President's Response – Dresden Waste and Recycling Facility Project

Physical Activities

York1 Environmental Waste Solutions Ltd. is proposing to construct and operate a waste disposal and regenerative recycling facility, located in Dresden, Ontario. The proposed project includes alteration of an existing landfill that would hold up to 1.62 million cubic meters of non-hazardous solid construction and demolition waste within an 8-hectare footprint, with a maximum daily limit of 1,000 tonnes. It also includes the expansion and alteration of an existing waste transfer station from 0.8 hectares to 25 hectares, to accept a maximum of 3,000 tonnes per day of recyclable materials and 1,000 tonnes per day of non-hazardous solid waste materials, including construction and demolition wastes and uncontaminated soil and soil-like materials.

These physical activities are not prescribed by regulations made under paragraph 109(b) of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA).

Delegation of Powers to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada

Under subsection 154(1) of the IAA as amended, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change (the Minister) may, subject to any terms and conditions that the Minister specifies, delegate to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) any powers, duties, or functions that the Minister is authorized to exercise or perform under the IAA. The Minister has delegated the powers under section 9 of the IAA to the President of IAAC.

Decision

I, Terence Hubbard, President of IAAC, have decided not to designate the project pursuant to section 9 of the IAA.

Information Considered

In forming my response, I took into account the analysis prepared by IAAC.

Reasons

In making my decision not to designate the project, I considered whether the carrying out of the project may cause adverse effects within federal jurisdiction or direct or incidental adverse effects and concluded that the project may cause these adverse effects. I then considered public concerns related to these effects; adverse impacts on the rights of Indigenous Peoples; whether a means other than an impact assessment exists that would permit a jurisdiction to address the adverse effects within federal jurisdiction and the direct or incidental adverse effects; and other relevant factors identified in IAAC's Analysis Report.

I decided not to designate the project for the following reasons:

• The project must be carried out in compliance with applicable federal and provincial mechanisms.
• The requirements under the following federal and provincial mechanisms, some of which include consultation with Indigenous communities and public engagement, provide a framework for addressing public concerns related to the adverse effects within federal jurisdiction or the direct or incidental adverse effects that may be caused by the carrying out of the project; adverse impacts that the project may have on the rights of Indigenous Peoples recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982; and other relevant factors identified in IAAC's Analysis Report.
• There are means other than an impact assessment, such as the following federal and provincial mechanisms, that would permit a jurisdiction to address the adverse effects within federal jurisdiction and the direct or incidental adverse effects that may be caused by the carrying out of the project.

These mechanisms include:

• federal legislation, including the Fisheries Act, Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, and Species at Risk Act; and,
• provincial legislation, including the Environmental Protection Act, Ontario Water Resources Act, Clean Water Act, 2006, Conservation Authorities Act, Endangered Species Act or Species Conservation Act, 2025 (once proclaimed), and Ontario Heritage Act.