Ramani Nadarajah

The appellant appealed a Director's Order, an Amended Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA), and a Notice of Suspension of the Amended ECA regarding its facility in Sarnia.

At a Case Management Conference, the appellant indicated its intention to withdraw all appeals except for one item in the Amended ECA relating to the cessation of accepting and storing benzene.

The Tribunal ordered the proceedings closed and discontinued for the withdrawn appeals and scheduled a further Case Management Conference for the remaining issue.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals of an environmental compliance order concerning benzene emissions, three community members sought party status.

The Tribunal granted them party status under s. 145(1) of the Environmental Protection Act, finding their individual perspectives on health impacts would assist the adjudication.

The Tribunal also granted the appellant leave to amend its grounds for appeal in light of a new federal Interim Order and provincial regulation.

The appellants appealed the County's Official Plan Amendment 2 (OPA 2) and the Township's failure to make a decision on related official plan and zoning by-law amendments, which would permit an Environmental Resource Recovery Centre (ERRC) in a significant woodland.

The appellants argued the facility would have negative impacts on the natural heritage system and did not qualify for exemptions under the Growth Plan.

The Tribunal found that the proposed facility would not cause negative impacts to the significant woodlands or wildlife habitat, and that the required off-site afforestation and reforestation provided appropriate compensation.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals against OPA 2 and approved the related amendments in part, finding them consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and in conformity with the Growth Plan.

Nicholyn Farms Inc. brought a motion to adjourn the hearing of appeals regarding County of Simcoe Official Plan Amendment No. 2 (COPA 2) and to consolidate it with the hearing for appeals of County Official Plan Amendment No. 5 (COPA 5).

The County of Simcoe and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing opposed the motion, arguing that COPA 5 was not properly appealed and that an adjournment would cause significant prejudice and delay to the County's waste management objectives.

The Tribunal found that an adjournment would prejudice the County and the Ministry, and that the moving party failed to justify the delay.

The motion was dismissed.

The Ontario Land Tribunal issued a procedural order for the hearing of appeals concerning the Township of Springwater's proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 2 and Zoning By-law Amendment, which would permit a waste management facility in the Freele County Forest.

The order sets out the organization of the hearing, which will be conducted by videoconference in two parts, and establishes the requirements for the parties before the hearing, including the exchange of witness lists, expert witness meetings, and the filing of participant statements.

At a Case Management Conference regarding appeals for a proposed gravel pit expansion, the Ontario Land Tribunal granted participant status to two individuals on consent.

The Tribunal also substituted the Federation of Tiny Township Shoreline Associations for an individual objector.

A pending motion to consolidate an appeal regarding a permit to take water was scheduled to be heard at the next Case Management Conference.

The applicants sought a development permit to construct a second dwelling on their farm property within the Niagara Escarpment to facilitate farm succession.

The Niagara Escarpment Commission (NEC) conditionally approved the permit, which was appealed by the Coalition on the Niagara Escarpment.

The Hearing Officer recommended refusing the permit, finding that the proposal did not meet the strict requirements of the Niagara Escarpment Plan for secondary or temporary farm dwellings.

However, the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry rejected the Hearing Officer's recommendation and confirmed the NEC's decision to issue the conditional development permit.

The applicants sought to construct a secondary dwelling on a lot in the Niagara Escarpment Rural Area.

The Niagara Escarpment Commission conditionally approved the development permit, which was appealed by several parties.

Prior to the hearing, the applicants requested an adjournment to allow them to apply for an amendment to the Niagara Escarpment Plan.

The Hearing Officer granted the adjournment, finding it appropriate and an efficient use of resources, and scheduled a subsequent telephone conference call.

A pre-hearing conference was held regarding appeals of a Niagara Escarpment Commission decision to conditionally approve a development permit for a secondary dwelling.

The parties agreed on a timeframe for scheduling the hearing and requested a continuation of the pre-hearing conference to discuss possible resolution of issues.

The Hearing Officer scheduled the hearing, document disclosure dates, and a continuation of the pre-hearing conference.

The Concerned Citizens of Brant and the County of Brant appealed the issuance of a Permit to Take Water (PTTW) and an Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) for an aggregate washing operation at the Dufferin Aggregates Paris Pit.

The appellants sought revisions to the conditions of both instruments to provide greater protection to the local aquifer, particularly concerning water taking volumes, monitoring requirements, and the potential for atrazine contamination.

The Environmental Review Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving several revised conditions on consent of the parties, including clarifications to water taking limits and requirements for public posting of contingency plans.

However, the Tribunal rejected the appellants' requests for extensive additional monitoring and a new science risk assessment for atrazine, finding that the aquifer was not stressed, the existing conditions were sufficiently precautionary, and there was no credible threat of atrazine contamination from the operations.

The Directors and the Instrument Holder requested clarification of the remedy sought by the Appellants in their appeals of a Permit to Take Water and an Environmental Compliance Approval.

The Tribunal ordered the Appellants to provide particulars of their requested relief, including proposed wording for replacement conditions where possible, to promote an efficient and effective hearing process.

The Environmental Review Tribunal held a pre-hearing conference regarding appeals by the Concerned Citizens of Brant and the Corporation of the County of Brant against the issuance of a Permit to Take Water and an Environmental Compliance Approval to CRH Canada Group Inc. for an aggregate washing operation.

The Tribunal issued procedural directions and set a schedule for the exchange of documents, witness statements, and the hearing dates.

The applicant filed a complaint under section 174 of the Environmental Protection Act, alleging that the respondent employer failed to recall him from layoff as a reprisal for providing a statement to the Ministry of the Environment.

The employer argued that the applicant had been permanently laid off due to performance issues before they became aware of his involvement with the Ministry.

The Board found that the applicant's employment relationship had been severed at the time of his layoff, meaning he was not an 'employee' when the alleged reprisal occurred.

Although the Board found the employer's subsequent remarks to the applicant inappropriate and indicative of a reprisal, the application was dismissed because the statutory protection only applies to current employees.