Clips: Nestlé’s Guelph-area water permit to get environment review

Hearings won’t prevent 5-year permit but will look into need for drought clauses
By Margo McDiarmid CBC News Aug 15, 2013
A battle over pumping bottled water during droughts is heading to a full environmental hearing in Ontario.

The provincial Environmental Review Tribunal agrees with environmental groups that a deal between the Ontario government and food giant Nestlé needs more public scrutiny.
In its written decision, the tribunal says removing conditions that would compel Nestle to cut back on its water take during droughts is not in the public interest.
“The Tribunal finds the proposed settlement and withdrawal are not consistent with the purpose and provisions of the OWRA (Ontario Water Resources Act) or with the public interest.”
Mike Nagy with the environmental group Wellington Water Watchers is relieved.
“It speaks to the fact our concerns have been heard,” he said. “We’re quite pleased there will be a public dialogue on the issues.”
Drought conditions
It all started last year when the Swiss food giant applied to renew its licence for an underground well near Hillsburgh in Wellington County, west of Toronto.
Nestlé Waters Canada operates a production well in Hillsburgh, Ont., west of Toronto. The Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal will review conditions on a permit renewal for the well.Nestlé Waters Canada operates a production well in Hillsburgh, Ont., west of Toronto. The Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal will review conditions on a permit renewal for the well. (Google Maps)
Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment gave Nestlé a new five-year term, but added two new conditions that meant the company would have to reduce its take of water during droughts. That made Nestlé the only permit holder in the watershed to face mandatory reductions.
The company appealed the permit to the Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal.
Before the tribunal could rule, Nestlé and the ministry reached an agreement and the two drought conditions were removed from the company’s permit.
The Council of Canadians and Wellington Water Watchers launched their own appeal, arguing the ministry should stick with the plan to make the company cut back during droughts.
The group maintained the underground acquifer flows into the Grand and Credit watersheds that could be affected during severe dry spells.
The Ontario government and Nestlé Waters Canada say there’s no connection between the surface and underground water.
But the Tribunal ruled that’s a crucial point that needs further study.
“Without knowing where the water comes from, how fast it arrives, where it is going or how fast it gets there, it is difficult to assess the significance of drought conditions on the acquifer and of taking from the acquifer on drought conditions locally or elsewhere in Ontario.”
It has ordered public environmental hearings where water experts could be asked to testify.
‘Point of fairness’
Nestlé spokesman John Challinor said the issue for the company is about being the only water user facing mandatory restrictions.
“It came down to a point of fairness,” he said. Nestlé has previously said it would follow mandatory restrictions if everyone else does too.
Challinor said the new hearings won’t change much in the short term. Nestlé has a new five-year water permit to continue to take water for bottling.
The two new conditions were only for droughts.
“That situation may never happen in the life of the permit,” he added.
No date has been set yet for the environmental hearings.

Deal allowing Nestlé to draw Ontario water during droughts under review

By JOSH KERR The Canadian Press Aug. 17 2013
Conservationists are celebrating after the Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal struck down a deal between Nestlé and the province that would have exempted the Swiss food giant from water restrictions during droughts at a well it owns in Wellington County.
The tribunal, which termed the deal “not consistent” with both Ontario law and the public interest, ordered the case be given a full environmental hearing.
It’s a victory for the groups that brought the challenge: the Council of Canadians and local non-profit Wellington Water Watchers.
“I’m not saying I’m optimistic, we don’t know what to expect, but we’re very pleased there will be a hearing,” said Mike Nagy, chair of Wellington Water Watchers.
The saga started last year when the Ontario government attached new conditions to Nestlé’s water source, a well about 80 kilometres north of Toronto. The conditions would have forced Nestlé to cut back on the volume of water it pumped during times of droughts, making it the only permit holder in the watershed to face mandatory reductions.
The company appealed the permit to the Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal. But, while the tribunal was deliberating, Nestlé and the ministry made a deal to remove the conditions. The company subsequently tried to withdraw its appeal which would have ended the public hearing process.
In an effort to scuttle the deal and force a hearing to take place, the Council of Canadians and Wellington Water Watchers launched their own appeal.
“Nestlé argued that it shouldn’t be treated different but we say absolutely you should be,” Mr. Nagy said. “The overall concern with these types of permits is they’re 100-per-cent consumptive. Every drop of water removed from that watershed, that well, and trucked away, nothing is replenished.”
The permit for the Nestlé well allows the company to pump 1.13 million litres of water per day. Under Ontario regulations, the company pays only $3.71 for every million litres of water it draws.
While Nestlé maintained that the restrictions were unfair since there is no evidence that the surface watersheds are connected to the underground aquifer, the non-profits argued the hydrology isn’t understood well enough to say for sure.
Bruce Pardy, who presided over the tribunal, sided with the conservationists.
“The water in the aquifer comes from somewhere and goes somewhere,” wrote Mr. Pardy in his decision. “Even if taking from the aquifer does not directly affect surface waters in the immediate area, that does not mean that surface waters elsewhere would not be affected by taking from the aquifer during drought conditions.”
No date has been set for the new hearing and a Nestlé spokesman declined comment. “We’re still reviewing the decision to understand what additional clarification the officer requires in a hearing,” John Challinor said.
Will Amos, director of the Ecojustice Environmental Law Clinic at the University of Ottawa who represented the non-profits in the hearing, said this ruling might make regional governments in Canada take a more holistic look at the way they issue permits in the future.
“This is a shot across the bow at provincial governments who are not issuing permits for water with precaution front and centre in their thinking,” Mr. Amos said.