Keywords:Environmental Management Act – ss. 53(1), 100(1); standing; jurisdiction; person aggrieved; approval in principle; remediation
This was a preliminary matter on whether Squamish Terminals Ltd. (“Squamish Terminals”) had standing to appeal a decision of the Deputy Director to issue an approval in principle (“AIP”) to the District of Squamish. The AIP authorized the District to implement a remediation plan on certain contaminated properties adjacent to lands owned by Squamish Terminals.
In deciding whether Squamish Terminals was an “aggrieved person” with standing to appeal the decision under section 100(1) of the Environmental Management Act (the “Act”), the Board applied the test of “whether the person has a genuine grievance because an order has been made which prejudicially affects his or her interests.”
The Board found that Squamish Terminals would not suffer any prejudice as a result of the Deputy Director’s decision to approve the AIP. The Board found no evidence to suggest that the AIP, or the remediation plans in the AIP, would cause Squamish Terminals any harm. Accordingly, the Board found that any grievance held by Squamish Terminals did not arise directly from the issuance of the AIP. The Board noted that Squamish Terminals could take advantage of other provisions under the Act to address its concerns regarding possible contamination of its property from the remediated site.
The Board found that Squamish Terminals could not be properly characterized as a “person aggrieved” by the decision to issue the AIP, and therefore, had no standing to bring the appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
