I have been engaged for…

I have been engaged for several years with the issue of soil dumping resulting from improper and unregulated management of excess soil and contaminated soil. This issue has affected many members of my community in the area where I grew up and where my family continues to live in Durham Region near Uxbridge. These community members have experienced threats to their health and safety from high traffic volumes on hauling routes, and from contaminated imported soil (exceeding site-applicable regulatory limits) that carries the risk of contaminating the groundwater supply for their private wells. Many have also suffered significant reductions in property value owing to blighted landscapes, issues with erosion and sediment control, traffic, noise, and dust, without any mention of the effect on property values if a site is later found to contain contaminated soil.

The example of The Township of Scugog, where the Township is seeking over $100 million in compensation to fund the cleanup of a soil dump site, demonstrates the cost of not having a clear and enforceable provincial regulatory framework in place to manage excess soil and to better track contaminated soil. Where rural municipalities are not successful in achieving compensation, it will inevitably fall to the province and the taxpayers of the province to fund the remediation of these sites. As with most environmental issues, the cost of fixing problems after the fact would exceed, by an order of magnitude or more, the costs of avoiding these problems in the first place via a clear regulatory framework backed by enforcement.

With respect to the proposed regulatory framework, I have the following comments:

• 1. The draft regulation is still unclear with regards to when soils with elevated levels of contaminants are a waste and when the MOECC will step in to regulate the waste when it is deposited at a municipality where a site-alteration permit has been issued. The polluters need to be held accountable and MOECC is the proper authority in this regard.

• 2. The MOECC must provide more direction to receiving sites. Many municipalities refer to the 2014 MOECC Best Management Practices when defending conditions in their by-law. These BMPs need to be updated and strengthened in terms of recommendations for receiving sites, and this should be done in concert with the draft regulations

• 3. It is recognized that science has informed the introduction of proposed new Table standards that make standards proportional to the volume of fill at the receiving site. I am concerned that municipalities can by-pass these scientific standards and use their own, and that this will lead to further inconsistency across the province. I recommend minimum standards tables with a provision that municipalities may require stricter standards if they so choose.

• 4. Provisions listed in the draft regulation regarding Soil Processing Sites do not address the issues of concern with these sites. This section needs much more work in order to effect change and address the reality of what is already happening. Inappropriate materials and unacceptable contaminant levels in soil continue to be redistributed from processing sites to receiving sites that are not landfills and which are designated as environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs). I recommend that the regulations include language that specifically prohibits deposition of these soils in environmentally sensitive areas such as the Oak Ridges Moraine (Natural Core and Natural Corridor designations under ORMCP). I also recommend that you amend the current definition of ESAs in the draft regulations to include High Aquifer Vulnerability Areas, Wellhead Protection Areas and prime farmland areas.

• 5. While I agree that the source site for excess soil should be completing an Excess Soil Management Plan as defined in the proposed regulations, I have concerns about the quality of these reports and enforcement of the conditions when there is no requirement to post the report on the proposed registry that would allow for quick reference, review and spot checks by the MOECC. Posting of ESMPs on the proposed registry should be a requirement under the proposed regulations.

• 6. I see it as imperative that MOECC take “airport” out of the definition of “infrastructure project”. As someone who has been aware of the loopholes surrounding fill and privately operated aerodromes (Earthworx, Greenbank, Burlington, New Tecumseth), I see this as a crucial step to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.

• 7. I feel strongly that the fees from the registry, or some portion thereof, should go towards funding enforcement of the new regulations and of ESMPs by MOECC. Without proper enforcement, the proposed regulations will not adequately protect the environment and rural communities.

[Original Comment ID: 209837]