Civil Dispute Case Summary: Oil Field Waste Facility vs a Lake Community—a Tale of 5 Mediations
Challenge
A community surrounding a recreational lake objected to an oil field waste company setting up facilities near the lake.
Judy (owner of JRB Mediations), who was a mediator for the Alberta Energy Regulator at the time, was referred to conduct mediation services on this matter with several landowners and facilitate a mutually beneficial agreement between the landowners and the oil field management facility company.
Background
An oil field management facility company had applied to the Alberta Energy Regulator to build a facility within 3 km of a recreational lake. Farmland and acreages surround the lake. The lake is important to its surrounding residences for several reasons:
its campground is host to regional, national, and international visitors,
annual fishing derbies occur at the lake,
the lake is a bird and waterfowl sanctuary, and
the lake is a point of community pride.
The company had provided information sessions to the community on its proposed facilities. Many of the residences had attended these sessions with several objecting to the proposed facility. Five residences decided to file objections to the proposed project with the Alberta Energy Regulator. Separate ADRs/ Mediations were held between the company and each of these five landowners.
The Goal
The purpose for mediation was to facilitate a conversation between each of the parties and the company. The aim was to:
enable the company to provide information and answer questions about the project to dispel any rumours circulating within the community about the project.
ensure each party understood each other’s perspectives and concerns
clarify assumptions or miscommunications
discuss potential impacts to the landowner, community, and the lake
discuss company limitations
work together towards mutually agreeable resolutions
The Process
Pre-Mediation Interviews:
Several separate pre-mediation interviews were held with each of the objecting landowners and the company. The purpose of the pre-mediation discussions was to:
provide information about what mediation is, its benefits, and the mediation process,
what and how the landowners knew about the proposed project (information from rumours or from company information sessions),
parties’ perspective of the situation,
identification of each of the parties’ issues, interests, and concerns pertaining to the project,
what each party wanted and their potential resolution options
determine if mediation for any of the parties was appropriate for the situation
The following is a summary of the interviews.
Positions of the parties
Five Landowners
Landowners’ Positions:
The landowners, who filed objections to the proposed project had no objection to the facility itself but did object to its proposed location. The five landowners held similar positions. They wanted the company to:
move the facility to another location away from residences and further away from the lake.
test water wells pre- and post- project construction.
pave a segment of the county road from the main highway to the turn- off of the proposed facility.
construct updates to the lake’s community centre (new playground, leveling of the grounds, and more).
Since landowners’ issues and interests were similar, they were combined together for this case summary and are as follows:
Landowners’ Issues:
location
spills and site mitigations (creek, lake and water)
water quality, fresh water usage, and water well baselines
dust control and roads (safety, quality, maintenance, trucks, school buses, design)
lighting, traffic (hours, speed, idling, fumes), and noise
truck routes/ staging
good neighbours and communication
cement casing viability
property values
Landowner Interests (what’s important to them):
country living & quiet peaceful enjoyment of the land
environment and natural landscape
road safety, and maintenance
respect and care of the land
wildlife
healthy lake and landscape
clean air and water
communication
road upgrades
sense of community
farming operations
aesthetics
compensation
The Company
Company’s Position:
The company’s position was that the location cannot be moved. The proposed location was the best location due to a number of factors:
geological formation of the area,
depth of clay base in the area,
transportation corridor,
ease of access, and
access to existing well sites.
The company espoused that:
the site had been designed and engineered to mitigate, as much as possible, any potential leaks, contamination, or spills of any kind, to protect the environment,
the site design went beyond regulated requirements, and
the regulated landowner notification zone radius went beyond regulation requirements.
Company’s Non-Negotiable items:
The company requested mediator to let the landowners know that two key items would not be tabled by the company:
1) re-building or paving of the county highway for 4 km and
2) drilling of landowner water wells.
Company Issues:
project understanding
representation of facts by landowners
compensation
communication
location
roads
Company Interests:
location
relationships
understanding of project
environment and reducing industry waste
community and safety
noise
communication
being a good neighbour and good relationships
dust control
infrastructure
Common interests between landowners and the company:
communication
relationships
environment
community
safety
Details of the Mediation
The purpose of this mediation was to facilitate a conversation among the parties so landowners could obtain, directly from the company, information and understanding of the project, and both parties could provide to each other their perspective of:
the situation,
perceived impacts,
clarify information and assumptions,
work together towards mutually agreeable resolutions.
The mediation facilitated an information exchange and assisted the parties to come to resolution with issues as needed.
Mediation Design
Although some landowners wanted a group/ multi-party mediation, mediations were conducted separately with each of the five Landowners and the company. This was determined by:
Request from the company—the company did not want a multiparty mediation for fear that one or two landowners may “stir things up,” and there would be no information exchange nor resolutions.
Separate mediations ensured that focus could be on each individual landowner and their own concerns, ensuring their voices would be heard, and it would be a personal meeting.
Each landowner could freely discuss resolutions with the company that would meet their own specific needs.
Resolutions could remain confidential between the company and each individual landowner.
Better outcomes could be had by all the landowners.
Experts attended Mediation:
The company brought in their own subject matter experts to explain various technical aspects of the project to the landowners as required.
The Mediator (Judy) coordinated the attendance of two Alberta Energy Regulator subject matter experts at each mediation:
a geo-hydrologist (to speak to the hydrology and drainage of the area and mitigation concerns),
a field inspector (to speak to regulations, legislation, inspections, and adherence to regulations).
Focus of Discussions:
Though each landowner had individual concerns to discuss and negotiate, the following were shared issues for all parties to address and resolve in mediation.
project understanding
communication
relationships
location
environment
safety
noise
roads
The Successful Resolutions
Though each landowner had separate resolutions and written agreements that suited their personal circumstance because of mediation, the mediation meetings resulted in the following resolutions common to each of the five landowners:
Outcomes for all landowners:
Better understanding of the project.
Understanding of county/ provincial government/ and company boundaries pertaining to transportation routes, roads maintenance and upgrading of roads.
Better understanding of perspectives and clarification of assumptions.
Company informed landowners of partial road upgrades and proposed maintenance.
Resolutions for some individual landowners included:
company would extend snow removal to a landowner’s driveway.
company would pay for half the testing of a landowner’s water well (pre-construction).
company would plant trees on a landowner’s property and around the facility.
company would check regularly on property located across from its proposed facility to ensure security and safety of the landowner’s property.
company would provide to the lake campground good will through the provision of labour and materials for the lake community’s projects.
Duration of the Mediations:
With the help of the mediator, the company and each of the five landowners were able to resolve their issues and reach an agreement through mediation.
Each of the five mediations concluded within 4 to 5 hours.