GROUNDS for PERMANENT WAR Land Appropriation, Exceptional

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

GROUNDS for PERMANENT WAR Land Appropriation, Exceptional GROUNDS FOR PERMANENT WAR Land Appropriation, Exceptional Powers, and the Mid-Century Militarization of Western North American Environments by Brandon C. Davis A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (History) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) May 2017 © Brandon C. Davis, 2017 ABSTRACT Few areas across globe have escaped the pressures of militarization. Despite the many significant developments and repercussions tied to the military control of vast areas of national territories, the complex intersections between militarization and the environment have only recently attracted scholarly attention. This dissertation argues that the contemporary condition of global permanent war and ongoing state of emergency are rooted in the military control of land and other natural resources. During the mid-twentieth century buildup of North American defense forces, the practice of military land appropriation not only legitimized and expanded certain types of unilateral, emergency powers but also produced secret and legally permissive spaces in which the exercise of such extraordinary powers and related military land use practices could be more freely conducted. A major impetus driving these mid-century land use developments was the rise of unconventional weapons of mass destruction. Not only did such weapons technologies destabilize the global political order but they also brought about a multitude of disruptions at local sites. By investigating the establishment and operations of two of the world’s largest, most secretive, and longest-lasting chemical and biological weapons proving grounds—the U.S. Army’s Dugway Proving Ground in western Utah and the Canadian-and U.K.-controlled Suffield Experimental Station in southeastern Alberta—this study reveals how the imperatives of permanent war have had critical influence in shaping the workings of power between local citizens, government, and the environment in western North America. At its core, this dissertation pushes back against the various assumptions and prerogatives driving the establishment of a permanent military presence in the North American West. All four chapters examine how varying elements of exceptional, emergency executive and administrative powers have shaped military land claims and practices of military land use. The study uncovers and demystifies the procedures, policies, and practices governing the establishment, operational activities, and ongoing control of North American defense lands. It provides a critical examination of the legal, material, and figurative grounds of our continuing and permanent global state of war. ii LAY SUMMARY Few doubt that militaries need substantial amounts of land for their operations, yet the question of why they need these lands, or how they acquired and have used them, has typically been taken as a given. This study examines the establishment, early operational activities, and ongoing control of North American defense lands. Chapter 1 looks into how the U.S. Defense Department acquired so much land, and highlights how the military’s claims to these lands rested on shaky legal foundations. Chapters 2 and 3 both investigate how militaries appropriated large tracts of western land for the establishment of permanent chemical and biological weapons testing sites. Chapter 4 looks beyond land claims and more closely at how the military’s control of land has facilitated the practice of controversial defense-related research activities. The study makes a case for the importance of investigating the origins and functions of North American defense lands. iii PREFACE This dissertation is an original, independent work by the author, B. Davis. A version of chapter 1 has been published in E.A. Martini, ed., Proving Grounds: Military Landscapes, Weapons Testing, and the Environmental Impact of U.S. Bases (2015). All materials reprinted by permission of the copyright holder, the University of Washington Press. All images are reprinted in accordance with usage agreements and citation guidelines for the reproduction of government and unpublished archival materials. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .................................................................................................................. ii Lay Summary ...................................................................................................... iii Preface ................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents ................................................................................................. v List of Figures ...................................................................................................... vi List of Abbreviations ....................................................................................... vii Acknowledgements ......................................................................................... viii Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1 Defending the Nation, Protecting the Land: Emergency Powers and the Militarization of American Public Lands ............. 36 Chapter 2 Military Sacrifice Zones and the Art of Permanent War: The Establishment of Utah’s Dugway Proving Ground, 1942-1954 .................. 79 Chapter 3 Military Dispossession and the Mobilization of History: The Establishment of Alberta’s Suffield Experimental Station, 1939-1947 .... 135 Chapter 4 Exceptional Weapons, Spaces, and Powers: Experimentation and Development at Suffield Experimental Station ........... 188 Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 245 Bibliography .................................................................................................... 262 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Map of Dugway Proving Ground .............................................................14 Figure 2: Map of Suffield Experimental Station ..................................................... 15 Figure 3: Ralston, Alberta ...................................................................................... 27 Figure 4: The Goshute Tract .................................................................................. 92 Figure 5: Dugway’s Dog Area (known today as Ditto Area) ................................ 105 Figure 6: The Road to Dugway............................................................................. 105 Figure 7: Dugway Golf Club .................................................................................. 111 Figure 8: Dugway as American Suburban Community ........................................ 111 Figure 9: The Final Two Choices for an Experimental Station .......................... 150 Figure 10: Agricultural Areas, Southeastern Alberta .......................................... 159 Figure 11: Suffield Block Landowners Moving Out ............................................ 170 Figure 12: National Defence moving into the Suffield Block .............................. 171 Figure 13: Layout for Field Trial .......................................................................... 216 Figure 14: Observer 25F of Suffield Field Experiment 229 ................................. 220 Figure 15: Health Consequences of Mustard Gas Exposure ............................... 229 Figure 16: Protective Gear Makes a Difference ................................................... 231 vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS BW—Biological Warfare CBW—Chemical and Biological Weapons CW—Chemical Warfare DHH—National Defence Headquarters Directorate of History and Heritage DND—Department of National Defence DOD—Department of Defence DPG—Dugway Proving Ground DRDC—Defence Research and Development Canada DTIC—Defence Technical Information Center FDR—Franklin Delano Roosevelt LAC—Library and Archives Canada MGO—Master-General of the Ordnance NRC—National Research Council NACP—National Archives and Records Administration at College Park RCMP—Royal Canadian Mounted Police UXO—Unexploded Ordnance vii AKNOWLEDEGEMENTS My name stands alone on the cover, but this work owes its existence to a rich network of people who have generously supported the author’s efforts. First and foremost, I am grateful to my dissertation supervisor Tina Loo for her encouragement, advice, patience, humour, and unapparelled professionalism and expertise. Thank you for your dedicated support in seeing this project through. I’m also deeply appreciative of Jessica Wang’s commitment to this work, and for always asking the right questions. I’d also like to express special gratitude to Matthew Evenden for his consistent, thoughtful, and long-term support; to Coll Thrush for being both a grounding influence and source of inspiration; to Bob McDonald for the many engaging conversations and for always having my back; and to Eagle Glassheim for his advocacy and guidance. I’ve also benefited greatly from the University of British Columbia's substantial support. The Phil Lind Award in U.S. Studies, the Alice H. Sorila Memorial Scholarship in History, and numerous University Graduate Fellowships made my studies possible. The History Department’s Graduate Research and Writing Fellowships also funded several research trips and provided a critical source of funding when completing this dissertation. For this assistance, as well as numerous teaching and
Recommended publications
  • The War Years
    1941 - 1945 George Northsea: The War Years by Steven Northsea April 28, 2015 George Northsea - The War Years 1941-42 George is listed in the 1941 East High Yearbook as Class of 1941 and his picture and the "senior" comments about him are below: We do know that he was living with his parents at 1223 15th Ave in Rockford, Illinois in 1941. The Rockford, Illinois city directory for 1941 lists him there and his occupation as a laborer. The Rockford City Directory of 1942 lists George at the same address and his occupation is now "Electrician." George says in a journal written in 1990, "I completed high school in January of 1942 (actually 1941), but graduation ceremony wasn't until June. In the meantime I went to Los Angeles, California. I tried a couple of times getting a job as I was only 17 years old. I finally went to work for Van De Camp restaurant and drive-in as a bus boy. 6 days a week, $20.00 a week and two meals a day. The waitresses pitched in each week from their tips for the bus boys. That was another 3 or 4 dollars a week. I was fortunate to find a garage apartment a few blocks from work - $3 a week. I spent about $1.00 on laundry and $2.00 on cigarettes. I saved money." (italics mine) "The first part of May, I quit my job to go back to Rockford (Illinois) for graduation. I hitch hiked 2000 miles in 4 days. I arrived at my family's house at 4:00 AM one morning.
    [Show full text]
  • 1St EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL SQUADRON
    1st EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE DISPOSAL SQUADRON MISSION LINEAGE 1st Ordnance Squadron, Special, Aviation activated, 6 Mar 1945 Inactivated Activated, 1 Nov 1946 1st Ordnance Squadron, Aviation Inactivated, 1 Oct 1948 Redesignated 1st Explosive Ordnance Disposal Squadron, 16 Jun 1952 STATIONS Wendover Field, UT Fort Worth, TX, 7 Dec 1946-1 Oct 1948 Wright Patterson AFB, OH, 16 Jun 1952-7 May 1954 ASSIGNMENTS 509th Composite Group Strategic Air Command COMMANDERS Maj Charles F. H. Begg HONORS Service Streamers Campaign Streamers Armed Forces Expeditionary Streamers Decorations EMBLEM MOTTO NICKNAME OPERATIONS Activated in March 1945 at a crucial stage in the progress of the War Department's atomic bomb program, the 1st Ordnance Squadron, Special (Aviation) became a member of the 509th Composite Group to bring overseas the men, skill, and equipment needed to assemble the atomic bombs which were dropped with such devastating effect on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The blows against these cities were a culmination for the members of the squadron and more than rewarded them for the hard work and long hours spent in training and testing for the raids which were to startle the world. The men had been working with top scientists on the atomic bomb program for over nine months in a military unit different from any standard army organization. Under the leadership of Major Charles F. H. Begg the squadron's personnel consisted of a group of picked officers and enlisted men from all branches of the armed forces. So exacting were the technical and military security requirements for the squadron that only twenty per cent of those having basic qualifications for the work were accepted.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Areas Board
    spEc1A+&m’#.3 ’ 1009 n A,&siment Commission shall have as its official seal, a seal bear- ing the words, “Alberta Assessment Commission, Alberta, Can- ada” in a circle with the coat of arms of the Province of Alberta, to be the official.sea1 of the Commission on, from and after the ~3rdday of April, 1935. JOHND. HUNT, (0.C. 1011-35) Clerk of the Executive Council. ORDER IN COUNCIL NUMBERED 965-35, AMENDED Edmonton, Saturday, August 31, 1935. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, by and with the advice of the Executive Council, has been pleased to order that Order in Council numbered 965-35, dated August 17th, 1935, appointing Thomas Pate‘rson Bell, of Lake Isle, a Police Magistrate, in and for the Province of Alberta, be and is hereby amended so that the address “Lake Isle,” shall read “Evansburgh.” JOHND. HUNT, (O.C. 1052-35) Clerk of the Executive Council. AUTHORITY FOR THE FORT OSTELL CHAPTER I.O.D.E. LIBRARY AT PONOKA, TO PROVIDE LIBRARY FACI- LITIES, APPROVED i! Edmonton, Saturday, August 31, 1935. His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, by and with the advice of the Executive Council, has been pleased to order (pursuant to the provisions of Subsection (4), of Section 34 of The Public Libraries Act), that Fort Ostell Chapter I.O.D.E. Library at Ponoka, be and is hereby authorized to provide public library facilities. JOHND. HUNT, (O.C. 1008-35) Clerk of the Executive Cxmcil. ’ THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL AREAS ACT; 1934 CONSTITUTION OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL AREA, TO BE KNOWN AS, “THE NEUTRAL HILLS AREA,” APPROVED Edmonton, Saturday, August 31, 1935.
    [Show full text]
  • Conclusions in Verse
    RepresentativeRepresentative SamplingSampling forfor EnergeticEnergetic CompoundsCompounds atat MilitaryMilitary TrainingTraining RangesRanges Sampling near tank target Sampling near low-order 500 lb YakimaTraining Center bomb, Camp Guernsey Red crater at CFB Gagetown Alan D. Hewitt, Thomas F. Jenkins, Marianne E. Walsh, Michael R. Walsh, Susan Taylor, Charles Ramsey, and Judith C. Pennington MajorMajor ClassesClasses ofof EnergeticEnergetic ChemicalsChemicals UsedUsed byby DoDDoD NO 2 CH3 N O 2 N NO2 Nitroaromatics N N O N (TNT) 2 NO 2 NO2 Nitramines (RDX) H C-O-NO 2 2 Nitrate Esters HC-O-NO (NG) 2 H 22 C-O-NO EnergeticEnergetic ChemicalsChemicals inin MilitaryMilitary ExplosivesExplosives • Composition B (artillery/mortar) 60% Military grade RDX (Contains about 10% HMX) 39% Military grade TNT (Contains about 1% other TNT isomers and DNTs) • Composition C4 (demolition explosive) 91% Military Grade RDX • Tritonal (Air Force Bombs) Military grade TNT, aluminum • Composition A4 (40-mm grenades) Military grade RDX • TNT (artillery) Military grade TNT • Composition H-6 (Air Force bombs) Military grade RDX and TNT, aluminum • Octol (Antitank rockets) Military grade HMX and TNT EnergeticEnergetic ChemicalsChemicals inin MilitaryMilitary GunGun PropellantsPropellants • Nitrocellulose (NC) Polymer used in all gun propellants • Nitroglycerin (NG) Component of double and triple base propellants • Nitroguanidine (NQ) Component of triple base propellants • 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (2,4-DNT) Energetic plasticizer in some single base propellants PhysicalPhysical
    [Show full text]
  • COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Tiny Cryptantha Cryptantha Minima in Canada
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Tiny Cryptantha Cryptantha minima in Canada THREATENED 2012 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2012. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Tiny Cryptantha Cryptantha minima in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. x + 37 pp. (www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm). Previous report(s): COSEWIC. 2000. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the tiny cryptanthe Cryptantha minima in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 18 pp. Smith, B. 1998. COSEWIC status report on the tiny cryptanthe Cryptantha minima in Canada, in COSEWIC assessment and status report on the tiny cryptanthe Cryptantha minima in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 1-18 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Sue Michalsky for writing the status report on the Tiny Cryptantha Cryptantha minima in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada. This report was overseen and edited by Bruce Bennett and Erich Haber, Co-chairs of the COSEWIC Vascular Plants Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur la Cryptanthe minuscule (Cryptantha minima) au Canada. Cover illustration/photo: Tiny Cryptantha — Source: Environment Canada 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Making a Manhattan Project National Historical Park
    Atomic Heritage Foundation Preserving and Interpreting Manhattan Project History & Legacy Making A manhattan Project National Historical Park AnnualAnnual ReportReport 2010 Why should We Preserve the Manhattan Project? “The factories and bombs that Manhattan Project scientists, engineers, and workers built were physical objects that depended for their operation on physics, chemistry, metallurgy, and other natural sciences, but their social reality - their meaning, if you will - was human, social, political. We preserve what we value of the physical past because it specifically embodies our social past. When we lose parts of our physical past, we lose parts of our common social past as well.” “The new knowledge of nuclear energy has undoubtedly limited national sovereignty and scaled down the destructiveness of war. If that’s not a good enough reason to work for and contribute to the Manhattan Project’s historic preservation, what would be?” -Richard Rhodes, “Why We Should Preserve the Manhattan Project,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2006 Remnant of the K-25 plant during the demolition of the east wing. See story on page 6. Front cover (clockwise from upper right): The B Reactor at Hanford, J. Robert Oppenheimer’s house in Los Alamos, and the K-25 Plant at Oak Ridge. These properties are potential components of a Manhattan Project National Historical Park. Table of Contents Board Members & Advisory Committee............3 George Cowan and Jay Wechsler Letter from the President......................................4 Manhattan Project Sites: Past & Present.......5 Saving K-25: A Work in Progress..........................6 AHF Releases New Guide............................................7 LAHS Hedy Dunn and Heather McClenahan.
    [Show full text]
  • Assented to , 1939.)
    BILL No.9 of 1939. All Ad to Amend and Consolidate the Special Areas Act, 1938. (Assented to , 1939.) HIS MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly 0:1; the Province of Alberta, enacts as follows: 1. This Act may be cited as "The Special Areas Act, 1939." 2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,­ (a) "Board" means the Special Areas Board appointed pursuant to this Act; (b) "Department" means the Department of Lands and Mines; (c) ."Land" includes in addition to its ordinary meaning .buildings and improvements thereon, but tioes not include any minerals therein or thereunder; (d) "Minister" means the Minister of Lands and Mines; (e) "Municipality" means any municipal district or im­ provement district or part thereof included in a Special Area; (I) "Person" includes a partnership or corporation; (g) "Public Lands" means unsubdivided lands situated in a Special Area which have been transferred to the Crown under the provisions of this Act, or which are Provincial lands or school lands within the meaning of The Provincial Lands Act, 1931, or which are designated as Public Lands. pursuant to any provisions of this Act; (h) "Ratepayer" means the person with the right of possession of land and includes any lessee of public< lands; ( i) "Special Area" means any Special Area constituted under the authority of this Act and includes Tilley· East, Berry Creek, Sounding Creek, Sullivan Lake, Neutral Hills and Bow West, now constituted as Special Municipal Areas; (j) "Unsubdivided Lands" means all land other than and except land subdivided into lots and blocks as a townsite, a plan of which is registered in a Land Titles Office.
    [Show full text]
  • High-Threat Chemical Agents: Characteristics, Effects, and Policy Implications
    Order Code RL31861 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web High-Threat Chemical Agents: Characteristics, Effects, and Policy Implications Updated September 9, 2003 Dana A. Shea Analyst in Science and Technology Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress High-Threat Chemical Agents: Characteristics, Effects, and Policy Implications Summary Terrorist use of chemical agents has been a noted concern, highlighted after the Tokyo Sarin gas attacks of 1995. The events of September 11, 2001, increased Congressional attention towards reducing the vulnerability of the United States to such attacks. High-threat chemical agents, which include chemical weapons and some toxic industrial chemicals, are normally organized by military planners into four groups: nerve agents, blister agents, choking agents, and blood agents. While the relative military threat posed by the various chemical types has varied over time, use of these chemicals against civilian targets is viewed as a low probability, high consequence event. High-threat chemical agents, depending on the type of agent used, cause a variety of symptoms in their victims. Some cause death by interfering with the nervous system. Some inhibit breathing and lead to asphyxiation. Others have caustic effects on contact. As a result, chemical attack treatment may be complicated by the need to identify at least the type of chemical used. Differences in treatment protocols for the various high-threat agents may also strain the resources of the public health system, especially in the case of mass casualties. Additionally, chemical agents trapped on the body or clothes of victims may place first responders and medical professionals at risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Intermunicipal Development Plan
    Special Areas Board & M.D of Acadia No. 34 INTERMUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Special Areas Board M.O No. XXXX & M.D Bylaw No. 2020-770 Adopted XXXX, XX, 2019 Prepared By: Palliser Regional Municipal Services [Insert Signed M.O. from Special Areas Board] M.D. OF ACADIA NO. 34 BYLAW NO. 2020-770 BEING A BYLAW OF THE M.D. OF ACADIA NO. 34 IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA TO ADOPT THE SPECIAL AREAS BOARD AND M.D. OF ACADIA NO. 34 INTERMUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS: pursuant to the provisions of Section 631(1) of the Municipal Government Act, as amended, the Council of the M.D. of Acadia No. 34 may, by Bylaw passed in accordance with Section 692 of the Municipal Government Act, adopt a plan to be known as: “SPECIAL AREAS BOARD AND M.D. OF ACADIA NO. 34 INTERMUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN” AND WHEREAS: a Public Hearing was held on _____________ , 2020, as required by Section 230 of the Municipal Government Act. NOW THEREFORE: THE COUNCIL OF THE M.D. OF ACADIA NO. 34 IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA, DULY ASSEMBLED, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Bylaw may be cited as “Special Areas Board and M.D. of Acadia No. 34 Intermunicipal Development Plan”. 2. Council shall adopt Special Areas Board and M.D. of Acadia No. 34 Intermunicipal Development Plan in consultation and as agreed to with Special Areas Board.” 3. This Bylaw shall take effect on the date of the third and final reading. READ A FIRST TIME THIS __ST DAY OF _______, 2020. MAYOR CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER READ A SECOND TIME THIS __ST DAY OF _______, 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Status Report on the Destruction of the United States Stockpile of Lethal Chemical Agents and Munitions for Fiscal Year 2019
    Annual Status Report on the Destruction of the United States Stockpile of Lethal Chemical Agents and Munitions for Fiscal Year 2019 September 30, 2019 The estimated cost of this report or study for the Department of Defense is approximately $740 for the 2019 Fiscal Year. This includes $0 in expenses and $740 in DoD labor. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1 II. Mission .................................................................................................................................1 III. Organization .........................................................................................................................1 IV. Current Status of U.S. Chemical Weapons Destruction ......................................................2 A. Site-by-Site Description of Chemical Weapons Stockpile Destruction……………….2 B. Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives Program……………………………..….3 V. Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program ......................................................5 VI. Funding Execution ...............................................................................................................7 VII. Safety Status of Chemical Weapons Stockpile Storage .......................................................8 APPENDICES A. Abbreviations and Symbols B. Program Disbursements C. Summary Occurrences of Leaking Chemical Munitions i I. Introduction The Department of Defense (DoD) is submitting
    [Show full text]
  • Encana Shallow Gas Infill Development in the CFB Suffield
    EnCana Shallow Gas Infill Development in IR Due Date: the CFB Suffield National Wildlife Area CEAA File #05-07-15620 August 2nd, 2007 IR Requested By: Federal Government IR No. Page CEAA-EIS-001 1 #Terr – 2 –C Reference: Volume 1, Section 1.3.2.1, Page 1-8 Preamble: EnCana comments on the primary approvals required under the Regulatory Framework. Request: GOC recommends that EnCana specify the requirements of the Master Access Agreement and the Partial Assignment Agreement as they apply to the approval process for development applications within the National Wildlife Area, formerly known as the Riverbank Zone, Middle Sandhills, and Mixed Grassland areas; specify the role of the Base Commander and the Suffield Environmental Advisory Committee and how the Project will conform to the Agreements. Response: The above-referenced Agreements (the “Agreements”) speak for themselves. EnCana does not purport to limit, expand or otherwise interpret the Agreements. EnCana remains bound by, and committed to, the Agreements. However, the Agreements clearly prescribe that: (i) NWA development applications are to be made to the EUB; (ii) the EUB shall seek the opinion of SEAC (the “Opinion”) in respect of such applications within the Riverbank and Middle Sandhill zones; but, (iii) the EUB shall not be bound by the Opinion. The Base Commander has no role in the approval process but may “give or refuse consent to,” or “order the performance or cessation of,” an act or thing relating to NWA development only on the unanimous recommendation of SEAC and only in the following circumstances: (i) within the Riverbank and Middle Sandhill zones; and, (ii) for the purpose of “developing natural gas as discreetly as possible” following “the development of protection measures.” In EnCana's view its policies and procedures as detailed in the EIS conform to all requirements of the Agreements.
    [Show full text]
  • De : Lagran [Mailto:] Envoyé : 15 Avril 2008 20:23 À : Macdonald,Keith [CEAA] Cc : [email protected]; [email protected] Objet : Reference #05-03-15620
    De : lagran [mailto:] Envoyé : 15 avril 2008 20:23 À : MacDonald,Keith [CEAA] Cc : [email protected]; [email protected] Objet : reference #05-03-15620 I think is extremely import for you three people I have addressed, and who are signatories to the Notice Of Commencement to meet again for follow -up to what has happened at the NWA in Suffield!! Without Alberta's tribunals involvement, we are unable to justify this ongoing proceedings as a Joint Review.The Alberta EUB [ERCB] have no place at a federal environment review other than as a contributor of information, certainly not as the center of the decision process! I would like to correct your statement that the project is subject to regulatory approvals of the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board. This is only so should drilling be approved by the Minister of Defense after a favorable environment review report from the Federal Minister of Environment. Since the ERCB rules of practice makes it impossible to have standing to intervene unless one is directly affected, the idea of a short cut by holding a Joint Hearing never did have any merit! Alberta Sustainable Resources, and Alberta Environment who rightly will not "play-along" with this silly underhanded way of handling a Federal Environmental Review, have left little choice but to retire the present EUB and their temporary board members. This became much more than a joint environmental review, it was taking "Roles and Responsibilities" of various parties information into account. The 1975 master operating agreement must
    [Show full text]