Environmental Appeals Board Reduces Economic Benefit Assessment for Violations

2026 ABEAB 5                                                                                            Appeal No. 25-021&22 ALBERTA environmental appeals BOARD Decision Date of Decision – March 11, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF sections 91, 92, 95, and 98 of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, RSA 2000, c E-12; -and- IN THE MATTER OF an appeal filed by [COMPANY]. and Environmental 360 [COMPANY]. of Administrative Penalty and Notice of Economic Benefit Assessment No. AP-EPEA-DCOM-1583 issued under the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act by the Director, [NAME], Regulatory Assurance Division, [NAME] to [COMPANY]. and Environmental 360 [COMPANY]. Cite as:            [COMPANY]. et al. v. Director, [NAME], Regulatory Assurance Division, [NAME] , 2026 ABEAB 5. BEFORE: [NAME], Board Chair. SUBMISSIONS BY: Appellants: [redacted] Director: [NAME], Director, [NAME], Regulatory Assurance Division, [NAME], represented by [NAME], and [NAME], Environmental Law Section, Alberta Justice. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [NAME] ([NAME]) issued Administrative Penalty and Assessment of Economic Benefit No. AP-EPEA-DCOM-1583 to [COMPANY]. and Environmental 360 [COMPANY]. (the Appellants) for allegedly contravening Approval No. 347704-00-00 (the Approval) by failing to construct the Rocky View County Waste Management Facility as described in the application; failing to store hazardous waste and materials in containers in accordance to the Hazardous Waste Storage Guidelines; accepting material not referred to in Table 4.3-A, being Class 6.2 – biomedical waste facility; failing to maintain a daily inventory of waste stored in waste storage area; exceeding the waste storage limits; and failing to report a contravention of the terms and conditions of the Approval. [NAME] also argues that [COMPANY]. and Environmental 360 [COMPANY]. contravened the Waste Control Regulations by failing to store liquid hazardous liquid waste in a manner that secondary containment is provided and failing to store liquid hazardous waste in a manner that routine inspections can be performed. [NAME] assessed an administrative penalty of $37,500.00 and a one-time economic benefit assessment in the amount of $220,000.00 (the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment ). The Board received a Notice of Appeal from the Appellants with respect to the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment. A mediation meeting was held, following which the parties continued negotiations. The parties agreed upon a resolution whereby the parties recommended that the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment be varied by reducing the Economic Benefit Assessment portion from $220,000.00 to $82,691.96. The Board accepted the agreement and ordered the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment be varied accordingly. The Administrative Penalty is assessed as $37,500.00 and the Economic Benefit Assessment is assessed as $82,691.96. The total payable is $120,191.96. This amount is payable within 30 days of the date of this decision, and no interest is payable for 30 days of the date of this decision. TABLE OF CONTENTS I.       Background.................................................................................................................. 1 II.     discussion....................................................................................................................... 2 III.    Decision............................................................................................................................ 3 IV.    order of the Board................................................................................................... 3 I.                                           Background [ 1 ]                                        [COMPANY]. and Environmental 360 [COMPANY]. (the Appellants) operate a Waste Management Facility located in Rocky View County, Alberta (the Facility). [ 2 ]                                        [COMPANY]. holds Approval No. 347704-00-00 (the Approval) for the construction, operation and reclamation of the Rocky View County Wagon Wheel Waste Management Facility located at NE-10-26-29-W4M. The operation and compliance with the Approval is overseen by Environmental 360 [COMPANY]. [ 3 ]                                        On May 18, 2023, three Environmental Protection Officers (EPOs) from [NAME] inspected the Facility. The EPOs noted many non-compliances during the inspection. [1] [ 4 ]                                        Upon investigation, the Director concluded that [COMPANY]. and Environmental 360 [COMPANY]. contravened section 227(e) of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act , RSA 2000, c E-12 (EPEA) and section 11(1) of the Waste Control Regulation , Alta. Reg. 192/1996. [ 5 ]                                        On May 16, 2025, t he Director issued Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment No. AP-EPEA-DCOM-1583 to the Appellants f or contraventions of the section 227(e) of EPEA and section 11(1) of the Waste Control Regulation (the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment) . [ 6 ]                                        On June 3, 2025, the Environmental Appeals Board (the Board) received a Notice of Appeal from the Appellants. The Board acknowledged receipt of the Notice of Appeal in a letter dated June 4, 2025. In the letter, the Board asked the Director to provide the records he reviewed and were available to him when making his decision to issue the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment (the Director’s Record). [ 7 ]                                        On June 11, 2025, the Director wrote the Board advising that the Director’s Record would be available by August 29, 2025. [ 8 ]                                        On September 4, 2025, the Director’s Record was provided to the parties to the appeal in preparation for the scheduled mediation meeting. [ 9 ]                                        A mediation meeting between the parties was scheduled for October 7, 2025. On October 6, 2025, this meeting was rescheduled to October 30, 2025. [ 10 ]                                    On October 30, 2025, a mediation meeting involving the parties and a Board appointed mediator was held by way of video conference. After the mediation, discussions between the parties continued. [ 11 ]                                    On December 1, 2025, the Appellants requested a meeting with the Director, without Board counsel or the mediator, on a without prejudice basis under the protection of the mediation privilege. [ 12 ]                                    The Board scheduled a follow-up mediation meeting for December 15, 2025. [ 13 ]                                    On December 15, 2025, a follow-up mediation meeting involving the parties and the appointed mediator was held by way of video conference. The parties continued their settlement discussions following this meeting. [ 14 ]                                    On February 20, 2026, the Board was notified by the Appellants that the parties had reached an agreed upon resolution to reduce the Economic Benefit Assessment from $220,000.00 to $82,691.96.  The Administrative Penalty amount would remain the same. II.                                        discussion [ 15 ]                                    In the negotiated agreement, the parties recommended to the Board that the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment be varied by reducing the Economic Benefit Assessment to the amount of $82,691.96. [ 16 ]                                    The Board considered the agreement acceptable and varied the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment according to the agreement reached between the parties.

III.                                    Decision [ 17 ]                                    Based on the agreement between the parties, the Board varies the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment as follows:

1.                   Reducing the economic benefit assessment from the amount of $220,000.00 to the amount of $82,691.96;

2.                   Confirm the administrative penalty in the amount of $37,500.00;

3.                   Reducing the total administrative penalty and economic benefit assessment from $257,500.00 to $120,191.69;

4.                   The administrative penalty and economic benefit assessment amount is to be paid within 30 days of the date of this decision; and 5.                   No interest is payable for 30 days from the date of this decision. [ 18 ]                                    Pursuant to section 98(3) of EPEA, [2] a copy of this decision is to be provided to: 1.                   [NAME], [COMPANY]; represented by [NAME], [COMPANY]. 2.                   [NAME], Director, [NAME], Regulatory Assurance Division, [NAME]; represented by [NAME]. [NAME], Environmental Law Section, Alberta Justice. IV.                                     order of the Board [ 19 ]                                    In accordance with sections 98(1) and (2) of EPEA, the Board has the authority to confirm, reverse, or vary the decision of the Director. [3] Therefore, with respect to the decision of the Director to issue Administrative Penalty No. AP-EPEA-DCOM-1583 to [COMPANY]. and Environmental 360 [COMPANY]. for contravening section 227(e) of EPEA and section 11(1) of the Waste Control Regulation Alta. Reg. 192/1996 the Board orders the decision of the Director to issue the Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment is varied as follows:

1.                    The Agreement (the Resolution) is confidential.

2.                    The Administrative Penalty portion will remain at 13 counts for a penalty in the amount of $37,500.00.

3.                    The Economic Benefit Assessment portion is reduced to $82,691.96.

4.                    The total Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment amount payable is $120,191.96.

5.                   The Appellant shall within 30 days of the date of this Decision pay the Administrative Penalty of $37,500.00 and the Economic Benefit Assessment of $82, 691.96, for a total of $120,191.96.

6.                   No interest is payable for 30 days from the dates of this Decision. Dated March 11, 2026, at Edmonton, Alberta. “ original signed by ” [NAME] Board Chair [1] .             Notice of Administrative Penalty and Economic Benefit Assessment No. AP-EPEA-DCOM-1583 identified the non-compliances in an Addendum. This Addendum is reproduced in the Appendix to this decision. [2]                     Section 98(3) of EPEA states: “(3)        On making its decision, the Board shall immediately (a)           give notice of the decision to all persons who submitted notices of appeal or made representations to the Board and to all other persons who the Board considers should receive notice of the decision, and (b)           make the written decision available in accordance with the regulations.” [3]                    Section 98(1) and (2) of EPEA provides: “98(1)    In the case of a notice of appeal submitted under section 91(1)(n) or (o) of this Act or a notice of appeal submitted under section 115(1)(j), (l) or (q) of the Water Act , the Board shall, within 30 days after the completion of the hearing of the appeal, make a written decision on the matter. (2)          In its decision, the Board may (a) confirm, reverse or vary the decision appealed and make any decision that the Director whose decision was appealed could make, and (b) make any further order the Board considers necessary for the purposes of carrying out the decision.”