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, Alberta
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 Canada’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 First Nations 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 Saskatchewan 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 Calgary'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