered in this case, Rule 199 directs that the Tribunal shall issue a decision dismissing the proceeding.
DECISION
7The Tribunal accepts the withdrawal of the appeal. Pursuant to Rule 199, the appeal is dismissed.
Appeal Withdrawn
Appeal Dismissed
“Jerry V. DeMarco”
JERRY V. DEMARCO
ASSOCIATE CHAIR
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