Executive Summary Enbridge…

Executive Summary
Enbridge Gas welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposed regulatory changes for the beneficial reuse of excess soil at pits and quarries in Ontario posted by the Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry (MNDMNRF). Comments below focus on the potential economic impacts and opportunities for liquid soil processing that may be considered in the application of the proposed regulatory changes.

Economic Impacts
The MNDMNRF Regulatory Impact Statement states “the anticipated environmental, social and economic consequences of the proposal are expected to be neutral to positive.” The same Regulatory Impact Statement also states “The cost for record keeping and oversight by a QP1 (where importing more than 10,000 m3 of excess soil) are beyond the requirements under the EPA2 for a reuse site governed by an instrument (i.e. approval under ARA) but are necessary to support oversight under the ARA3. An estimated cost of approximately $350,000 over a ten-year period is expected. This cost would apply to aggregate site approval holders who are authorized or seek authorization to import large quantities of excess soil to facilitate rehabilitation of the site.” Based on this statement, it could also be interpreted that the proposed changes are expected to produce a negative economic consequence by increasing the cost of soil management for ARA license holders; costs which would be passed on to generators of excess soils, thereby increasing their soil management costs. Alternatively, if costs are not passed on to generators, the increased costs for rehabilitation which would not have been considered in the original site economic analysis, might hinder or deter licensees from adequately rehabilitating sites, which would exacerbate the ongoing issue in Ontario.

Opportunities for Liquids Soil Processing
Disallowing liquid soil processing within the licensed area of an aggregate site may unnecessarily restrict license holders from being able to offer this service to generators. Given the lack of liquid soil receiving facilities in Ontario (especially in less developed areas of the province), aggregate pits offer a solution to the current issue of finding suitable liquid soil receiving sites in close proximity to generator sites. Allowing liquid soil processing within licensed areas with appropriate oversight to mitigate adverse effects, would not exempt the license holder from obtaining the necessary instrument to permit such work, but would provide more flexibility and opportunity for a license holder to setup an appropriate facility. Some aggregate sites may not have sufficient unlicensed land within the property to allow for setup for such a facility otherwise. Removing or further limiting options for liquid soil management does not support the goal of beneficial reuse of excess soil; rather it contributes to increased transportation and generation of additional greenhouse gas emissions, increased costs, and greater potential for improper management.

Conclusion
Enbridge Gas appreciates having the opportunity to comment on the government’s proposed regulatory changes for the beneficial reuse of excess soil at pits and quarries in Ontario. If you have any questions or require additional information please do not hesitate to contact Nicole Gruythuyzen, Senior Advisor Government Affairs (nicole.gruythuyzen@enbridge.com).