Please find below comments…

Please find below comments on the Excess Soil Management Regulatory Proposal from the Hamilton Conservation Authority (HCA). Please consider these comments in addition to those submitted by our umbrella organization Conservation Ontario. I apologize for the lateness of the submission.

Thank you

The efforts of the MOECC in developing the proposed regulation to help address the significant issue of large scale fill movement in the Province are very much appreciated and overall, the proposed regulation seems quite through from a technical standpoint. However, there are specific items of note in the document that our agency wishes to bring to your attention:

Page 8 – The exemption of temporary excess storage sites from ECA requirements is concerning. Throughout the proposed regulation there seems to be a perception that temporary soil storage sites are not of the same level of concern and do not warrant the same level of scrutiny as any other receiving site and there is no real sound rationale provided to justify this stance.

Page 9 – The HCA would suggest that the minimum fill volume to trigger the ESMP requirement be lowered from the current 1000m3 to 500m3.

Pages 10 & 11 – The proposed exemption of municipal infrastructure repair work, transfers by the same proponent between projects and for receiving sites outside settlement areas is also concerning as these can generate significant fill volumes and permits may not have been secured for these projects in advance.

Page 13 – The ESMP needs to include the actual agency approvals/permits for receiving sites, not just locations. If the project is to be completed “in accordance with the site specific instrument”, a permit is the only way to demonstrate that this has been achieved.

Page 15 – In this section, the term “in compliance with the site specific instrument” is used. The terminology used should be more consistent and if compliance is to be used, the inclusion of a CA permit in the ESMP is even more warranted.

Page 20 – The 28 day interval recommended for updating cumulative fill movements seems to be quite long. Depending upon the volume of material being hauled, may thousands of cubic metres of fill could have be moved during this time and there are any issues with soil quality or errors with reports, they would be very difficult to correct.

Page 37 – Schedule A. As mentioned above, the ESMP should include copies of other permits (CA permits, municipal site alteration by-law permits) to demonstrate receiving site “compliance with the site specific instrument”

Page 37 – Schedule A 2 (b). For completeness, it would be appropriate to include not only the Ontario Numbered Company information, but the owner or principal’s name as well.

Page37 - Schedule A 3 (g). Further to the above comments for Page 8, temporary excess soil sites may also be subject to site-specific instruments and require permits from regulatory agencies.

Pages 41 & 42 – Schedule A 11 (c) & (h). Again, a copy of the actual permit from other regulatory agencies should be included.

Pages 48 & 49 – It is recommended that all source sites should have excess soil characterization.

Page 60 – The discussion of soil re-use in Environmentally Significant Areas is somewhat concerning as these areas may include natural hazards and/or wetlands and would often be subject to site-specific instruments such as CA regulations. Placement of fill in these areas is generally not supported. If the intent of this section is that the re-use would be intended for ecological restoration projects, then this should be specifically stated in the section.

Page 86 – CA regulations should be included in the list of site-specific instruments.

Page 86 – The issue of soil banks are of concern as these sites have not been pre-identified in CA watersheds and may be subject to site-specific instruments. Soils banks would not be appropriate in CA regulated areas and having multiple proponents storing material on one site would be difficult to implement as agencies like CAs cannot issue permits to proponents to place fill on property they do not own.

[Original Comment ID: 209844]