Administrative Compliance Mechanisms

• Author: Jamie Benidickson
• Pages: 141-160

141

CHAPTER 7

ADMINISTRATIVE

COMPLIANCE

MECHANISMS

A. COMPLIANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE

ENFORCEMENT

Beyond the underlying framework of environmental standards that an

industrial, commercial, or other applicant may be expected to meet

after the required approvals and authorizations have been obtained,

lie questions relating to compliance and eventually to the implica-

tions of non-compliance; that is, what levels of compliance are being

achieved and what are the consequences of failing to satisfy (or even

disregarding) applicable environmental norms?

Alternative strategies for encouraging environmental performance

have been actively debated: some commentators advocate a concilia-

tory approach, while others have promoted a sanctions-based or penal

model of enforcement.1 The discussion has been inf‌luenced not only by

evidence of the potential effectiveness of these general alternatives in

environmental terms, but also by external developments affecting the

context in which enforcement efforts are underta ken. The introduction

of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms with its evolving implications

1 K Hawkins, Env ironment and Enforcement: Regulat ion and the Social Def‌inition of

Pollution (Oxford: Clarendon P ress, 1984) is a classic reference work on t he gen-

eral debate. Can adian developments are sur veyed in D Chappell, From Sawdust

to Toxic Blobs: A Consideration of Sa nctioning Strategies to Combat Pollution in

Canada (Ottawa: Supply & Services, 1989).

ENVIRONMENTAL L AW

142

for administrative procedures, prosecutorial practices, and penalty re-

gimes, and an appreciation of administrative enforcement costs in per-

iods of f‌iscal restraint are notable examples of such inf‌luences.2

The compliance mechanisms considered in this chapter include

a range of measures to monitor environmental performance, to issue

warnings and administrative orders, and even to impose penalties

through an administrative process. Other approaches to compliance

such as the prosecution of offences or the use of voluntary agreements

are discussed in Chapters 8 and 16 respectively.

B. REPORTING OBLIGATIONS

The terms and conditions applicable to operating licences and permits

will frequently impose regular reporting obligations that provide of-

f‌icials with information on an ongoing basis concerning the normal

operations of approved sites and facilities. Water treatment facilities

will be expected to conduct regular testing and report results. The

operators of waste disposal sites may be required to report the nature

and volume of materials collected by or delivered to them. In addition,

statutory reporting obligations are now common in connection with

spills and other irregular discharges of contaminants. The OEPA re-

quires every person who discharges or causes or permits the discharge

of a contaminant “out of the normal course of events” that causes or

is likely to cause an adverse effect to notify the ministry forthwith.3

Specif‌ic notif‌ication requirements apply in Ontario when a pollutant is

spilled, that is, discharged, into the natural environment from or out

of a structure, vehicle, or other container in a manner that is abnormal

in quality or quantit y in light of all the circumstances of the di scharge.4

Reporting obligations may be found in other provincial legislation, es-

pecially relati ng to gasoline and other fuels, and in such federal statutes

as the Fisheries Act5 and CEPA 1999. Under the latter there is a statutory

requirement to report imposed on some individuals, while the legisla-

tion permits others to report both releases and likely releases of toxic

substances.6

2Canada (Director of Investigati on & Research, Combines Investigation Branch) v

Southam Inc, [1984] 2 SCR 145; R v Wholesale Travel Group Inc, [1991] 3 SCR 154.

3Environmental Protection Act, RSO 1990, c E.19, s 15 [OEPA].

4 Ibid, s 92.

5 RSC 1985, c F-14, s 38(4) [FA].

6Canadian Environmental P rotection Act, 1999, S.C. 1999, c 33, ss 95–96 [CEPA 1999].