Decision Date: January 28, 2000

Panel: Cindy Derkaz

Keywords: Waste Management Act – ss.1, 3, 31; sandblasting; dust; definitions of “pollution” and “air contaminant”

This was an appeal by Peg-Rin Enterprises Ltd. of a Pollution Abatement Order Amendment made by the Assistant Regional Waste Manager in relation to dust emissions from Peg-Rin’s sandblasting operation in Thornhill, B.C. Peg-Rin sought to have the Order reversed.

The Order stated that Peg-Rin was to stop the “pollution” associated with its sandblasting operation and required Peg-Rin to: (1) develop and submit a plan to prevent dust from its operation from impacting on residents of Thornhill; (2) contract for the services of a consultant to analyze the sandblasting residue and recommend handling and disposal procedures, or alternatively, assuming the residue is special waste, to submit a plan for handling and disposing of the residue; and (3) carefully monitor dust emissions from the premises and use appropriate suppression methods to ensure that neighbouring residents and their properties were not affected. Peg-Rin sought to have the Order reversed on the grounds that it is not causing “pollution” and the Order is unreasonable because Peg-Rin has limited financial resources and is operating at a higher standard than others.

Based on evidence from the Assistant Manager and neighbouring residents, and on dust sample analyses, the Panel found that the sandblasting emissions were causing “pollution” and that the terms of the Order were reasonable in the circumstances. The Panel rejected the argument that Peg-Rin should not have to comply with the Order because its financial resources are limited or that others are not obeying the law. Furthermore, the Panel found that while Peg-Rin’s newly purchased dust collector and fibreglass sheeting might abate the sandblasting emissions, this was a matter for the Assistant Manager to decide upon receiving a plan in accordance with the Order.

The appeal was dismissed.