The ever-changing environmental regulatory landscape complicates environmental compliance. This dynamic nature of environmental regulations is one of the reasons we provide monthly reminders in our environmental compliance tips.
Human error is a common cause of violations, but negligence (intentional or unintentional) can also exacerbate violations, as evident in some of the enforcement cases below.
Oil Spill at Ontario Poultry Processing Facility
An accidental spill of oil that subsequently impacted a stream resulted in two convictions and fines.
The parties convicted were 1660513 Ontario Inc., operating as LJW Tanklines (LJW), and Olybro Inc., operating as a general partner of Olymel S.E.C./Olymel G.P. (Olybro)
According to the Court Bulletin, on July 2, 2021, LJW delivered cooking oil to the Olybro facility. The driver was cautioned that the bulk storage tanks contained a high level of oil. As the oil was transferred to the tanks, they reached capacity, and excess cooking oil began spilling into an attached overflow tank. The cooking oil then breached the tank’s capacity and flowed across the ground towards the facility’s main driveway and parking lot.
The driver discontinued the transfer of oil and “immediately reported the spill to Olybro staff.” The driver also notified LJW dispatch. Neither LJW nor Olybro reported the spill to the Ontario Spills Action Center.
“Olybro staff did not notify the ministry’s Spills Action Center of the spill but rather emailed an Environmental Compliance Officer with the ministry. The ministry did not become aware of the spill until July 4, 2021.”
Releases to the environment can result in federal or provincial enforcement (Photo by Radek Jedynak on Unsplash)
When the Ministry inspected the site, they reported that the cooking oil in the drainage ditch and stream caused adverse effects by impairing the quality of the environment for aquatic and sediment-dwelling organisms.
The Court Bulletin states, “1660513 Ontario Inc. was convicted of one violation under the Environmental Protection Act (EPA), fined $30,000 plus a victim fine surcharge (VFS) of $7,500, and given 60 days to pay. Olybro Inc. was convicted of one violation under the EPA, fined $140,000 plus a VFS of $35,000, and given 90 days to pay.”
Also, see our compliance tip on Reporting Spills.
200 Counts Spanning 8 Years
According to Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), on April 30, 2025, ECCC Enforcement “laid 200 charges against ArcelorMittal Canada Inc. for violation of subsection 36(3) of the Fisheries Act.”
It is important to note that these are only charges at this time. Details are sparse, but the issue relates to mining operations in Quebec. The ECCC statement includes, “These investigations were conducted into alleged deposits of deleterious substances into several fish-bearing waterways made by the Mont-Wright mining complex and the Fire Lake mine in the Fermont region of Quebec.” The incidents reportedly occurred between May 2014 and June 2022.
We will provide updates on this in future blogs.
Alberta Energy Regulator Issues $456,000 Fine
The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) has issued an administrative penalty to CEPro Energy & Environmental Services Inc. (CEPro) for $456,000 for contraventions of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (EPEA).
According to the decision by the AER, in February 2023, “CEPro submitted five reclamation certificate applications for oil sands exploration programs on behalf of Everest Canadian Resources Corp. through the AER’s OneStop system. Applications are required to include a declaration attesting to the accuracy of the information. Subsequently, reclamation certificates were issued based on the information provided. On May 25, 2023, an AER audit of the application submissions identified multiple regulatory breaches. Subsequent audits confirmed further deficiencies, including falsified or missing data relating to Phase 1 environmental site assessments (ESAs), among other requirements. Accordingly, the AER cancelled the reclamation certificates that had been issued to Everest based on information submitted to the AER by CEPro” (emphasis added).
As stated in the Administrative Penalty Director’s Decision, AER made multiple attempts to contact CEPro to discuss the Preliminary Administrative Penalty Assessment. The report states that AER attempted to reach Ms. Lian Zhao, President of CEPro, several times via telephone and certified letters, but the attempts were unsuccessful.
Environmental Assistance
Environmental compliance is increasingly complex, and violations can be consequential. If you need assistance with environmental assessments, permitting, management, etc., we can help. Contact Christopher Paré, P.Geo, at 519-948-7300, Ext. 114 for more information.
Alan Hahn drafted this blog. Alan has an undergraduate degree in Environmental Studies and completed a graduate program in Environmental Management. He has worked in environmental management for more than 45 years. He has written hundreds of blogs and articles. His published work includes HazMat Magazine, BizX Magazine, Michigan Lawyers Weekly, GreenStone Partners, Manure Manager Magazine, and Progressive Dairy.
Christopher Paré, P.Geo, reviewed this blog. Chris is a senior geoscientist and manager of Dragun’s Windsor, Ontario, office. Chris has more than 30 years of experience on projects ranging from environmental site assessments (Phase One/Two ESA), excess soils, remedial investigations, soil and groundwater remediation, Permits to Take Water, Records of Site Conditions, vapour intrusion, and site decommissioning. Chris is a frequent speaker, author, and expert witness. See Chris’ bio. Follow Dragun Corporation on LinkedIn, X, or Facebook.
Sign up for our monthly environmental newsletters.
Principled Foundation | Thoughtful Advice | Smart Solutions
Established in 1988