ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD

INFORMATION PACKAGE

Town of Strathmore

Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act Amending Approval No. 1190-01-13 (Our Files: EAB 05-053 & 054)

HEARING

February 12-14, 2007, 8:30 am Strathmore,

Please contact: Environmental Appeals Board Gilbert Van Nes 306 Peace Hills Trust Tower General Counsel and 10011 – 109 Street Settlement Officer Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3S8 Phone: (780) 427-6207 Fax: (780) 427-4693 E-Mail: [email protected] www.eab.gov.ab.ca

The Environmental Appeals Board is a separate and independent body that reviews certain decisions made by Alberta Environment. The Environmental Appeals Board is separate and apart from Alberta Environment and is composed of environmental experts from a variety of disciplines.

Set Up and Restrictions for Media:

• Please do not proceed past the public gallery. • No flash photography. • Please enter and exit by the rear door only while the Board is in session. • Please turn off cell phones and pagers.

If you have any questions about the Board or these proceedings, please contact Board staff. Gilbert Van Nes would be pleased to answer your questions.

Layout for Room:

Board Panel

Board Witnesses Staff

Elders Siksika Town of Nation Strathmore

Alberta Environment

▲ DO NOT PROCEED PAST THIS POINT ▲

Public Gallery

BRIEF SUMMARY:

This Hearing is with respect to Notices of Appeal filed by the Siksika Nation Elders Committee and the Siksika Nation regarding an Amending Approval issued by Alberta Environment to the Town of Strathmore for their wastewater system allowing the construction of a pipeline and the discharge of treated waste water into the Bow River.

2 Environmental Appeals Board Panel: Dr. Steve E. Hrudey, Chair Mr. Ron Peiluck, Vice-Chair Mr. Al Schulz, Board Member

Environmental Appeals Board Staff: Gilbert Van Nes, General Counsel and Settlement Officer Valerie Myrmo, Registrar of Appeals Marian Fluker, Associate Counsel

Appearances: Appellant: Siksika Nation Elders Committee Witnesses: Elder Roy Little Chief, Donna Breaker, Kelly Breaker

Appellant: Siksika Nation Represented by: Rangi Jeerakathil, McPherson Leslie & Tyerman Witnesses: Hester Breaker, Chair, Siksika Water Advisory Panel; Ron Doore, Water Plant Operator; Gerry Gustad, Wastewater Advisor; Roy Crowther, Alpine Environmental Ltd.; James Marr, Banner Environmental Engineering Consultants Ltd.; and Clemen Bear Chief, Floyd Royal and Anne McMaster, Siksika Nation Elders

Approval Holder: Town of Strathmore Represented by: Sabri Shawa, May Jensen Shawa Soloman Witnesses: Dwight Stanford, Town Manager, Town of Strathmore; J.P. Bechtold, Golder Associates; Mark Ruault, UMA Engineering; Patricia Cross, Madawaska Consulting; and Steve Stanley, EPCOR Water Services Inc. and EPCOR Technologies Inc.

Director, Alberta Environment: May Mah-Paulson, Director, Southern Region, Alberta Environment Represented by: Charlene Graham, Alberta Justice Witnesses: May Mah-Paulson, Director, Southern Region, Alberta Environment; and Frank Lotz, Alberta Environment

Intervenors: Jim Webber, Western Irrigation District

Description of Appeals:

The Environmental Appeals Board received Notices of Appeal from the Siksika Nation Elders Committee and the Siksika Nation (Notices of Appeal attached) appealing the Amending Approval issued to the Town of Strathmore under the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act by Alberta Environment. The Amending Approval is

3 an amendment to an existing approval to construct a wastewater pipeline and associated outfall to the Bow River. The treated effluent pipeline will originate at the Strathmore wastewater storage cells located in the SE ¼ 11-24-25-W4M. The effluent conveyed by the pipeline is to be treated at the Strathmore wastewater treatment facility to tertiary standards, which includes removal of nitrogen and phosphorus nutrients. Treated effluent will discharge from an armoured outfall into an existing surface channel running along the toe of the embankment approximately 100 metres to the secondary channel at the confluence with the Bow River.

A complete copy of the Board’s file in this matter is available for viewing at the Strathmore Municipal Library during its normal operating hours, and at the Office of the Environmental Appeals Board in Edmonton.

Hearing Procedures:

The procedures for the Hearing are as follows:

1. The Hearing will be held February 12-14, 2007 until approximately 4:30 pm each day. There will be a lunch break of approximately 1 hour. The Board may also recess the Hearing from time to time as it deems appropriate.

2. The Board will open the Hearing with a brief presentation outlining the procedures for the Hearing. Elder Little Chief, Mr. Jeerakathil, Mr. Shawa, and Ms. Graham will each be permitted to give a brief opening statement for up to 5 minutes. The opening statements should consist of a brief summary of the case the party intends to present to the Board during the Hearing.

3. Mr. Webber will be permitted to make a presentation for up to 10 minutes, followed by up to 5 minutes of cross-examination by each Elder Little Chief and Mr. Jeerakathil.

4. Elder Little Chief will be permitted to present direct evidence for up to 4 hours, followed by up to 40 minutes of cross-examination by each Mr. Shawa and Ms. Graham. The Board is allowing extra time for the Siksika Nation Elders Committee to present their case in the event the Siksika Nation Elders Committee requires the services of a translator.

5. Mr. Jeerakathil will be permitted to present direct evidence for up to 1 hour and 30 minutes, followed by up to 40 minutes of cross-examination by each Mr. Shawa and Ms. Graham.

6. Mr. Shawa will be permitted to present direct evidence for up to 1 hour and 30 minutes, followed by up to 40 minutes of cross-examination by each Elder Little Chief and Mr. Jeerakathil.

4 7. Ms. Graham will be permitted to present direct evidence for up to 1 hour and 30 minutes, followed by up to 40 minutes of cross-examination by each Elder Little Chief and Mr. Jeerakathil.

8. All parties will then have an opportunity to make closing comments. Elder Little Chief, Mr. Jeerakathil, Mr. Shawa, and Ms. Graham will each be permitted up to 20 minutes for closing comments. Finally, as the burden of proof lies on the Appellants, Elder Little Chief and Mr. Jeerakathil, will be permitted to make a final comment for up to 5 minutes.

9. The Board will consider granting the opportunity to present rebuttal evidence from the Appellants upon receipt of a request from Elder Little Chief and/or Mr. Jeerakathil. The purpose of rebuttal evidence is to respond to any evidence presented by the other parties that could not reasonably have been anticipated at the start of the Hearing. The presentation of new evidence that does not respond to the evidence of the other parties is not permitted.

10. Redirect evidence will be permitted where appropriate and at the discretion of the Chair.

11. Time limits will be strictly enforced by the Board and a timer will be used. The parties should have prepared their presentations and questioning with these time limits in mind.

12. During direct evidence parties may call their witnesses (testimony will be sworn) and present their case. Cross-examination will only be permitted between parties that are adverse in interest to each other. There are two main purposes of cross-examination. The first is to give the party an opportunity to ask questions of a witness adverse in interest, based on their testimony or statements, in order to support the party’s position. The second purpose is to challenge the validity or accuracy of that witness’ statements or testimony.

13. At each stage in the proceeding the Board may ask questions of the parties.

14. The Board will be recording the proceedings for its own use.

15. The Hearing is open to the public for viewing only.

Stay Request:

The Siksika Nation, Chief and Council, filed a Stay application with the Board. The Board will hear oral arguments from Siksika Nation, Siksika Nation Elders Committee, the Town of Strathmore, and Alberta Environment, at some point during the Hearing on February 13 or 14. The Stay application that is before the Board is a complex question, requiring the Board to balance the interests and concerns of the Siksika First Nation and

5 their potable water plant, with the interests and concerns of the Town of Strathmore and their sewage treatment system.

The Board’s Report:

Once the Hearing is concluded, the Board will issue its Report and Recommendations to the Minister of Environment in accordance with section 99 of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. The Board will recommend to the Minister to confirm, reverse, or vary Alberta Environment’s decision to issue the Approval. The Minister will then make the final decision with respect to this appeal by issuing a Ministerial Order. Once the Minister has made his decision, the Board will ensure that all parties to these appeals receive a copy of the Board’s Report and Recommendations and a copy of the Minister’s Order. If you wish to receive a copy of the Board’s Report and Recommendations or have any questions about the proceedings today, please speak to Gilbert Van Nes at this venue today. Board staff can also be reached at (780) 427-6207, or via e-mail at [email protected].

About the Environmental Appeals Board:

The Environmental Appeals Board was established on September 1, 1993, by the proclamation of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. In 1994, the Board was given jurisdiction under the Government Organization Act, and in 1999, the Board was also given jurisdiction under the Water Act to hear appeals of certain matters.

The Environmental Appeals Board provides Alberta citizens and industry with a mechanism to appeal certain decisions made by Alberta Environment regarding a range of environmental issues stemming from the approval of activities that have environmental consequences. The Board offers those persons who are directly affected by such activities an opportunity to have their concerns heard. As such, the Board plays an important quasi-judicial role in ensuring the protection, enhancement, and wise management of the environment. In this role, the Board is committed to taking a proactive stance in the fair, impartial, and efficient resolution of all matters before it.

The Board is in a unique position in relation to the Department of Environment and the Ministry of Environment. For budgetary reasons and for the purpose of providing the Minister with its decisions and reports, and notwithstanding the Board’s effort to balance environmental and economic interests, the Board remains aligned with the operations and goals of the Ministry of Environment. However, in order to maintain its adjudicative objectivity, the Board operates at arms-length from the Department of Environment, allowing it to maintain a necessary degree of independence.

The Board is comprised of appointed Board members who are supported by Board staff. Board members are appointed by Cabinet (under the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, section 90(1)) based on their background and expertise in environmental or policy fields. All members are part-time and are paid on a per diem

6 basis (set by Order in Council) and are reimbursed for their expenses. Staff, including legal and research staff, are employed by the Alberta Government, who facilitate the Board’s operations and adjudication. The fundamental premise of the Board’s operation is that the staff embraces the fiscal, environmental, and human resource goals of both the government and the Board. The Board approaches each appeal with an impartial and unbiased view while remaining cognizant of the operational goals within the Ministry of Environment. The Board’s organizational structure has helped to ensure efficiency and productivity without compromising its purpose and integrity.

Environmental Appeals Board Panel Members for February 12-14, 2007:

Steve E. Hrudey, Chair Dr. Hrudey has a risk management and environmental health sciences background, with a Ph.D. in Public Health Engineering and a D.Sc. (Eng) in Environmental Health Sciences and Technology from the University of London. He is currently a Professor of Environmental Health Sciences and Associate Dean (Academic) of ’s first School of Public Health at the University of Alberta. After developing the environmental engineering and science program in the University of Alberta’s Department of Civil Engineering, he moved to establish an environmental health sciences program in the Department of Public Health Sciences in 1988. His areas of research expertise are drinking water safety, environmental contaminant exposure assessment, environmental decision-making, and approaches for health risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication. He held the Eco-Research Chair in Environmental Risk Management from 1993 to 1998. Dr. Hrudey has served on several editorial boards, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) strategic grants panel on environmental quality, and the NATO Priority Panel on Environmental Security in Brussels, and he chaired the Royal Society of Canada Expert Panel to review social economic models for Canada-wide air quality standards. From 2000 to 2002, Dr. Hrudey served as a member of the Research Advisory Panel to the Walkerton Inquiry, and he served as Leader of the Protecting Public Health Program for the Canadian Water Network until July 2005. He was appointed in June 2005 to the Science Advisory Council for the National Collaborating Centres of the Public Health Agency of Canada. In May 2006, he was appointed to a 3 member expert panel to conduct public hearings across Canada to advise the Federal Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs on regulatory options to assure safe drinking water for communities in Canada. He has extensive experience with scientific evidence in environmental cases before courts and tribunals as an expert witness, scientific advisor and as a decision-maker. He has authored or coauthored 140 refereed journal articles, 5 books, 12 book chapters, 6 expert panel reports, and over 100 other publications in environmental sciences. Dr. Hrudey was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, Academy of Sciences, in 2006 and he was also named as a winner of the 2006 TD/Canada Trust Walter Bean Environment Award at the University of Waterloo, and the 2006 Distinguished Visiting Speaker at the National Water Research Institute. Previously, he was awarded the Killam Annual Professorship (2003) for overall academic contributions (Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry), an Emerald Award for Environmental Research in Alberta (1995), the Albert

7 Berry Medal for contributions to environmental engineering in Canada from the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering (1991), and the McCalla Research Professorship (1986 in the Faculty of Engineering) at the University of Alberta.

Ron Peiluck, Vice-Chair Mr. Peiluck is Managing Director of SCOPE Environmental and Projects, Alberta-based companies that provide environmental and landscape architectural design and contracting services to a broad range of private and municipal clients; Scope Projects Inc. specializes in the design, construction and maintenance of patented wetland and biofiltration systems for application in golf course, residential and commercial ponds. Mr. Peiluck has a BSc from St. Johns College in chemistry, microbiology and earth sciences. He obtained a Diploma in Business Administration after successfully completing the first year of the MBA program at the University of Western Ontario. After graduate studies and applied research at the universities of and Manitoba, he earned an MA in resource planning. Mr. Peiluck obtained his national certification to conduct environmental site assessments between 2000 and 2004. During his position as President of The Lombard North Group Ltd., the company grew to become the largest landscape architectural based environmental, planning and engineering firm in Canada. He has extensive experience as an advisor and witness to 24 judicial and quasi-judicial boards, including the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, Alberta Natural Resources Conservation Board, the U.S. Federal Power Commission, and the National Energy Board. Mr. Peiluck has extensive international experience having worked in 7 countries including Brazil, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

Al Schulz, Board Member Mr. Schulz holds a B.Sc. in Chemical Engineering and a M.Eng. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Alberta. He served the Alberta Government from 1968 to 1997, concluding his career as the Assistant Deputy Minister of Environmental Regulatory Services with Alberta Environment. Mr. Schulz is currently a consultant to industry, Regional Consultant with the Canadian Association of Chemical Producers, member of the Board of the Tire Recycling Management Association, and past Chair of the Environmental Committee of the Alberta Professional Engineers, Geologists, and Geophysicists of Alberta.

8 Schedule for February 12, 2007: This schedule is a guide only and is subject to change.

Order of Presentation Time Allotted Estimated Schedule

Hearing start time Day 1 8:30 AM

Opening speech by the Board Chairman 0:15 8:45 AM

Opening Comments by the Siksika Elders Committee 0:05 8:50 AM

Opening Comments by Siksika Nation 0:05 8:55 AM

Opening Comments by the Town of Strathmore 0:05 9:00 AM

Opening Comments by Alberta Environment 0:05 9:05 AM

Intervenor Presentation by Western Irrigation District 0:10 9:15 AM Cross-Examination of the Western Irrigation District by the Elders Committee 0:05 9:20 AM Cross-Examination of the Western Irrigation District by the Siksika Nation 0:05 9:25 AM

Board’s Questions for the Western Irrigation District 0:15 9:40 AM

Direct Evidence of the Siksika Elders Committee 4:00 1:40 PM

Lunch 1:00 2:40 PM Cross Examination of the Siksika Elders Committee by the Town of Strathmore 0:40 3:20 PM Cross Examination of the Siksika Elders Committee by Alberta Environment 0:40 4:00 PM

Break 0:15 4:15 PM

Re-Direct Evidence by the Siksika Elders Committee 0:05 4:20 PM

Board's Questions for the Siksika Elders Committee (estimate only) 0:30 4:50 PM

Approximate time for end of Day 1 of Hearing. 4:50 PM

Schedule for February 13, 2007:

Order of Presentation Time Allotted Estimated Schedule

Hearing start time Day 2 8:30 AM

9 Opening speech by the Board Chairman 0:05 8:35 AM

Direct Evidence of Siksika Nation 1:30 10:05 AM

Break 0:15 10:20 AM

Cross Examination of Siksika Nation by the Town of Strathmore 0:40 11:00 AM

Cross Examination of Siksika Nation by Alberta Environment 0:40 11:40 AM

Re-Direct Evidence of Siksika Nation 0:05 11:45 AM

Board's Questions for Siksika Nation (estimate only) 0:30 12:15 PM

Lunch 1:00 1:15 PM

Direct Evidence of the Town of Strathmore 1:30 2:45 PM

Break 0:15 3:00 PM Cross Examination of the Town of Strathmore by the Siksika Elders Committee 0:40 3:40 PM

Cross Examination of the Town of Strathmore by Siksika Nation 0:40 4:20 PM

Re-Direct Evidence of the Town of Strathmore 0:05 4:25 PM

Board's Questions for the Town of Strathmore (estimate only) 0:30 4:55 PM

Approximate time for end of Day 2 of Hearing. 4:55 PM

Schedule for February 14, 2007:

Order of Presentation Time Allotted Estimated Schedule

Hearing start time Day 3 8:30 AM

Opening speech by the Board Chairman 0:05 8:35 AM

Direct Evidence of Alberta Environment 1:30 10:05 AM

Break 0:15 10:20 AM Cross Examination of Alberta Environment by the Siksika Elders Committee 0:40 11:00 AM

Cross Examination of Alberta Environment by Siksika Nation 0:40 11:40 AM

Re-Direct Evidence of Albert Environment 0:05 11:45 AM

Board's Questions for Alberta Environment (estimate only) 0:30 12:15 PM

10 Lunch 1:00 1:15 PM

Rebuttal by the Siksika Elders Committee (if permitted) 0:07 1:22 PM Cross Examination of the Sikiska Elders Committee by the Town of Strathmore 0:05 1:27 PM Cross Examination of the Sikiska Elders Committee by Alberta Environment 0:05 1:32 PM

Re-Direct Evidence of the Siksika Elders Committee 0:05 1:37 PM

Board’s Questions for the Siksika Elders Committee (estimate only) 0:30 2:07 PM

Rebuttal by Siksika Nation (if permitted) 0:07 2:14 PM

Cross Examination of Siksika Nation by the Town of Strathmore 0:05 2:19 PM

Cross Examination of Siksika Nation by Alberta Environment 0:05 2:24 PM

Re-Direct Evidence of Siksika Nation 0:05 2:29 PM

Board's Questions for Siksika Nation (estimate only) 0:30 2:59 PM

Break 0:15 3:14 PM

Closing Comments by the Siksika Elders Committee 0:20 3:34 PM

Closing Comments by Siksika Nation 0:20 3:54 PM

Closing Comments by the Town of Strathmore 0:20 4:14 PM

Closing Comments by Alberta Environment 0:20 4:34 PM

Final Closing Comments by the Siksika Elders Committee 0:05 4:39 PM

Final Closing Comments by Siksika Nation 0:05 4:44 PM

Closing Speech by Board Chairman 0:05 4:49 PM

Approximate time for end of Day 3 of Hearing 4:49 PM • Allocated times may also vary during the Hearing and any changes to the times will be at the discretion of the Chairman. • The times for lunch and breaks may vary and will be decided by the Chairman. • Time for questioning of the parties by the Board may vary because the length of time required for questioning cannot be determined until the Board has heard all of the evidence. • The parties should have prepared their presentations and questioning with these time limits in mind. • The Board will hear oral arguments with respect to the Stay application filed by the Siksika Nation, Chief and Council, at some point during the Hearing on February 13 or 14.

11

•i/1G12886 19:25 4837342885

84/89 PAGE 483-297-6869

•ECEIVED January

16, 2006 BY

JAN

1 200• 7

Environmental Alberta Appeals Bared

306 Peace Trust Hills Tower

10011 109 Street

Edmonton, Alberta

3S8 T5J

Attention: Denise Black, Secretary Board

EAB File-• AEB05-053

Dear Madam,

Take Notice That,

!, Donna Breaker,

of #1, Strathmore, RR Box 34, Alberta,

(403) TIP 1J6,

myself

7342344,

con=•ider by affected

decision made the pursuant a to

Environmental

Protection Act, hereby

Enhancement and and

APPEAL

to

Environmental the Appeals Board.

appealing the decision May of Mah-Paulsen.

am Approvals

Manager,

dated

Environment, Alberta Southern

Region November 24, 2005

to issue

Amending

Approval No. 11901-01-13

the to Town of Strathmore for

the

construction, operation

and of reclamation wastewater system. a

Alberta

of received notice

Environment's

decision

November 24,

2005,

on

when Frank Lotz Tmcy and Campbell

Environment Alberta from

called

me

home

at

and

told that the approval

given going me be to the Town to

was of

Stralhmore.

had why wondered had heard back not Alberta from

Environment

consideflng

that

appeal letter sooner

faxed my

on was

October 3, 2005.

obie•

Envlr0n•.ent's Alberta tq dec•__k•n foil the for _owing masons_.

1.

the spokesperson for Sikslka Nation's the am Elders Committee.

•--'MlY=matl•r,i=•al•_elR•l•f•t

..1•, ,EL•,•.•Ittee.

As Holder of a

81/16/2886 19:25 4837342885

81116/2•6 18; e6 483-29"i-6869

When of first brought project, learned this I. the

the matter Elders to

Committee's happened attention. the public to notice the in see

Strathmore

Standard There

also

information rmwspaper.

was

some

(very posted poorly) local Sikei• in the Nat•on post office.

Them

notlflc, project of the lack atlon by of the Town of proper a was

Strathmore Siksika Eldem the to

Committee 81kslka

residents, and to

especially RIVER. those along BOW the live who

tl•e.project

There

Information regarding provided was

no to the was

EidersCommittee by

Town the Strathmore.

There

of reliable

was no

by provided professionals. •lata

Therefore, 5, lack there

of consultation with Elders the proper a was

Committee by the Town of Strathmore.

Conee..n• re•ardlna the Eqvirqpmeplt Alberta Decislgn

object project, the the extremely to location dose

pipeline of

the

and

outfall to the boundary. Reserve One of Elders the

explained this

(the =It water) should have way, time itself.'. dean Another to Elder

following: said the

"Families who live flood only will deal

in not with muddy

areas

but

will also (poopy deal water- with water),

This

now Is

sewer

HEALTH HAZARD families, those to animal plant and a life.

We

Native

people taught

for environment to as are

care

our

including

WATER;

First Nations have respected and

as we

passed

children to what taught! our on were we

We dght have speak regarding to every saving out natural

pure

Despite

water.

worldwide and Canadian

campaigns

on

ensuring safe quality

project

thls water

is another example of

what (fork

tongue) call

thing and we do say the one

you

opposite

always

not to be busted. It's the

dominant

society

to

air, water, the land,

Stun, etc. animals We own humans too. are

81/16/2886

19:25

4837342885

86/09

PAGE

83-•16/2886 18: 4•3-297-68B9 BB • RF_.6 SUC5 Pt•E• 83]85

signed Treaty We fights 1877 have in includes land, and water

We

surrendered dghts protect land, to resources. never

our

our

environment." water and

There along 7. grounds sacred including the river, burial sites that are

protected to need be that have been identified. not

Our people still Vis'mn Quests along for

they

dyer

the go

go

near

they the days river- nights, where fast and for 4 4 is it unknown how

project this will affect them,

idea the have We pipeline what the of

appearance and will outfall

no

aesthetics) (noise, look like smell, it prevent from people using may

portion that of the river,

10, We

do not have that redamalJon Ihe

assumnP,

of the es

process

pipeline outfall the will satisfactory. be or

Siksika 11. historically community

have residents

collected

and

harvested along plants (including the medidnal, river

food and

ceremonial purposes).

We have guarantees that outsiders

will

not no

highly disturb

We sensitive want to that our these

areas. ensure

protected, areas are

Sweetgmss

12.

along the dyer

would like

grows

we

assurances

this going that be protected. is to

unwilling People

13.

catch fish from and to

eat the fiver. We am

do

know not how this project degrade further will disturb and the river.

We 14.

would

like that I1 traditional

sites any assurances

are

discovered throughout the

they •onstru•lion that

will

notify process,

the authofltles appropriate

(the Elders) Slksika in

to order

preserve

the sites.

consideration

15. In time of the time

factor and

the lack of

allowed

for Siksika community Including Elders members the

Inform to

themselves,

debate to think and to Issues, about

the eleventh

this

hour

opportunity tO inform

about outsiders historical relationship

our

with

lands and environment dear our indlcatom that Albeda are

81116/2886 19:25 4837342885

87/09

PAGE

91/1612886

18:8• 483-297-6869 SVCS •31JTI-EI• RE6 B4/B5 PAGE

granting already Environment by bias its has shown and cor•ructlon

environmental to/for the. review credible Town Strathmore. of a

appeal, it From 16. that schedules indicators to have appears our

been the of Strathmore set needs to of the than Town rather the

on

Sikaika like those of needs who again Nation will subjected

be once

such impacts evident withthe environmental and oli to

as gas

activities excessive in past the 5 years.

signatories Importantly, Treaty $1kslka 17. MoSt Nation 7 to

are

(1877). (EA) Envimnrnental do consider not

assessments

how

Infringe Treaty projects

aboriginal rights. Treaty and

dghts

on are

fi•doral fiduciary obligations.

well, 18. Alberta Environment's As decision failed to

consider

important health, Siksika sooial, values Nation's

to

Impacts,

cultural

traditional teachings and concerning ecological

traditional

knowledge.

long knowledge

going As be Ignored, to respected not is

and our as

of

approach then overall Including the

ecosystem to concern no our

protection, precautionan] water be in The the must absence extreme.

principles of of

Environmental

will Law further invite chaos our

to our

livelihood.

We would like the Board do the to

Ensure consult#don the Siksika Committee Elders with is proper

completed, This will tie take Elders and require enough

resources.

time for the information

understood end time be to consider

to what

they

They beard, have require presentation in language. their

own

This will tal•e patience. process

We like Board would the welcome to other significant of

eoumes

Insights through that available not science-based modem

are

research methods analyses, and

Allow

Siksika Nation community members stakeholders their to

as

alead lands

and environment

take

to role to

ensure more as

comprehensive

consideration ecological local of environment.. our 4

81/15/2886 19:25

4037342805

88/09

PAE;E

81t1612005

10:06 483-297-6869 e5I•5 P/•E

shadng 4, To for democratic information, promote

process a more

we

Stkslka the permit like Board Nation would to members make to

informed decisions. conclusions and

copies would also have hard of all like documents relating the to to this

appeal. have omputera. We do not c,

headng

for

The dependant the Elders and available dates

a are

upon

are

meeting hearing weather. the $1kslka held If the the Nation any on

or were

for .make it would easier it attend. much to reserve, us

would McMaster, include also President Ann Elders like to of tl•e

Committee another should Involved In who be this appeal. person She as

through: reached be can

Ann McMaster

President, Siksika Elders Nation Committee

Phone 403-734-2299

Box 81

Cluny, Alberta

T0J 0SO

There •, meeting is of the Elders Committee scheduled for Januan/18 a

2006.

We

would like opportunity (and raise to this issue provide

an

morn

information project have} the do.n't about which

to Elders the we

Committee.

also

would

Stay like application

for to submit to the

Board. If the an

a

pipeline construction ahead, of the will change difficult be it to

the goes very

location pipeline the of the out/all. It will

too much cost

and that or money,

should pipeline why be the not ahead. reason a goes

also would like

to disturbance that ado a lanai the is disturbance to felt a

by

trying We

the sacredness honour of to culture. person. a are our

Sincerely,

Donna Breaker

ALBERTA

ENVIRONMEHTAL APPF_.ALS BOARD

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Under 91), (Section Protection Enhancement and Act the Environmental under the (Section Water 115) Act

and

Organization (Schedule 5). Government under the Act

by Appeals This form be received within stringent Environmental Board the limits must time after receive

you

appealing. by decision Environment notice of the Alberta that These time limits

section

in set you out are

are

(4) 116( ) of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act and 91 section of the 1 Water Schedule Act and 5

Organization of GOvernment the wishing Those Act. lile Please Note: Notice Appeal electronically, of to

must

a

signature mail, appeal fax deliver with also their to: or

Appeals Environmental Board

306, 10011 109 Street

Edmonton, 3S8 Alberta T5J

(780) Fax: 427-4693

(780) (Toll 310-0000) Phone: 427-6207 Free:

gilbert.vannes Appeal @gov.ab.ca E-mail Notice of to:

You appeal Appeals wish Environmental by registered send the Board to

mail, to that

your may

know your you so

required appeal by theBoard time. is responsibility within the It received

that to Notice of your was ensure your

Appeal by received do have is the Board. If of EnvironmentaIProtection not the

Enhancement and Act

you

copy a

(Part Organization 9), 4), Act(Schedule (Part the Water Act the Government 5), the Environmental Appeal Board

Regulation, Practice, Environmental Appeals the Board's Rules of the Board provide will copies charge. free of or

TO: THE ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD

NOTICE THAT TAKE

Stimson, Chief Council,. Siksika Adrian of behalf Nation Chief the and Siksika I, and the Nation on

Province of Alberta the of

(403) (403) Phone: Fax: 734-5336 734-5337

myselt by

decision consider affected EnvironmentaIProtection made pursuant the to Enhancement and Act, WaterAct,

the

a

or

Organization Government the appeal Appeals hereby and Act the Environmental Board. to

The collected this information allow the form is Appeals Environmental to Board perform its to

necessaPj function. on

collected information is The authority under o! Information the Freedom the of Protectk•n Privacy of and Act,

33(c). section

Section 33(c) provides only personal inlormation collected il that that be directlyto information relates and may

is

for

necessary

processing the appeal. ol information, please Gilbert For Nes, Van General contact Counsel,

your Environmental more

Appeals Board phone the address and at number above.

1 ::ODMA•PCEK•S•.•skatoon\1392681\l

being represented, supply following please the information: If you are

Tyerman charge (lawyer Rangi MacPherson LLP & in file: Leslie Jeerakathg G. of

nd 1500, Saskatoon, 410-22 SK S7K Street East 5T6

(306) 975-7107 (306) 975-7145 Phone: Fax:

questions, provide information You please requested. the all •t have must the Board. contact Please the you that any

note

Board

file Appeal. information related matters until o! has We Notice have to do

Statement not ol Concern any you no

a your

filed thatyou Alberta consider with Environment and Board if the the raised matters Concern, Statement to want in you of

your

Appeal. repeat should those in Notice this of you concerns

IL

Mah-Paulson, May Region, Director Southern appealing decision Alberta Environment the of: am

24, Strathmore November Town of 2005 company/person) dated issued (name of to

activity subject operation Location which of is (municipality, decision Alberta Environment's o! etc.): county, or

Strathmore, AB

November 25, On emafl); (via 2005 what how did notice receive decision: Alberta Environment's date and of you

by

of received

Approval fax and e-mail the 16, December

2005 copy a on was

Please provide regarding

have decision tudIner intormation

the appealing. information The any you may be

•/ou

are

can

the decision the decision found

Environment notice from Alberta of and appeal. processing assist will in or on us your

(the May "Director") Amending Approval (Approval Mah-Paulson issued 1190-01-13) No. the under

an

Enhancement Environment Act, Protection and R.S.A.

E-12, 2000, amended November

24, 2005, in

as c. on

application by (Applicalion o! Strathmore 019-1190) Town No. the regarding to the construction, response an

operation and reclamation of Strathmore. Town for of system wastewater the a

Appeal II. o! submit this Notice under the:

Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, section 91

(Note: Alberta like? If What of Environment's decision do parts fail

objections not all of state to

here, you you your

ill

raising prevented appeal.) be in from them later you may your

("Siksika" The Nation") Siksika objects Nation "Siksika the No. 430 the approval the of to

or

by operation construction Strathmore and the Town pipeline of of and associated wastewater

a

being appropriate ouffail without the Bow River studies underlaken being without and to

measures

place Siksika address the of in the Nation. put to concerns

(Note: Alberta What Environment's decision? with respect If

to fail

all your to of state

are concerns you

your

reasons

prevented raising here, appeal.) later from them be in may you your

Siksika Nation is Alberta The decision of concerned that the 1. Environment

made the

was

on

including, evidence, basis of insufficient but limited not to

Golder by

The Memo relied Environment

is Alberta signed stamped by

upon not a.

or a

professional engineer reliable and is

with not report expert the respect to

as an or

required in addressed the Memo be by addressed legislation; matters applicable to or

assumptions Golder b. mixing about 100% The in the Memo the location ouffa]l and at

outfall

of Golder downstream the

false. location The Memo

did

not

are use

mixing appropriate mixing models and made incorrect assumptions its and assessment

discharge

of effects the the of Bow River the and downstream

is therefore

on users

incomplete and/or inaccurate;

2 =OOMA\PCDOCS•Saskatoon'•1392681\t

predict The used in Golder conditions the Memo

quality effects Bow water to the

c.

on

given discharge in River levels valid low flow the the (especially channel not

are

months). required mixing during winter the The the concentration levels to used meet

unlikely the Golder the in secondary in Memo throughout

channel to much

occur are

unlikely mixing complete

of will the is and it that for

distance extended year occur an

downstream;

Golder consider heavy pharmaceuticals d. The did metals Memo not and other or

pollutants; harmful

Data relied in Golder

collected the Memo

potentially of upstream the be to

e.

on was area

representative impacted conditions and of the is discharge. site the of not at

No from the of data collected (i.e.

that river reach of esed the i.

area was concern

by Nation); Siksika the and

vicinity

No from data collected the of Siksika's intake ii. systems; water was

by impacts L relied Golder Data does cumulative reflect the only of not the not on

increasing of treated but of addition urbanization, also and wastewater, other

impacts; impacts proposed upstream or

previous

Golder location The the

Memo based of the outfall The ouffall. .g. on was

analysis since location has moved and

been has upstream been of done the no

new

previous location; location whether is similar it the to or

Golder Suspended h. The Memo incorrect data used for Total Solids.

Environment The Siksika Nation Alberta is that issued concerned Approval the without

safeguards implementing sufficient that downstream

quality maintained, to

water ensure

was

including following: limited but the not to

requirement that upgrade Strathmore its There is

facilities;

treatment sewage a. no

potential effects the Siksika b. The intake adequately

systems water not

on

were

plugging including considered, limited the but infiltration of gravels; not to

provision requiring monitoring is heavy There the of levels

metals, of pesticides,

c. no

pharmaceuticals; and

requiring provision

is d. There that the effluent tested toxicity be for the to

at no

discharge point;

potential health risks Siksika Nation The serious the members other and to e.

adequately downstream addressed;

considered

not users or were

phosphorous guideline CCME Total levels will f. the exceed will and levels exceed

protective viability of the the in of will and reach 7 increased result in algal ecosystem

growth changes aquatic and other the mitigated; this and ecosystem to not was

Negative Impacts depositing habitat, fish by and fish the

deleterious of substances, g.

on

adequately considered; not were

impacts Other Cumulative considered. h. not were

3 ::OOMA\PCDOCS'•Saskatoon\1392681't1

Although recognized

independent Alberta Environment for the need review Golder of the

an

Study Effects Mitigation Use Memo Plan, Traditional and and provisions approval of the

a

undertaken

require all be that do be and all steps prior addressed not

the

to concerns

discharge by Strathmore, including of of Town the limited wastewater but to:

requirement independent is There review that

Goider of the completed Memo

be

no a. an

beginning discharge prior Strathmore river; the into wastewater to to

requirement

is that by independent There b.

the raised review addressed be no concerns

in way; any

provision whereby discharge There is by

the Town the Strathmore suspended of is

no

c.

pending analysis

implementation and/or

of Study Traditional the Use Effects the

an

or

Mitigation Impacts Plan.

Nation Siksika is concerned Environment The Alberta that 4. issued Approval the without

ensuring adequate Siksika consultation with that Nation place, the including took but not

limited to:

approval prior without adequate The issued

consultation with Nation; Siksika the was a.

provision

outlining the

b. There is which the in Town Strathmore of act no must manner

provided; Siksika's information the to upon response

provision The consultation is in the provision of "updating"

Siksika nature

more c. a

seeking

Siksika's input addressing and rather Siksika's than concerns;

Siksika that consultation in submits after such d. the

already approval has

manner a

satisfy requirement meaningful issued the of does been not consultation.

Such hearing

other 5. be this of

allowed out at set and by matter the may any concerns as

Appeal Board.

affecting you? Environment's

How decision (Note: IV.

is If Alberta fail state all

o! to

here, be you your

reasons you

may

raising prevented appeal.)

from later in them your (b)

directly by Siksika Nation is affected The of the Alberta decision 1. Environment. Slrathmore's

proposed outfall within location is kilometre of the

boundary. Reserve a new

unique biology The and River has being sensitive Bow which 2. negatively is affected by

a

levels, increased

suspended nutrient likely solids other and added components of

result

a

as

population regional rapid urbanization .and input expansion, the of and waters, storm

being additional nutrient The solids proposed load and discharged be wastewater. the to to

Strathmore under Approval just by river the Siksika of will lands upstream these

accelerate

likely negatively effects usability and affect will the of these

downstream in

waters to users a

cumulative manner.

Siksika the is downstream of River, Bow

drinking, relies 3. and household, it for

user a

on

agricultural, recreational, hunting, traditional and like fishing. trapping, and uses

The Nation has infiltration 4. the

has and Bow River gates

two about

effect the on concerns on

4 ::COMA•CDOC•'•Saskatoon\1392681•l

quality of

the its

will

that members and

water and of the potential costs

use consume

any

change facilities. Strathmore's proposed ouffall location to is located only approximately

15

infiltration km from Reserve

approximately the and gate km from 50 one another. on

Given proximity Nation's the 5.

River, the Bow the Nation submits to that effect the of

any

pollution

will intense be members, especially for its given

cumulative effects

more

through

City encountered 's discharge proposed the of into Bow the River upstream

of the Reserve.

The location of 6.

the Treaty Siksika under Reserve specifically 7 chosen

because

of its

was

proximity River, through the Bow which length the full to of Reserve. the passes

Reserve

Siksika The majority 7. makes the lands of within basin, of reach 7 river

the

which up

the longest is second

rights Siksika Treaty reach.

exercises its territory traditional

which

over

Bow includes surrounding River the

and

River, Bow the both within outside and of

the

areas

Reserve. b

As Sikslka result impacts

consulted about must the Bow Siksika River. to a

e

gi,ven

submits above, that

affected the

by Environment's it is Alberta decision in

much

a more

significant than.the AIbertan. way average

Such 8.

effects other hearing be the this of by out set at Appeal and allowed matter may the as

Board.

Why

do like by the decision

Environment? made (Note: not Alberta

fail I! you of

here, all state to you

your

reasons

prevented raising be from appeal.) them later in may you your

Siksika The Nation

by is decision that the concerned Alberta Environment

made: was

On the of insufficient basis evidence;

implementing

Without safeguards sufficient the maintenance to downstream of ensure

quality; water

Without ensuring adequate with consultation Siksika Nation; the c.

noting

By legitimate

d. Siksika, the of failing but

appropriate take action to to concerns

address the concerns;

Such

other

hearing be the this of set at out matter. e. reasons may as

would What Board

like the

(Note: do appeal? to resolve to If you fail

all your to

state solutions the you appeal

to

your

raising prevented here, be from later appeal.) them in may you your

The

Siksika's of consultants expert in the Expert

attached Reports set out concerns

must

as

meaningfully be

addressed implemented and recommendations

which any and

concerns

recommendations

include, limited but not to: are

Preparatior•

mixing

study, using of

information collected within the river

a. of reach a

investigations based hydrogeology and

of the flow and

concern within

patterns that on

reach,

including potential flow the of into paltern groundwater by

wells water used

Siksika adjacent and bed; River the Bow to

Conducting

independent,

b. risk-based

of the discharge proposed design

assessment an

and

impacts its downstream

users; on

5 ::OOMA•PCDOCS•Saskatoon•.1392681•.l

mid-channel diffuser Use of outfall;

the outlet at a c.

impacts

appropriate

of Assessment d. Siksika the Nation's traditional.uses of the on

river;

levels

Monitoring heavy pesticides of of metals, pharmaceuticals; and e.

Conducting

multi-level

f. toxicity for aquatic mitigate life tests deleterious to

effects to

on

life; aquatic

Upgrades Strathmore's plant; to treatment sewage g.

Testing of point effluent release toxicity; the h. the for at

Such

solutions i. other in

the attached

set expert out reports and be

out set as are

may

as

hearing of this allowed by and the the Board. at matter

impacts mitigation plan completed An by be evaluated Director. and must the

completed plan An be by and evaluated Director. the must emergency response

approval should No until be issued the Siksika of the Nation have been

evaluated concerns

adequately addressed. and

consultat'ion

Meaningful with required Siksika should during be and each the of at stages

the that Siksika of the

above adequately Nation

to addressed. ensure concerns are

Such hearing solutions

other be of this the by and out allowed at set the matter may as

Appeal Board.

Please feel copies attach additional free of documents assistance that be of Board. to the to may any

my

The information above best and the is information belief. of and correct to true

Submitted signed by:. and

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, December, Dated day this at 22nd 2005, of

[•angi

G. Jeerakathil

MacPHERSON LESLIE TYERMAN LLP &

1500-410 22nd Street East

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan

STK 5T6

6 ::ODMAW3DOCS•SaskaIoon•,la92681•1