ENVIRONMENT |
Inverhuron & District Ratepayers' Assn. v. Canada (Minister of the Environment)
A-427-00
2001 FCA 303, Sexton J.A.
20/6/01
31 pp.
Appeal from Trial Division order dismissing application for judicial review of Minister of Environment's decision project to develop dry storage facility for used nuclear fuel at Bruce Nuclear Power Facility not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects--Bruce Nuclear Power Development located on Bruce Peninsula, on southeast shore of Lake Huron--Including, among facilities, Bruce "A", Bruce "B" generating stations, each consisting of 4 Candu, heavy water nuclear reactors--In early 1996, as facilities began to approach maximum capacity without permanent storage solution in sight, Ontario Hydro commenced project to design, construct, operate dry storage system to provide additional on-site "interim" storage capacity for up to 744,000 used fuel bundles--Such facility subject to licensing by Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB) under Atomic Energy Control Act--Under terms of Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, AECB required to ensure environmental assessment (EA) conducted as early as practicable in planning stages of project, prior to issuing licence--Minister decided project not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects, referred project to AECB--Appellant seeking judicial review of Minister's decision--Application dismissed with costs--Appropriate standard of review to be applied to decision of responsible authority upon receipt of screening level environment assessment reasonableness simpliciter--Special expertise residing in Atomic Energy Control Board--Appropriate inquiry in reviewing decision on reasonableness standard whether Board, in making decision, had before it information from which it could reasonably reach conclusion--Standard of review of reasonableness simpliciter requiring Minister have reasonable basis for arriving at decision--Court not required to agree with Minister's decision--Must merely be able to perceive rational basis for it--Not for Court to delve into scientific complexities associated with determining validity of appellant's factual assertions--Comprehensive study report prepared in accordance with methodology selected by proponent providing Minister with rational basis for arriving at decision project not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects--December 1997 report, July 1998 addendum containing number of explicit statements indicating conclusions reached applied equally to reference design, possible alternatives to it--Comparisons conducted by comprehensive study report providing Minister with rational basis for concluding no significant adverse radiological effects likely to be caused by project--Minister's decision reasonable--Awarding of costs between parties addressed by r. 400--Submissions to Applications Judge essentially rehashes of arguments made to Minister--No truly novel legal, factual arguments raised--Genuineness of appellant's motivation in bringing application not basis for not awarding costs against it--All governments of municipalities surrounding Bruce Nuclear Power Development supported findings of environmental assessment upon which Minister based decision--Appeal dismissed--Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106, r. 400--Atomic Energy Control Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. A-16--Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, S.C. 1992, c. 37.