Domtar property cleanup will cost $78M: developer
Tough government requirements ‘not necessary,’ Cherokee argues
Unreasonable cleanup demands by Alberta Environment toward the former Domtar industrial site in northeast Edmonton will cost more than $78 million and likely discourage future brownfield developments in the province, a developer charged Monday.
Cherokee Canada made the accusation during the first day of an Environmental Appeals Board hearing that will attempt to resolve a long and bitter dispute over the property north of Yellowhead Trail near 44 Street.
“This hearing is about a significant environmental public policy issue for Alberta,” Cherokee’s managing partner John Dill told the board’s three-member panel.
“Our failure here will have consequences that are provincewide.”
The 37-hectare property in question served as a Domtar Inc. woodtreatment operation from 1924 to 1987.
Cherokee bought the land in 2010 to build a residential subdivision.
Though some homes have been constructed, the development has since stalled and both companies are now fighting enforcement orders that demand extensive soil sampling and a cleanup of all contamination on the uninhabited portions of the site.
In imposing the orders, Alberta Environment is essentially insisting on a cost-prohibitive “dig and dump” approach in which all contaminated soil is hauled away, Cherokee executives said.
“We would never have undertaken this if there was any possibility we were obligated to provide a dig and dump approach to this site,” Dill told reporters. “The costs are high, the environmental impact is also high because you’d be trucking thousands of trucks through that neighbourhood and filling up Alberta landfills, when it is not necessary.”
Cherokee’s scientific experts told the panel that a more viable “risk management” and “exposure control” process should be allowed that tries to make use of existing soil in a way that is still safe for human habitation.
BERM A MAJOR SOURCE OF CONTROVERSY
In particular contention at the hearing is the company’s 2014-15 construction of a berm along the southern edge of the site that used a core of contaminated soil from the property covered by a layer of clean soil.
Cherokee said the design is safe and has been used successfully in other brownfield developments in Canada. The firm said Alberta Environment staff were initially supportive of Cherokee’s approach, and the company decided to go ahead with the project based on that government buy-in.
But a “sea change” then occurred in mid-2014, when department staff familiar with the file left for other jobs and a new team with a different attitude was assigned.
“Everything we had accomplished to that point was turned upside down … we were told it was all wrong, unauthorized and probably illegal,” Dill said.
Since then, Alberta Environment’s compliance director has used increasingly heavy-handed tactics — including new orders issued in March and July this year — against the firms while rejecting offers to discuss the science of the project, he said.
“What we have here is a director that shoots first and asks questions later.”
Alberta Environment contends it never gave approval for the berm.
The department’s lawyer Wally Braul accused the companies of attempting to obscure the situation by going through a history lesson, when the only relevant factor is the current condition of the land and the firms’ failure to address it.
He said the compliance director would be abdicating his duty if he didn’t demand immediate action on the site, especially since recent sampling found troubling levels of contaminants that call into question claims the site is safe.
“The orders were prepared in a dispassionate and careful manner,” Braul said.
Appeals board spokesman Gilbert Van Nes said eight days of testimony are expected, making this the longest hearing the board has ever conducted.
Domtar’s testimony is scheduled for Tuesday, followed by the City of Edmonton and Alberta Health Services on Wednesday.
City lawyer Michael Gunther spoke briefly Monday, saying a decision on the project must not be deferred and municipal taxpayers should not be on the hook.
“Something has gone horribly wrong with this project, we agree,” he said.
Alberta Environment and Parks is booked to give its arguments on Thursday and Friday. The hearing will then take a break until the week of Sept. 12 when three days have been set aside to wrap up the proceedings.
The panel will provide its analysis and make recommendations to the environment minister, who will make the final decision, likely come sometime in December.